How can I get my ram to run 1:1 on 1155 board (2600k-ddr3 1600)

[issa2006]

Hi


how can i get my ram to 1:1 ratio

getting ram to 1:1 on 1155 board (2600k-ddr3 1600)

2600k
ASRock Z68 Fatal1ty Professional Gen3
4x4g of Corsair CMP8GX3M2A1600C9 8GB (2x4GB) DDR3 (16g)



cpu set to 4g, 100.1b (testing)

normally its (default 1:8) at 3.4ghz

[wwwww]

You can't, the memory controller runs much faster than the RAM.

[Cpt.J.Sparrow]

Why do you want to run your RAM at 133MHz?

[issa2006]

Originally Posted by wwwww

You can't, the memory controller runs much faster than the RAM.

? please explain?



running ram at 1:1 is all ways best.(max perf out of it for pc etc(to long to explain)

per gen you could change the fsb, to get ratio that you want..

1156 1366 775 etc

but on the 1155 there is no fsb control (exp blk) limited to + 10
(and im not sure if that overclocks pci-e bus(i hope note)

i can evenset ram to what i wan, but 1600/1866 etc.. no 2000, 1700 etc

[wwwww]

Originally Posted by issa2006

? please explain?



running ram at 1:1 is all ways best.(max perf out of it for pc etc(to long to explain)

per gen you could change the fsb, to get ratio that you want..

1156 1366 775 etc

but on the 1155 there is no fsb control (exp blk) limited to + 10
(and im not sure if that overclocks pci-e bus(i hope note)

i can evenset ram to what i wan, but 1600/1866 etc.. no 2000, 1700 etc

It doesn't affect performance, it didn't on 1156, 1366 and it hasn't on AMD CPUs since the K8.

[Cpt.J.Sparrow]

Originally Posted by issa2006

running ram at 1:1 is all ways best.(max perf out of it for pc etc(to long to explain)

Too long to explain? Really?

Anyway, it does not apply here. Not for 1155.

Originally Posted by issa2006

but on the 1155 there is no fsb control (exp blk) limited to + 10
(and im not sure if that overclocks pci-e bus(i hope note)

Well, duh! Overclocking has changed with 1155. And, yeah, bclk affects PCI.

Originally Posted by issa2006

i can evenset ram to what i wan, but 1600/1866 etc.. no 2000, 1700 etc

That's right. Has to be a multiple of 100 (this can be increased; usually less than 103 for stability) x 1.33.

eg. 133 x 2 x 5,6,7,8 = 1333,1596,1862,2128

Oh, btw, 1:1 = 133MHz (x2) Even if you could, don't.

[SLATYE]

Originally Posted by issa2006

running ram at 1:1 is all ways best.(max perf out of it for pc etc(to long to explain)

I haven't heard that one for years!

It was certainly true on most of the K7 chipsets. The KT333 and KT400 did perform slightly better with the RAM equal to the FSB speed, and the nForce/nForce2 were very picky (although sometimes it was worth running the RAM faster just to give the IGP more bandwidth).

Intel chipsets, on the other hand, were never really bothered by that. You could run the RAM at just about any speed above the FSB speed and it'd be fine. P4s loved bandwidth, so running the RAM slower than the FSB was a bad idea.


These days it doesn't matter for the simple reason that CPUs don't have a FSB (or at least the RAM data doesn't go through the FSB equivalent). Therefore there are no nasty synchronisation issues trying to connect the RAM (at one clock speed) to the FSB (at a different clock speed). Instead the RAM just connects to the IMC, which runs at whatever speed is required.

As has been said above, "1:1" is 133MHz/DDR3-266. You'd be reducing the RAM bandwidth to 4.266GB/s, from the usual 20GB/s+. I seriously doubt that this will improve performance.

[issa2006]

well on my 775 q 9650 run at 3.6ghz (ddr2 800 4 4 4 12) i got it at 1:1...it made a difference in games/(frames) + mem benchies...

tested with cpu at 3g for both ram ratio tests.


not sure on asrock+2600k board.



iv got 16g (4x4g) ddr3 1600 9 9 9 24 1.65v ram :

Corsair CMP8GX3M2A1600C9 8GB (2x4GB) DDR3 x 2 kits v 5.11
1.65V, Unbuffered, 9-9-9-24,


iv still testing (def cpu (3.4) turbo off




------
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/sho...php?t=18227651

Sandybridge maximum safe voltages

Core Voltage - Not recommended too exceed 1.38v, doing so could kill the CPU, we therefor recommend a range of 1.325-1.350v if overclocking.
Memory Voltage - Intel recommend 1.50v plus/minus 5% which means upto 1.58v is the safe recommended limit. In our testing we have found 1.65v has caused no issues.
BCLK Base Clock - This is strictly a NO, anyone using base clock overclocking could/will cause damange to CPU/Mainboard. (Set manually to 100)
PLL Voltage - Do not exceed 1.9v!!


(heard that ram above 1.6 bad for cpu
(post-)

"quote

Hi there


Right guys myself and our technical guys have spent the entire weekend and this morning in discussions with Intel regarding the alarming amount of reports of Sandybridge CPU's dying and have been conducting our own testing as have Intel to find out what is a definite no no.


Sandybridge maximum safe voltages

Core Voltage - Not recommended too exceed 1.38v, doing so could kill the CPU, we therefor recommend a range of 1.325-1.350v if overclocking.
Memory Voltage - Intel recommend 1.50v plus/minus 5% which means upto 1.58v is the safe recommended limit. In our testing we have found 1.65v has caused no issues.
BCLK Base Clock - This is strictly a NO, anyone using base clock overclocking could/will cause damange to CPU/Mainboard. (Set manually to 100)
PLL Voltage - Do not exceed 1.9v!!



Processor - Basically we recommend customers not to exceed 1.35v to play it safe, all our bundles are set at 1.3250v or lower, any competitors offering bundles above 4.6GHz you should be enquiring as to what voltage they are using as we believe anything over 1.38v will limit CPU lifespan and anything over 1.42v will likely kill the CPU or severely limit its lifespan.

Memory - Intel recommend 1.50v plus/minus 5% which means 1.60v is the ideal safe maximum, but we have found in our testing all 1.65v memory is fine. We have also found most new 1.65v like Corsair XMS3 will run at its rated timings with just 1.50-1.55v which is well within Intel specifications. So people upgrading to Sandybridge you can still use your old DDR3, but we do recommend you run it at 1.60v or less. We are shipping most of our bundles which feature Corsair XMS at 1.50v-1.55v at rated timings. We've also discussed with Asus and MSI regarding voltages for memory and they also confirm in their testing 1.65v caused no issues with reliability.

Base Clock - To put it simple if you value the life of your components, do not overclock using base clock!

PLL Voltage - Again do not exceed 1.9v!


These are just guidelines we recommend you follow, if you want to push more voltage through your CPU's then just be aware they could die on you. Your warranty is un-affected and we will honor any CPU's that die, we just won't ask questions as to how you killed them.

Not all CPU's are as fragile as others, we have experimented upto 1.50v Vcore and 1.70v memory and had zero issues with reliability, so it seems some of fine when pushing hard.
"

----


testing ram voltage at 1.605...etc



7 9 8 24 t1. gives me some improvement


cant lower the "9" in the 2nd figure.. crashes at bootup (ie 1.65v 9 8 9 9 24) fails to boot up even with 1.7v(testing only)

going from 19/ to 20 + 21g speeds (sandrasoft)


ram wont run at 1866 no matter what


Whats a good ram tester to test stability in windows 7? (test fost of the ram.. incase i lower voltage to much, or lower timmings etc/

(test via mem 86+ 4.20 - 4 passes takes 8 hours default setting)(iv tested cpu etc=passes 15+ hours at default)(vs tested etc)

[DarkForceMage]

Originally Posted by issa2006

but on the 1155 there is no fsb control (exp blk) limited to + 10
(and im not sure if that overclocks pci-e bus(i hope note)

Don't touch the bclk as it does overclock the cpu's integrated graphics processor.

Sandy bridge responds best to high frequency rather than 1:1, but keep the dram below 1.575v as adjusting vram voltage also runs through the cpu's built in memory controller that is rated for 1.5v. give or take 5%.

SB memory comparison

memtest+ and linpack AVX at full memory usage seem to work great. http://gigaflopd.com/downloads/linx/ also make sure to have service pack 1 to run linpack properly or it won't put as much load on the cpu. I was only doing 54gflops before I did this, now at 4ghz it's over 100gflops and 100% load stays constant.

[SLATYE]

Originally Posted by issa2006

well on my 775 q 9650 run at 3.6ghz (ddr2 800 4 4 4 12) i got it at 1:1...it made a difference in games/(frames) + mem benchies...

tested with cpu at 3g for both ram ratio tests.

The Q9650 is an old CPU; it does have a FSB and therefore there could be benefits from keeping the 1:1 ratio (although even then, it seems unlikely - Intel's chipsets were by far the best at handling non-1:1 ratios).

The Core i5 is a new CPU. It's a whole new design, and won't benefit from the 1:1 ratio.

[Aetherone]

Originally Posted by issa2006

running ram at 1:1 is all ways best.

11 only best ... when you have ... chip in the way (too much effort to explain) ... been years since anything ... had nbs. tested .. with ... q9550 (waste of $$ getting ram not slower than FSB)) ... you should get razer speakers ... make stuf better.






This only applies when you have a northbridge sitting between the ram and the CPU. Core "i" CPUs have the memory controller shifted from the Northbridge to the CPU itself and will happily run the memory at whatever speed you like with none of the penalty of double handling through a secondary chip.