New to RAM overclocking

it_geek

Master Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
2,959
Reaction score
470
Hi all =)


Quite a while back, I posted a thread about an aging computer that I had. I decided to just change out the RAM and it was determined to be the cause of the BSODs. Turns out the corsair ram was the most problematic and I decided to pop it over to convergent systems and try my luck. We will see how that goes as I have a 8 week waiting window. In addition, a faulty SATA cable completely halted the detection of hard drives and it has been replaced.


Now, I have obtained 4 x 2GB Kingston HyperX 1066MHz DDR2 RAM to keep this rig running.


At 1.8V and a 5-5-5-18 timing it runs only at 800MHz.


Problem is, I do want to learn how to safely overclock without destroying the RAM or my MB.


Which values should I adjust? The GIGABYTE MB is exceptionally flexible to modify every single parameter so I don't really know which to start with.


See this guide here from page 40 onwards.


Which value should I change first? I obviously have to modify the timing to 5-5-5-15, but what about the voltages? Should I only change the DRAM voltage to 2.2 or 2.3V? What about the core and termination voltages? What about the channel specific voltages? I also read somewhere that the North Bridge voltage must be changed also... but by how much is a question that remains unknown.


Also, I am only using the stock heatsink for this RAM, is it necessarily to get an additional cooler if I am intending to overclock the RAM?


Specs for this computer are available in my previous thread (link in the first sentence...)


Appreciate everyone's help here, then perhaps I am more ready to overclock future more powerful rigs. I am learning how to overclock for training first.
 
Last edited:

shawntyq

High Supremacy Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2007
Messages
49,228
Reaction score
1,613
So... no one can offer some advice on this :s11:

simply because the value of overclocking a ram gives near to no value for the amount of effort put into it.(but i heard Ryzen benefits more from it as compared to intel)

it is more complex as compared to overclocking other components like processor or gfx(maybe because i dont OC rams so i might find it more complex).

sorry for of no help :o
 

it_geek

Master Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
2,959
Reaction score
470
simply because the value of overclocking a ram gives near to no value for the amount of effort put into it.(but i heard Ryzen benefits more from it as compared to intel)

it is more complex as compared to overclocking other components like processor or gfx(maybe because i dont OC rams so i might find it more complex).

sorry for of no help :o


i am quite surprised.


Well obviously my DDR2 example makes no sense (how much performance benefit are you gonna gain from 216MHz? not much...), but I thought it would become more relevant with the newer generation of DDR 4 and possibly DDR 5 RAMs.
 

Koenig168

Supremacy Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2007
Messages
9,030
Reaction score
1,151
I would just leave the DDR2 at 800MHz and 1.8V and tighten the timings to 5-5-5-15.

If you wish, you can OC to 1066MHz at 2.2V and 5-5-5-15. Test for stability and then decrease the voltage until unstable and bring the voltage back up two notches.
 

narkizy

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2016
Messages
538
Reaction score
0
i am quite surprised.


Well obviously my DDR2 example makes no sense (how much performance benefit are you gonna gain from 216MHz? not much...), but I thought it would become more relevant with the newer generation of DDR 4 and possibly DDR 5 RAMs.

Mostly because you mentioned your ddr2 example which is quite old and obselete, and yes, the benefits are close to negligible thats why no one bothered to reply xD

Now back to the current times, overclocking ddr4 ram is almost exclusively for ryzen chips since it helps in achieving a slight boost in the overclock due to the infinity fabric in ryzen CPUs. For intel chips faster ram is almost useless so overclocking is pointless. So tldr: depends on the CPU.
 

Rashkae

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2004
Messages
22,378
Reaction score
81
i am quite surprised.


Well obviously my DDR2 example makes no sense (how much performance benefit are you gonna gain from 216MHz? not much...), but I thought it would become more relevant with the newer generation of DDR 4 and possibly DDR 5 RAMs.

Overclocking DDR2 is much much simpler than DDR4. So, there is no relevance really.
 

Ark Law

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2013
Messages
11,540
Reaction score
495
I seriously recommend Koi's advice of throw and buying new hardware
 

watzup_ken

High Supremacy Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2003
Messages
25,491
Reaction score
1,931
I am waiting for DDR5, hoping that it will come out this year :s12: or maybe early next year.

Is there a particular reason why you need to wait for DDR5? I feel a lot of people want the newest, but I do question the benefit. While DDR5 will appear to be faster, the latencies will also increase drastically. For example, the first gen DDR4 is only 2133, and because of the significant increase in latency, it is actually slower than a DDR3 running at 1866 and with a tighter timing. Also if you look at the current processors, I would believe none of the processors, regardless of AMD or Intel is benefiting significantly from those rams running at 3600 or more in real life usage. It looks wonderful from memory specific benchmarks for most users, that's all.
 

EclipseR_

Junior Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2016
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Is there a particular reason why you need to wait for DDR5? I feel a lot of people want the newest, but I do question the benefit. While DDR5 will appear to be faster, the latencies will also increase drastically. For example, the first gen DDR4 is only 2133, and because of the significant increase in latency, it is actually slower than a DDR3 running at 1866 and with a tighter timing. Also if you look at the current processors, I would believe none of the processors, regardless of AMD or Intel is benefiting significantly from those rams running at 3600 or more in real life usage. It looks wonderful from memory specific benchmarks for most users, that's all.

I keep asking the same question to my friends
 

watzup_ken

High Supremacy Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2003
Messages
25,491
Reaction score
1,931
The reason is simple.


Because it will push the prices down for DDR 4 RAMs.


I already know about the practical limits for DDR5 and from this point on it's going to be a large marketing gimmick :s12::s13:


But with a frenzy going after DDR5 I can quietly sneak some DDR4 RAMs for myself. :s13:

So far, I don't observe price drops on older ram when a new one comes out. Not at least after more than a year. And ram prices fluctuates, so whatever plan you have u should have a backup plan.
 

watzup_ken

High Supremacy Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2003
Messages
25,491
Reaction score
1,931
i will keep that in mind.


I brought my old rig back online anyways so I am probably going to hang around a bit.


I am also not a pioneer for new technology. I usually adopt the technology 4 - 5 years after its release. No rush anyway...


I only just got my first SSD (and it's 2nd hand) - an Intel SSD 320 Series 600GB, which I paid a little over $40 for. I am still experimenting with it, but that drive had 350TB read and written onto it.


Probably aiming for the Samsung 850 Pro Series 2TB next. I am unlikely to hit the 600TBW in 10 years so I think the warranty is quite worth in my opinion. Only problem is trying to find new stock for this SSD.

If you know some lobangs for the SS 850 Pro 2TB let me know

850 Pro 2TB is not cheap. It will likely be more than 1k easily since its running MLC Nand. Any reason why you need such high storage SSD? My recommendation is to only have a SSD that is enough to run your OS and applications. For storage, best to stick to mechanical drives or cloud storage. Biggest SSD I got is 1TB, and that goes into my laptop with limited storage options.
 
Last edited:

Rashkae

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2004
Messages
22,378
Reaction score
81
850 Pro 2TB is not cheap. It will likely be more than 1k easily since its running MLC Nand. Any reason why you need such high storage SSD? My recommendation is to only have a SSD that is enough to run your OS and applications. For storage, best to stick to mechanical drives or cloud storage. Biggest SSD I got is 1TB, and that goes into my laptop with limited storage options.

Heng moi bought the 2TB Micron SSD from Rakuten
 

watzup_ken

High Supremacy Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2003
Messages
25,491
Reaction score
1,931
Lifespan. I am probably going to be carrying this drive to the next laptop. And the next. And the next. With 9.1 PBW written during a stress test for the 256GB variant, the 2TB one will probably last much much longer. 40PB is probably a conservative estimate. It will probably outlive me.


I have got other reasons including high I/O and the SSD being a mere intermediary for file storage but I am not going to go into that cos it would be a WOT... :s22:

I've seen reviews testing how much writes SSD can take. I don't know what you are going to use it for, but it takes a very very long time (like tens of years) for most users to even reach 1PB of write. My Intel G2 160GB is almost 10 years old and only have less than 2TB written to date as my main OS drive (health is 99 out of 100). While the NAND can last that much writes, I am unsure if you take into account that there are other components on the SSD and if they will last. An SSD is not just about the NAND, there are other components on it. Buy what makes sense to you from a usage and budget standpoint, rather than buying based on some theory that it will last you a very long time.
 
Important Forum Advisory Note
This forum is moderated by volunteer moderators who will react only to members' feedback on posts. Moderators are not employees or representatives of HWZ. Forum members and moderators are responsible for their own posts.

Please refer to our Community Guidelines and Standards, Terms of Service and Member T&Cs for more information.
Top