Skip to main content
Super User

Return to Answer

added 254 characters in body
Source Link
Bigbio2002
Bigbio2002
  • 3.9k
  • 1
  • 25
  • 34

Typically, you'd gain more benefit by higher MHz vs. lower CAS timings. In a general case, even though your CAS timings may be increased to 5-5-5-15 from 4-4-4-12, for example, the extra 133MHz of clock speed gained will allow the memory to go through those CAS cycles in less time, thereby being "faster" in terms of random access.

However, it seems that you've stumbled upon an edge case where the lower CAS timings take less time than the higher CAS timings, despite the lower clock speed. In theoryIn theory, I suppose that a 100% random workload would perform better in this scenario if your math works out. Though inBut like others have said, there are other factors to consider (motherboard, etc.), and this would only apply for an entirely 100% random workload that only reads a single word at a time. For the case that you defined, the difference is marginal as it is. Anything aside from that hypothetical random workload would have less performance than if it were running with the RAM modules at a higher clock speed.

In the real world, when there's a tradeoff, go for the higher MHz (or registered modules, or whatever applies to your need).

Typically, you'd gain more benefit by higher MHz vs. lower CAS timings. In a general case, even though your CAS timings may be increased to 5-5-5-15 from 4-4-4-12, for example, the extra 133MHz of clock speed gained will allow the memory to go through those CAS cycles in less time, thereby being "faster" in terms of random access.

However, it seems that you've stumbled upon an edge case where the lower CAS timings take less time than the higher CAS timings, despite the lower clock speed. In theory, I suppose that a 100% random workload would perform better in this scenario if your math works out. Though in the real world, when there's a tradeoff, go for the higher MHz (or registered modules, or whatever applies to your need).

Typically, you'd gain more benefit by higher MHz vs. lower CAS timings. In a general case, even though your CAS timings may be increased to 5-5-5-15 from 4-4-4-12, for example, the extra 133MHz of clock speed gained will allow the memory to go through those CAS cycles in less time, thereby being "faster" in terms of random access.

However, it seems that you've stumbled upon an edge case where the lower CAS timings take less time than the higher CAS timings, despite the lower clock speed. In theory, I suppose that a 100% random workload would perform better in this scenario if your math works out. But like others have said, there are other factors to consider (motherboard, etc.), and this would only apply for an entirely 100% random workload that only reads a single word at a time. For the case that you defined, the difference is marginal as it is. Anything aside from that hypothetical random workload would have less performance than if it were running with the RAM modules at a higher clock speed.

In the real world, when there's a tradeoff, go for the higher MHz (or registered modules, or whatever applies to your need).

Source Link
Bigbio2002
Bigbio2002
  • 3.9k
  • 1
  • 25
  • 34

Typically, you'd gain more benefit by higher MHz vs. lower CAS timings. In a general case, even though your CAS timings may be increased to 5-5-5-15 from 4-4-4-12, for example, the extra 133MHz of clock speed gained will allow the memory to go through those CAS cycles in less time, thereby being "faster" in terms of random access.

However, it seems that you've stumbled upon an edge case where the lower CAS timings take less time than the higher CAS timings, despite the lower clock speed. In theory, I suppose that a 100% random workload would perform better in this scenario if your math works out. Though in the real world, when there's a tradeoff, go for the higher MHz (or registered modules, or whatever applies to your need).