|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
24.7.103.234
In Reply to: RE: What are you guys using for memory? posted by Dawnrazor on June 06, 2009 at 20:30:02
what is more important, low latency or smaller memory size, if one has to pick?
Follow Ups:
Dawnrazor wrote:
" "What is more important, low latency or smaller memory size, if one has to pick?"
I'd say latency, every time. I'm convinced it's a critical parameter for RAM in a slow computer.
As you know, memory is slow compared to processors with a trade-off between clock speed and latency. RAM able to "keep up with" a fast CPU needs more cycles to do so - i.e. it generally has a higher latency than RAM that can only keep up with a slower device. (Not all slow RAM inevitably has low latencies but low latency RAM will be on the slow side.)
As you are slowing down the CPU to lower RFI (watch out for the Herz Police), there is no need for fast RAM but there is benefit to be had from low latency. OTOH, the extra power drawn by larger capacity chips is modest.
Back in January, I asked inmates "Does RAM quality matter?" and got some interesting replies (and a few witty ones, as you'd expect). Eventually, I changed the RAM in my cMP2 box for Kingston KHX6400D2UL/1G (2 x 512 MB, 3-3-3-10) as recommended by, I think, carcass93 and adjusting settings as suggested by (again, I think) Greg to 3-3-3-6. The difference was clearly audible.
The above is only a hypothesis (OK, a guess) though I find it credible. However, even with the same latency spec, different makes of RAM do seem to sound different. As to why that is, I'm at a loss.
Hope that helps,
Dave
I am under the impression that cics is using the Kingston 256 and
I use it because of that. I figured that was what was wanted.
I have not tried many others, other that the HYPERX 512 which was the previous recommendation. I think the 256 is better in my system
Nonetheless, I have always, simply, followed cics's formula since I wanted to hear what he was hearing.
If he has made a subsequent recommendation I have missed it!
If you want to use 256MB RAM DDR2, go with the Kingston Value RAM that Rick recommended - you'll find there aren't many others available anyway.
If you want to use 512MB, you have more choice, so look for CL4 (CAS Latency 4) RAM sticks - Kingston and Corsair have been good for me. Very hard (impossible?) to find the CL3 Kingston that cics first recommended, but the CL4 RAM will easily run at CAS latency 3 when you have underclocked your system as per latest cMP specs.
Avoid CL5 RAM - I haven't tried it, but others report bad sound - no surprise.
As for which sounds better - the differences are small, and may depend on your luck with the individual RAM module you get. They are so cheap, get a few and pick the best one!
Might want to try out the Winchip DDR2 512MB RAM rated at 1200MHz CL5. I think it sounds noticeably better than my Team DDR2 512MB CL3 800MHz, and I favor it over ValueRAM after the b27 release.
Let me undestand you substituted the Winchip DDR2 512MB RAM rated at 1200MHz CL5 for your Team and Value ram and it clearly was the winner. Is that right? Did you leave all your bios voltage settings same? How did it sound better? Please say more.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: