momaka wrote on 2025-01-13, 10:51:

I agree that 1:1 FSB to DRAM clocks is better, but I can't say I noticed too much (if any difference) on any of my DDR systems when they weren't running 1:1, and I have many of these.

It affects overall system responsiveness (you might want to run it side by side with an SDRAM-based system) and certain games like TES3 Morrowind (very inconsistent frame rates, I suppose high RAM use + AGP textures with 4:5 latency causes these).

momaka wrote on 2025-01-13, 10:51:

One of the systems I tested more extensively (with gaming) back in the day was a 2 GHz P4 Northwood system with RAM running at 133 MHz (266 DDR). I could put the RAM as high as DDR333, but didn't because it was a finicky Corsair 1GB PC3200 Value RAM module that couldn't run its full speed on most systems, and I think sometimes even DDR333 was finicky. It had no problems running at DDR200 or DDR266 speeds, though. Still, I didn't notice any "back and forth" with the FPS in any games, and I used that system for a bit of gaming in the late 2000's (mostly Half-Life 2 Deathmatch... which ran rather poorly simply because it was a very CPU speed -based game... though probably didn't help that I only had a GeForce FX5600 in the PC either.) Just for reference, the motherboard for this system was an ECS P4VXASD2+ (Via chipset-based).

The chipsets I've tested were Intel 865P and nForce2, and they both seem to behave in a similar way.

Thing is, I can't set the RAM to 100MHz (DDR200) at all on either system for different reasons: on Intel, the option doesn't show up, and on nForce, no such option is present in the BIOS. Even worse, on nForce it runs my CPU at FSB266, and it runs my RAM at DDR333. Even if I put a DDR266 RAM in it.

On my DDR2 systems, the board reads the JEDEC specs of the RAM and sets the speeds accordingly.

momaka wrote on 2025-01-13, 10:51:

I also ran non-1:1 FSB:DRAM clocks in my main PC for a long time: a Dell Optiplex 170L with a 2.8 GHz P4 Prescott HT and i865 ch […]
Show full quote

I also ran non-1:1 FSB:DRAM clocks in my main PC for a long time: a Dell Optiplex 170L with a 2.8 GHz P4 Prescott HT and i865 chipset motherboard (stock Dell one.) Due to one stick being DDR333 (PC2700), my RAM was running slower than my FSB. IIRC, I upgraded that system to 2 GB of matched DDR400/PC3200 RAM around 2019 or 2020, which then boosted the DRAM to DDR400. But I can't say I noticed any performance gains, both on the desktop and in the very few games I played on it (mostly Collin McRae Rally 4 and Need For Speed 5/6.)

songoffall wrote on 2025-01-12, 20:23:

I could live with 266MHz memory; but the 4:5 ratio was quite unpleasant - same issue on my Athlon XP PC. One of the reasons why I prefer to deal with SDRAM-based systems and not DDR-based systems. DDR memory controller is just plain awkward. With DDR2 it gets much better.

I think it just depends a lot on the platform and chipset used... maybe even a little bit (or more?) on the BIOS & board manufacturer.

For example, not all SDRAM-based systems are pain-free. If you ever had the "pleasure" of working with a motherboard with Intel i810 chipset, you'll understand. With that chipset, SDRAM is often not only limited to 512 MB, but also PC100 speeds. Meanwhile, PCs built around this exact chipset were usually late P3 era systems - i.e. 133 MHz FSB Coppermines. The cherry on top for these: no AGP port and only PCI. Yeah, they were... sloooooooow. 😁

As for DDR-based systems - not all of them are bad either. I actually really like my socket 754 and 939 AMDs - the memory controller is on the CPU, so no more of that FSB to DRAM ratio crap. With a competent BIOS, it's really easy to OC these and yet not go over-spec on the DRAM (useful if you are using plain DDR RAM but want to OC the system a little more heavily.) I think the first system I OC'ed well was my AsRock 939Dual-SATAII with its Athlon 64 3200+. Went right 250 MHz FSB (from 200 MHz stock), boosting the CPU clock from 2 GHz to 2.5 GHz - a nice 25% increase. No voltage mods, nothing. Just had to lower the memory frequency in BIOS from PC3200 to PC2100... which with the overclocked FSB brought it right back up to DDR400 speeds.

I try to avoid overclocking, because then AGP and PCI tend to get a bit unpredictable, tbh. I mean I understood the appeal when those were the only computers I had and I had to squeeze as much performance as I could out of them, but now I can just build a more powerful computer without having to deal with that. At this point in time, I'm more concerned with making my 9 beasts quieter.