Forums

Username:  

Password:  

       
Login Help

  LATEST POSTS  
 
America's Army Launc..
Learning BASICS of A..
can u give us hints ..
AA3 New Patch Releas..
Better Realism Alter..

Keywords:
 

More search options

  HOT TOPICS  
 
AA3 Mentor FAQ
Name that AA map!
Training Missions
Server Admin Info
» See more topics
  

    « Previous Page        Page 46 of 47     
  Page Jump        Next Page »  

 The Official Computer Building Help Thread 
 

W@@dy

First Sergeant
Posts: 2517
Joined: 12 Nov 2007

      Posted: 24 Mar 2011 13:57 Profile United States


Oh they're both 240? Didn't really notice.

I didn't realize the timings werent as important for DDR3.

Now I'm a little confused though. Whats the difference between latency and Frequency?

Latency is the timing between steps the RAM takes right? Inbetween receiving, storing, extracting and sending the data, no?

Frequency is then...how fast it goes through all those steps?

Oh wait. Timing isn't actually time, but how many clock cycles it performs before the next step, if I remember correctly.
So if it has a faster clock cycle (which is frequency?) a 9-9-9 (or w/e) could be the same speed as a 2-2-2-2 timing on a slower frequency ( I did no math whatsoever, so don't crucify me)

Or am I just way off base.

Buckaroo Banzai

Sergeant
Posts: 424
Joined: 11 Aug 2003

      Posted: 24 Mar 2011 14:14 Profile United States


Yeah, both are 240 pin, but the alignment of those pins is different, as is the function of certain pins IIRC.

Think of frequency as being the speed limit, and timings as traffic lights or stop signs.

_____________________

Embedded Image

W@@dy

First Sergeant
Posts: 2517
Joined: 12 Nov 2007

      Posted: 24 Mar 2011 14:52 Profile United States


So will DDR4 be the Autobahn?

greeneyes

Sergeant
Posts: 339
Joined: 04 Jan 2011

      Posted: 24 Mar 2011 15:24 Profile Satellite Provider


latency is response timing.
frequency is the speed.
no point in having a high frequency memory if latency is high.
top memory modules have low latency no matter what frequency.

_____________________

Embedded Image

W@@dy

First Sergeant
Posts: 2517
Joined: 12 Nov 2007

      Posted: 24 Mar 2011 15:27 Profile United States


Speed of what though. It's the clock frequency right?

greeneyes

Sergeant
Posts: 339
Joined: 04 Jan 2011

      Posted: 24 Mar 2011 15:34 Profile Satellite Provider


exactly as in a processor, frequency is processing speed, higher frequency+higher speed.
higher latency+slow response, low latency+faster response.

anything above CL 7 is a slow memory module now matter what frequency.

Buckaroo Banzai

Sergeant
Posts: 424
Joined: 11 Aug 2003

      Posted: 24 Mar 2011 19:13 Profile United States


In every test I've seen, higher frequency lead to higher bandwidth and better performance in real-world scenarios like gaming than lower timings.

greeneyes

Sergeant
Posts: 339
Joined: 04 Jan 2011

      Posted: 24 Mar 2011 19:18 Profile Satellite Provider


Buckaroo Banzai wrote:

In every test I've seen, higher frequency lead to higher bandwidth and better performance in real-world scenarios like gaming than lower timings.



depends on frequency and timing.

DDR3 CL7 1600 perform better than DDR3 CL9 1866.

Buckaroo Banzai

Sergeant
Posts: 424
Joined: 11 Aug 2003

      Posted: 24 Mar 2011 20:01 Profile United States


In that case, yes, the 266MHz(532MHz effective) increase in frequency isn't enough to compensate for the higher latency. 1866MHz with a CL of 8 would be the same as 1600 CL7. 2000MHz at CL9 would give equal bandwidth.

It's generally best to go with higher frequency RAM and run with tighter timings than stock, which may or may not require a bump in voltage, depending on the quality of the modules.

W@@dy

First Sergeant
Posts: 2517
Joined: 12 Nov 2007

      Posted: 27 Mar 2011 10:44 Profile United States


Gonna build a Media Center/multipurpose server

Embedded Image

Things intentionally left out:
HardDrive - Gonna try booting from USB first, found a way to do this with Win7 (or at least install from usb)
and my plans are to use the USB as a Harddrive (see bottom)
CD Drive - I've got extras laying around, plus, gonna try install/boot from usb as I said
OS - At first I think I'm gonna use DamnSmallLinux as an OS, then perhaps later when I have more money upgrade to Win7 and use this as an HTPC.

Using DSL as the OS will leave enough space on the flash drive to act as a Harddrive. When I get Win7 I'll probably buy an HD.
The goal of this thing is to be as cheap as possible, but enough to run an MC server, maybe a TS server, host some files that I can access remotely (mainly school work).

Any thoughts? The price limit is $200 btw

W@@dy

First Sergeant
Posts: 2517
Joined: 12 Nov 2007

      Posted: 29 Mar 2011 09:11 Profile United States


Went a different route on the media server. Should be cheaper and I got more ram. If not cheaper, close to the previous price

Silent^Reaper

Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 709
Joined: 12 Apr 2009

      Posted: 29 Mar 2011 09:15 Profile United States


Why don't you get windows server 2008? I know you are a student, look up dreamspark, you will be able to get it for free Smile

And didn't you say you spent 13 bucks on win 7 in another thread?

_____________________

Embedded Image
IRC || Forum TOS || Forum Help || EULA

W@@dy

First Sergeant
Posts: 2517
Joined: 12 Nov 2007

      Posted: 31 Mar 2011 21:36 Profile United States


Nah, I said I could. The only reason I don't want to go with win7 is because I want to make the OS as light as possible.

I'll look into Windows Server 2008 though. I didn't think of that.

wrath_of_grunge

Private First Class
Posts: 169
Joined: 27 Dec 2002

      Posted: 31 Mar 2011 22:11 Profile


i'll speak from experience. i've used windows 3.1, 95, 98, 98SE, ME, XP, Vista, and 7.

of all those windows OS's, 98SE was pretty good. until XP came along. XP was great, until 7 came out.

i bought my laptop with Vista on it because it had a deal for a free upgrade to 7 when it came out. i did the upgrade and it was garbage, same problems i had with Vista. i did a clean install of 7 and it is as close to a perfect OS as any.

nothing wrong with Linux or MacOS, or whatever you decide to use. but if you're gonna be doing gaming on it i would look to 7 to provide the best experience.

there are several optimization guides to use if you so wish to trim the fat, if you will. but for the most part all the big three OS's (MacOS, Windows, and Linux) have gotten pretty good about making their OS perform well.

_____________________
Embedded Image

W@@dy

First Sergeant
Posts: 2517
Joined: 12 Nov 2007

      Posted: 31 Mar 2011 22:32 Profile United States


I was looking at linux because this thing is mainly gonna be used for a MineCraft server (already running one on linux) and an FTP. Which should be straightforward using puTTY.

Later I'd like to expand the server though. Perhaps get it to be an HTPC. That's my goal I suppose. Or maybe rent it out to make income, although I don't really have any idea how to get that going. I'd ask Coe but he'd laugh at my stupidity.

Luckily he doesn't check this thread lol


 The Official Computer Building Help Thread 
 

    « Previous Page        Page 46 of 47     
  Page Jump        Next Page »  

  

Jump to: