# Whats the fastest DDR2 Dual channel memory?



## teamhex

Whats the fastest DDR2 Dual channel memory I can get ? My board says it can handle up to 1200MHz, but I cant find anything at 1200MHz. That and would I notice a difference over the ram im using now?


----------



## funkysnair

just get some crucial ballastix 1066mhz-there pritty cheap!!!

i paid about £30 for 2gig of geil black dragon ddr2 800mhz and im really impressed as i just bought it as cheap ram for my girlfriends computer but it doesnt look cheap at all!!!

there is these----\/

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showp...&groupid=701&catid=8&subcat=817&name=Kingston HyperX 2GB (2x1GB) DDR2 PC2-9200C5 1150MHz Dual Channel Kit (KHX9200D2K2/2G)

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showp...89-OC&groupid=701&catid=8&subcat=817&name=OCZ 2GB (2x1GB) PC2-9200C5 1150MHz Reaper HPC Edition Dual Channel DDR2 (OCZ2RPR11502GK)

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showp...11-OC&groupid=701&catid=8&subcat=817&name=OCZ 4GB (2x2GB) PC2-9200C5 1150MHz Flex II Passive/WaterCooled Dual Channel DDR2 (OCZ2FXT11504GK)


----------



## StrangleHold

Yes they make DDR2 1200 but for the price vs. performance you better of getting DDR2 1066 or even 800.


----------



## WhiteFireDragon

don't get the current ballistixs. they're single sided are one of the worst ddr2 currently. it won't overclock and will unpredictably die on you, even at stock speed. if you're able to get the old ballistixs d9 chips, then those are really impressive.

it's rare that you'll find ddr2 1200, and even then, your mobo will not run it at that speed by default. you'll need to OC it. the ones that don't run at 1200 default will need some pushing to get there. the old d9 chips will get here easily, but the current ones need a bit of work. i would suggest mushkins, gskill, and some corsairs


----------



## teamhex

Im digging the OCZ Reaper HPC, I guess ill get that after this next check, that and Im thinking a blu/hd drive/ dvd burner.


----------



## scooter

teamhex said:


> im digging the ocz reaper hpc, i guess ill get that after this next check, that and im thinking a blu/hd drive/ dvd burner.



do it!!!


----------



## mep916

WhiteFireDragon said:


> don't get the current ballistixs. they're single sided are one of the worst ddr2 currently.



Yep, they're garbage. I had to RMA two sets. Finally, on the third replacement, Crucial sent me the double sided D9's (that also have the dual LED lanes).


----------



## WhiteFireDragon

mep916 said:


> Yep, they're garbage. I had to RMA two sets. Finally, on the third replacement, Crucial sent me the double sided D9's (that also have the dual LED lanes).



did you actually have to request the D9's or did they just sent it and you got really lucky? and you bought yellow ballistixs and they sent tracers?


----------



## mep916

WhiteFireDragon said:


> did you actually have to request the D9's or did they just sent it and you got really lucky? and you bought yellow ballistixs and they sent tracers?



Naw, I got lucky. They were the single sided Tracers. The first set (of single sided) I purchased last year and they were DOA from newegg. Sent them back to newegg and the second set lasted for about six months. That set I RMA'd to Crucial, and, in return I received the double sided D9 set. I'm guessing that Crucial is having to replace a ton of the single sided modules, so they're replacing them with the double sided sets - or I was lucky.


----------



## TrainTrackHack

Why would you bother getting so fast RAM? As long you're running it in dual-channel, you'll notice absolutely no performance increase unless you're running some _REALLY_ intensive applications, in which case you'd probably have a DDR3-board and a dual-CPU setup anyways... trust me, if you had DDR2-533 and DDR2-1066 in dual channel with same relative timings (by which I mean that the timings of DDR2-1066 should be double that of DDR2-533 in case of this comparison), you'd gain absolutely no noticeable amount of performance unless you were running some really memory-intensive apps, but thenagain as I said if this was the case you wouldn't be sticking with DDR2 anyways.

I would just get some chep DDR2-800, as long as it has decent timings it will perform just as good as DDR2-1066 in any real-life applications.


----------



## funkysnair

well because of the cheapness of ram these days i would prefer to spend a little more and get some faster rated ram!

you do have a point but it isnt as valid as it would have been if the price for ddr2 1066mhz was twice the price as ddr2 800mhz-which it isnt anymore-!

for some one who is on a very strict budget its a different matter

as for the ballistix-me and kornowski have some and ive never had a problem with mine and neither has he??


----------



## teamhex

hackapelite said:


> Why would you bother getting so fast RAM? As long you're running it in dual-channel, you'll notice absolutely no performance increase unless you're running some _REALLY_ intensive applications, in which case you'd probably have a DDR3-board and a dual-CPU setup anyways... trust me, if you had DDR2-533 and DDR2-1066 in dual channel with same relative timings (by which I mean that the timings of DDR2-1066 should be double that of DDR2-533 in case of this comparison), you'd gain absolutely no noticeable amount of performance unless you were running some really memory-intensive apps, but thenagain as I said if this was the case you wouldn't be sticking with DDR2 anyways.
> 
> I would just get some chep DDR2-800, as long as it has decent timings it will perform just as good as DDR2-1066 in any real-life applications.



Well I game, so should I notice a difference? So what your saying is, if I get 800MHz with is not that far from 667MHz ill notice something, but if I buy the 1066MHz which is almost double the freq that im not going to notice it?
For some reason I just feel I need better ram, I bought a cheap 30 dollar kit of this 667 just to get this thing running, same for my HD's I got them from my old system. I went cheap on the initial build, 500 bux...then bought a video card and now im going to get RAM and some decent sata drives.


----------



## funkysnair

what you need to weigh up is how much you want to spend and how much the difference is between the 800mhz and the 1066mhz-!

you will find not much so just go with the 1066mhz and be done with the "i wish i got" palava!!!!


----------



## TrainTrackHack

> Well I game, so should I notice a difference? So what your saying is, if I get 800MHz with is not that far from 667MHz ill notice something, but if I buy the 1066MHz which is almost double the freq that im not going to notice it?


No, no, no... the point as, as long as the timings are good and you have your memory in dual-channel, you won't notice a difference. Well you _might_ notice a difference if you upgrade from 533 (unlikely), but if you have DDR2-800 in dual-channel it will, in any real-life applications, perform just as good as DDR2-1066 or DDR2-1200, unless the timings are way off.

Again, I'm assuming here that the memory is in dual-channel and the timings are fairly good - DDR2-533 with high latencies _will_ bottleneck heavy games.


----------



## Intel_man

DDR2 1200.

http://www.ncix.com/products/index.php?sku=27529&vpn=PVS22G9600ELK&manufacture=Patriot


----------



## mikesrex

get some Gigabyte 2GBHZ 2X1GB.  I use that and have had it clocked very high at tight timings.  I believe the stock clock is 800MHz at 4-4-4-12 but I have run it at 1000 MHz at 4-4-4-12 with ease.


----------



## bubblescivic

mikesrex said:


> get some Gigabyte 2GBHZ 2X1GB.  I use that and have had it clocked very high at tight timings.  I believe the stock clock is 800MHz at 4-4-4-12 but I have run it at 1000 MHz at 4-4-4-12 with ease.



damn right! i have two kits of this stuff and i would buy 2 more if i had money to spend on RAM. i run them on both my overclocked machines. w00t!


----------



## teamhex

hackapelite said:


> No, no, no... the point as, as long as the timings are good and you have your memory in dual-channel, you won't notice a difference. Well you _might_ notice a difference if you upgrade from 533 (unlikely), but if you have DDR2-800 in dual-channel it will, in any real-life applications, perform just as good as DDR2-1066 or DDR2-1200, unless the timings are way off.
> 
> Again, I'm assuming here that the memory is in dual-channel and the timings are fairly good - DDR2-533 with high latencies _will_ bottleneck heavy games.



Well, how do I know if the timings are good? Whats a good timing? The more the better or less the better? Also How do I know if its in dual channel mode. I know I have that capability, Do I just make sure there in the same colored slots?


----------



## TrainTrackHack

> Well, how do I know if the timings are good? Whats a good timing?


For 4-4-4-12 is excellent for DDR2-800, just like 5-5-5-15 is for DDR2-1066 and 3-3-3-9 is for DDR2-667.



> The more the better or less the better?


The less, the better



> Also How do I know if its in dual channel mode. I know I have that capability, Do I just make sure there in the same colored slots?


Generally that's all you need to do - also, while the computer POSTs, it should display a message saying that it's running in dual-channel. If you want to make sure, get CPU-Z, it will tell on the memory tab.


----------



## Mitch?

i'd just get some low latency ddr 800.
my mushkin performance ram was like $50 for 2 gigs back in the day, and at ddr800 they're at 4-3-4-11-2t
you'll probably notice a difference from 533 going to either 800 or 1066, but ddr800 is more than enough, you're bottleneck will be the CPU or GFX


----------



## teamhex

Mr. Johanssen said:


> i'd just get some low latency ddr 800.
> my mushkin performance ram was like $50 for 2 gigs back in the day, and at ddr800 they're at 4-3-4-11-2t
> you'll probably notice a difference from 533 going to either 800 or 1066, but ddr800 is more than enough, you're bottleneck will be the CPU or GFX



Could I get a link to a 4 gig kit? Or 2 gig kit I guess.


----------

