Stable system for running RW's?

[gptech]

Hi, I went on Amazon and read the reviews concerning this ram and someone recommends setting the timings thus 5-5-5-15....

What timings *someone* recommends is rather dependant on what motherboard they're using, are you getting an issue that necessitates tweaking any settings?

[smarty2]

Hi, I went on Amazon and read the reviews concerning this ram and someone recommends setting the timings thus 5-5-5-15....

What timings *someone* recommends is rather dependant on what motherboard they're using, are you getting an issue that necessitates tweaking any settings?

Hi there fella, yes I am having an issue with setting in the bios the ram to 1066 mhz, keeps on bsod'ing due to a phenom bug.
Heres the reviewers rec's
"If you are after an upgrade to get a bit more speed out of your DDR2 Machine or just need a replacemnet then I cant recommend this RAM any higher.
In over 10 years of building PC's these have been the most Stable and User Friendly Factory Overclocked RAM modules I have come accross. They run the 1066Mhz stated speed @ 2.1v with ease at timings of 5-5-5-15 and will quite eaisly run at 800Mhz and 4-4-4-12 timings at 1.8v and also overclock beautifully to around 1150Mhz on stock 2.1v with 5-5-5-18 timings.
Also the heatspreaders are supprisingly effective at dispersing heat generated, they show that all these nonsence solutions with fins and all sorts of stuff from other brands are a total waste and just for show.
Buy a set of these and you really wont regret it, they are great RAM sets."

[gptech]

Heres the reviewers rec's
"If you are after an upgrade to get a bit more speed out of your DDR2 Machine or just need a replacemnet then I cant recommend this RAM any higher.
In over 10 years of building PC's these have been the most Stable and User Friendly Factory Overclocked RAM modules I have come accross. They run the 1066Mhz stated speed @ 2.1v with ease at timings of 5-5-5-15 and will quite eaisly run at 800Mhz and 4-4-4-12 timings at 1.8v and also overclock beautifully to around 1150Mhz on stock 2.1v with 5-5-5-18 timings.
Also the heatspreaders are supprisingly effective at dispersing heat generated, they show that all these nonsence solutions with fins and all sorts of stuff from other brands are a total waste and just for show.
Buy a set of these and you really wont regret it, they are great RAM sets."

He isn't recommending that they be run at those timings, just that his observations show they will--as I said, RAM timings also depend on your motherboards capabilities. The increase in performance you'll get by running at 1066MHz as opposed to 800MHz is negligible, if it's BSODing at the higher speed then use the SPD default settings. Overclocked RAM is not guaranteed to run at the overclocked speed on all systems.

EDIT: If you're absolutely determined to run at 1066MHz, and your RAM is this: http://www.valueram.com/datasheets/khx8500d2k2_4g.pdf you'll need to up the voltage rather than alter timings.

[smarty2]

Yes, I have been experimenting with overclocking the cpu by 10%, the max my Ai overclocking allows for my mobo M2N Sli, adjusted the ram to run at 1066 mhz and set the timing on 2T and left the rest on auto, ran ok for 20 minutes but on a restart the bios had re set itself to defaults, so I have reduced the overclock to 3% and the ram to 800 mhz and everything back to auto, the cpu I think is the weak link and have been considering an AMD Phenom II X4 940 Black Edition Deneb Socket AM2+ running at 3.0Ghz?

[gptech]

According to http://uk.asus.com/Motherboards/AMD_AM2 ... ifications your motherboard doesn't support 1066MHz RAM speed anyway.
The 940 is a good CPU, but I wonder if moving up to that will just create another 'weak link', one that you can't easily upgrade. I'd suggest you actually start playing RW and see if it now performs any better before thinking of further upgrading.

[smarty2]

According to http://uk.asus.com/Motherboards/AMD_AM2 ... ifications your motherboard doesn't support 1066MHz RAM speed anyway.
The 940 is a good CPU, but I wonder if moving up to that will just create another 'weak link', one that you can't easily upgrade. I'd suggest you actually start playing RW and see if it now performs any better before thinking of further upgrading.

Well that may be the case, however its available in my bios nevertheless. I have started to play RW's and just successfully run a scenario on the Hamburg bremen route with no sbhh's and no appreciable slow down in Hamburg Hbf! Also Torino Genova without incident, trying Italia Francia next then on to the killer WCMLN! So far so good, that extra 4 gigs on top seems to be helping significantly. Thanks for your interest.

[gptech]

I have started to play RW's and just successfully run a scenario on the Hamburg bremen route with no sbhh's and no appreciable slow down in Hamburg Hbf! Also Torino Genova without incident, trying Italia Francia next then on to the killer WCMLN! So far so good

This is what we like to hear (read?)

[smarty2]

Well, I have done 2 scenarios on the WCMLN Sunday madness & The Royal Scot........... no SBHH's at all! Before the ram upgrade I almost always had an sbhh just before Lockerbie another one running over Beattock and always but always at Motherwell! Admitedly it was a bit stuttery before Motherwell and Glasgow but hey at least no ding! I can even get away with higher settings too. This upgrade has put life into the old dog, and I aint talkin about me!

[matt1314]

I practically never had an SBHH on any route and I've been playing TS2012 for a pretty long time.

My specs:

Intel Core 2 Quad Q8200 @2,33 GHz (from 2009)
Sapphire ATI Radeon HD5770 Vapor-X 1GB
6144 MB RAM
1 TB HDD

In-game settings: TSX on, AF x8, SSAA 1x2, everything maxed out except particles on low (because they are not really important and you save up a few FPS) and view distance on high. Shadows are on high. I've been experimenting with them switching between medium and high but then noticed that there is literally no FPS decrease with them turned to high. So I left them on high. I also use the FXAA Shader improvement by Bill.

At Glasgow (WCMLN) I get like 7-14 FPS with these settings. Not smooth but playable and no SBHH's. On Woodhead I also get approx. 20-30 FPS and in some dense areas 10-15 FPS.

[smarty2]

My history with RS then RW's now Ts2012 has been quite a stormy one, having problems mainly with irritating SBHH's until this upgrade of Hyper x ram, it seems to me then it has always been a resource problem that 4 gig never was enough, and having an extra 2 gigs of different manufacturers ram with my original was proving problematic at best but with 8 gigs to play with of Kingston it seems to have made things more stable, particularly since my gpu and processor are a bit long in the tooth now.

[markpullinger]

Agreed - 8 Gig made mine a lot happier especially with win 7 64 bit. 4 Gig didn't seem to give any improvement over 32 bit Vista but 8 does!

[gptech]

I'd say that the real point is that you need a stable system to install RW on to, not how do you make a system stable. RW is pretty good at finding the odd wee glitch we all have on our systems, many of them obscure and seemingly having nothing to do with RW.

[smarty2]

Soooo, my new spangly 8 gig of ram hasn't been the cure then? Now I am really confused!

[gptech]

For stable you can also read balanced/matched.... Your new RAM is certainly the cure in your case, but more to do with the fact that it's properly matched rather than the amount. As I said, RW finds the tiny faults that other games can overlook and plays silly so-and-so's.

[smarty2]

For stable you can also read balanced/matched.... Your new RAM is certainly the cure in your case, but more to do with the fact that it's properly matched rather than the amount. As I said, RW finds the tiny faults that other games can overlook and plays silly so-and-so's.

Aah, like Heineken then.