Nothing you can do with timing is going to make any difference in this case


You should feel lucky you can run 7-7-7 on 8-8-8 memory

Most cant and there are those out there who did what you are doing and the memory eventually became unstable after a burn-in period of a few months and they were forced to return to 8-8-8 timing

You may have gotten a set of OCZ modules from a cherry batch. Most will end up with all sorts of strange error problems, possibly even a corrupt OS from running timing lower than spec of the sticks even IF the memory and load tests PASS

Other than raise the memory speed, which increases memory performance with lower timing, there is nothing else you can do other then go to 6-6-6 memory product


You could try to rework the clock a bit. Drop the multipler and raise BCLOCK to obtain closer to 1600 but you will probably find out that OCZ 8-8-8 memory wont do close to 1600 7-7-7 stable.

You can try the following to obtain a higher stable memory speed at 7-7-7 but as I said, your already pushing things as it is with that cheaper OCZ product


DRAM REF Cycle Time: 88

QPI/DRAM VOLTAGE: 1.37

DRAM VOLTAGE: 1.68


Sometimes a touch of NB voltage helps too as well as CPU PLL

CPU PLL Voltage: 1.80 to 1.88 (MAX)

IOH Voltage: 1.15 to 1.20

ICH Voltage: 1.20


Assuming it did work with the above suggestions you may also be able to drop the CPU voltage a tad .. its a trial and error process

None the less.. even if OCCT and MEMTEST says OK, that does not mean it will be stable in FSX. I have seen all sorts of FSX/FS9 issues caused by unstable memory load tests do not pick up

7-7-7 is not a placebo compared to 8-8-8 just as 6-6-6 is not a placebo perf increase compared to 7-7-7

If you are running stable and without issues, consider yourself lucky and you probably got sticks from a run of chips that can do 7-7-7

You wont damage hardware clocking and reducing timing as long as you remain within voltage spec

All I am telling you is that it is possible to blow an OS to hell (file registry corruption) have an unstable application/driver due to file corruption during install of that product, and/or see graphic errors or other strange crashes in FSX with unstable memory clocked too low on timing, too high on speed or on too low a voltage.

If you are running good then as I said, you got lucky with the memory chips on those sticks. Most wont get that result

Here is a follow up on my findings with changing timings. Its a no go as I could not pass the OCCT test. With the timings changed I was getting core errors, with the timings set to spec I pass with flying colors. It was fun trying anyways and the more I play around with my setup the more I learn so all was not a loss. Thanks Nick for you knowledge to the community!

NickN wrote on Aug 8^th, 2009 at 11:43am:

Here is what I did and am very happy with the results. I was bored yesterday so I started playing around with my OC. I could in no way shape or form go any higher at all than 4.05 and be stable and began to wonder if I am unable to move it any higher even the smallest amount it and be stable then how stable is that clock for real. I then tried other OC's and found it was very stable allowing 3.5 - 3.8 GHZ with no problems at all. So then I said to myself, self- I know I can hit 4.05 ghz and run and I know I can hit 3.8 with no issues at all and if I reduced the CPU ratio to 19 and a BCLK of 206, that would allow me to run my ram at its rated speed (1600) which actually ended up being 1648 at the rated timings 8-8-8-24. Here is the best part of it all, I was able to reduce my VCORE to 1.29375 and my QPI to 1.325. I set my DRAM voltage from 1.64 to 1.66 as I figured it wouldnt hurt seeing as I had a mild OC on it now. SO I ended up running 3.93 GHZ on the CPU with a ton lower VCORE and my ram is now running full bore + a small bit extra. I then launched FSX and noticed a nice boost in smoothness. I was actually able to fly the KSEA route with MAX AG/Scenery at a solid 30 FPS. The whole thing felt alot better than it did at 4.05 GHZ. Me being a newbie at OC thought that I should just go as fast as I can on the CPU but found lowering it a tad and using a dif CPU ratio the whole system seems to work better in harmony.
Just wanted to pass along my findings.

Jim