Lower latencies are a good thing, of course, but how much can they really improve system performance? Are exotic, low-latency DIMMs worth the price premium? Read on as we explore the effects of memory latency on Athlon 64 performance in synthetic memory benchmarks, games, and real-world applications.

Memory latency?
Before diving into our benchmark results, it's worth taking a moment to go over how memory access works and where the various latencies come into play. Memory is organized like a spreadsheet, with data stored in cells that can be identified by a corresponding column and row. Spreadsheets can also be made up of multiple sheets, and similarly, memory can be made up of multiple banks. If we want to access a specific cell of memory, the system must first activate the sheet, or bank, containing the desired row. Next, the system sends an active command to the desired row. Once the row is activated, the system can issue read or write commands to specific columns in the row. When reading or writing has been completed, a precharge command is sent to close the row.
There are delays between each of the steps in memory access. These delays are referred to as latencies and expressed as a number of clock cycles. Here's a brief explanation of some of the most common, and important, memory timing parameters that affect access latencies:
Since latencies refer to delays, lower is better. That doesn't mean you should hop into your motherboard's BIOS and set each memory timing option to its lowest possible value, though. Memory modules are rated for a specific set of latencies at a given clock speed, and they're generally not stable with lower latencies. A DIMM's latencies are usually expressed as a series of four hyphenated numbers corresponding to the CAS latency, RAS-to-CAS delay, RAS precharge, and active-to-precharge delay. Low latency DDR400, for example, is generally rated for 2-2-2-5 timings at 400MHz. That refers to two cycles of CAS latency, RAS-to-CAS delay, and RAS precharge, and five cycles of active-to-precharge delay.

| HGST packs 1.5TB into 9.5-mm, three-platter Travelstar 5K1500 notebook drive | 14 |
| I'm sorry but if there's enough market demand for 13.3" 3200x1800 screens, there's MORE than enough demand for 24" 2560x1600 screens. | +37 |