MCH Read Delay Scaling and Default tRD Settings for Each Strap

Earlier, when we introduced the concept of the memory strap, we also included a table of common memory configurations that contained a column of "Default tRD" values. It's important to realize that these values are associated with the strap and have nothing to do with the actual FSB setting. This is because default operation assumes no overclocking, therefore if the 266 strap is being used then the processor obviously must be running at its rated FSB speed of 266MHz. Adding to this the element of a fully adjustable FSB introduces a new level of complexity that the system was never designed to handle.

This allows us to explain why making use of lower strap settings at one time provided for higher levels of performance - we've created the table below for just this purpose. (We say "at one time" because, as we will soon learn, most motherboards now implement strap changes in a manner much different than was previously done.) For example, selecting the 400 strap and setting a 1:1 memory divider at 400MHz FSB would result in DDR2-800 memory speed. By converting the FSB frequency into a cycle period (time for each clock tick) and then multiplying this value by the strap's default MCH Read Delay (tRD) we can effortlessly calculate the true latency (in nanoseconds) associated with this setting. As an example, dividing 1000 by the FSB (400MHz) gives us 2.5 (nanoseconds) - the co-efficient of 1000 used in this conversion formula was purposefully selected in order to give our result in the proper units. So, 12 times 2.5ns equals 30ns, which we then pair with our derived DDR speed rating of DDR2-800.



We will go into more detail about what this value means, but for the time being simply recognize that we want to minimize this number. We can see that the optimal configuration is one in which we would make use of a lower strap along with a higher FSB. While simultaneously applying these two considerations is obviously paramount in order to take advantage of this affect, the practical application of this approach is bounded in a number of ways. For instance, the near absolute minimum limit on any true read delay latency (tRD) might eventually come into play. We also need to be mindful of which memory dividers are available for the strap of choice, as these will ultimately dictate what final memory speeds are possible. Finally, we will soon learn that there are some strict rules that define whether or not a particular MCH Read Delay (tRD) is allowable, depending on the FSB, memory divider in use, and even the memory Column Address Strobe (CAS) setting.

Now that we have had a chance to apply the simple equation to convert a tRD value into a TRD latency, we are ready to examine a graphic that displays the full breadth of this concept. We have plotted the complete range of FSB speeds encompassed by currently defined straps versus the derived TRD values for each default tRD associated with each strap. That may sound more complicated that what it really is; basically, these lines represent how TRD scales across our FSB window of interest (266 to 400MHz FSB) for each tRD in the table above. We can see that by drawing a vertical line from each default FSB up to the line corresponding to that strap's default tRD, and then reading across always results in the same TRD - 30.0 ns. This is by design, and is precisely how each default tRD was determined for all of the straps we have examined. It may be helpful to think of tRD as another memory timing, except that it has nothing to do with memory and everything to do with the MCH. In this sense it responds to FSB scaling in the same way as other memory timings - CAS (tCL), RAS to CAS (tRCD), Row Precharge (tRP) - the true latency (TRD) always decreases in a manner inversely proportional to FSB, and at some point will reach a minimum where the next higher tRD must be used in order to continue scaling.



What happens if we can set the tRD independent of the strap in use? Of course, the strap selected would still dictate which memory dividers are available, but no longer are we forced to make this change solely for the purposes of modifying tRD. As it turns out, this is exactly how these settings work with most of today's enthusiast motherboards built for overclocking, and the ASUS Rampage Formula is no exception. The ability to set a tRD value, regardless of the strap (i.e. memory divider), allows for a whole new world of possibilities when tuning for enhanced performance.

This brings us to the focus of true improvements made to the X38 chipset, which can be experienced more easily with X48 now. Too many benchmark reviews have been guilty of inappropriately discounting the value of this new chipset by calling the X48 little more than a "speed binned" version of the X38 and then comparing their relative performance at stock speeds. This would be like calling the QX6850 (3.00GHz default clock) a speed binned version of the Q6600 (2.4GHz default clock), benching them head-to-head at an equivalent speed, and then concluding that the QX6850 provides no additional value. Overclocking headroom is exactly what differentiates Intel's current line of Core 2 Extreme CPUs from their mainstream offerings, and it's also what makes the X48 stand head and shoulders above the X38 now that the BIOS designs have matured. When all is said and done, this just makes us wonder who really understands how to overclock the MCH properly.

MCH overclocking takes many forms. One form is something you might already be familiar with, carried out by simply raising the FSB. The problem is that BIOS setup routines will usually provide relief to the MCH by automatically relaxing tRD as the FSB is pushed higher and higher. This effect can easily negate any gains that might otherwise be achieved. Taking control of tRD and manually steering it to a lower value will allow the user to retain the associated performance increase, and as such must also technically be considered overclocking. As with most if not all positive performance adjustments realized while overclocking, this modification comes at a cost - in particular, the need for increased vMCH.

That is not to say that a certain level of headroom does not already exist as an accessible performance boost - it does. While Intel is wise to provide generous levels of margin between pre-established default tRD values and those attainable without the need for any additional voltage, we would consider ourselves foolish if we did not take advantage of this relatively free performance improvement. For instance, looking at the plot of X48 MCH overclocking response curves below we can see that although a default tRD value of 12 is normally used at greater than 400MHz FSB (using the 400 strap), at about 425MHz FSB we should have little to no trouble setting a tRD of 6, even using stock vMCH. The end result this tRD reduction of 6 clocks brings is a total memory read latency decrease of approximately 14.1ns (the difference in TRD values at 425MHz FSB using a tRD of 12 and 6).



With that, we can finally see how this consideration comes full circle - the lower the TRD, the higher the memory read performance and vice versa. This change in TRD also drives vMCH, with lower values requiring substantially more voltage than the more "relaxed" (higher) values. We were able to push our ASUS Rampage Formula to a very impressive 450MHz FSB using a tRD of 5, which correlates to a TRD of about 11.1 ns. Because this required about 1.60V vMCH, for all intents and purposes we would consider this to be the practical limit of scaling, at least with conventional cooling. Above this voltage, we find that the X48 quickly turns into a little furnace during periods of prolonged load. Our recommendation is the liberal use of extra cooling capacity if you feel the need to push any further.

The Clock Crossing Procedure and MCH Read Delay (tRD) Real-World Results: What Does a Lower tRD Really Provide?
Comments Locked

73 Comments

View All Comments

  • Bozo Galora - Friday, January 25, 2008 - link

    Yet another world class article by Mr. Boughton
    Not only do you give the insight, but you make it easily UNDERSTANDABLE.
    You da man
  • AndyKH - Friday, January 25, 2008 - link

    Also... is this tRD adjustment only possible with a X48 board? If not, I would have preferred that this article was kept seperate from an article about a specific motherboard. Don't get me wrong, I think it is a very informative article :-).
    If it is possible to adjust the tRD on other chipsets than the X48, can the possibility of setting the tRD as low as 5 then be attributed to the X48?
  • Gary Key - Friday, January 25, 2008 - link

    tRD functionality within the BIOS is dependent upon the motherboard manufacturer. We have been harping on the motherboard suppliers to fully open up the BIOS on the enthusiast boards, this includes tRD and associated phase changes. ASUS is one of the first (DFI also) to offer an extensive range of settings in this particular area (most BIOS releases handle tRD adjustments automatically). We debated on separating the article content but due to the BIOS options available, they were more or less tied to each other. Yes, if tRD is available in the BIOS, it can be set on other Intel based boards or chipsets. In fact, I had very good success on the ASUS 780i board with tRD adjustments. Thanks for the comments! :)
  • Georgeisdead - Wednesday, February 27, 2008 - link

    Would tRD be called something else? Perhaps Read to Write Delay (tRWD)? I have an EVGA 680i board and I cannot find the tRD setting. I don't even see it as an available option with memset 3.4. Does anyone know of a synonym for tRD?
  • Brunnis - Friday, January 25, 2008 - link

    The Gigabyte GA-P35-DS3 has a BIOS option to set tRD and I seem to remember that it had a large effect on memory performance. Would this be the setting that you talk about here. If it is, it seems ASUS isn't the first one to offer it.
  • Shoal07 - Friday, January 25, 2008 - link

    Can anyone confirm you can set the tRD to anything besides innoculous settings like "auto" "high" and "low" on the GA-P35-DS3, and specify if its the L or R? Also, what memory was used in this test? (I read the whole article and I don't recall the specs of the system/testbed as a whole).
  • Brunnis - Friday, January 25, 2008 - link

    I have checked my GA-P35-DS3 again. The option is labeled "Static tRead Value" in the BIOS and can be set to any integer value between 1 and 31. Modifying this value changes the "Performance Level" as reported by the Windows program MemSet 3.4 accordingly. Changing the value from 8 to 7 on my board yielded the following results in Sisoft Sandra bandwidth benchmark:

    tRD 7: 7117 / 7139 (MB/s)
    trD 8: 7026 / 7045 (MB/s)

    Pretty large different from changing a single timing one step.
  • AndyKH - Friday, January 25, 2008 - link

    Is it correctly understood that no other motherboards allow the tRD to be adjusted from within the BIOS, or is it simply because this board has named the setting something sensible? I think the article is a bit unclear about that.
  • legoman666 - Friday, January 25, 2008 - link

    Very enlightening article. The only thing missing are real world application tests showing the benefits in office applications, games (most important ;) ), and encoding.
  • Gary Key - Friday, January 25, 2008 - link

    We will have full application benchmarks in the X48 roundup that Kris and Raja are working on.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now