OT, new PC build

I intend to build a new PC with a 1066 FSB & 2.13GHz Intel duo.
Question, what speed memory should I get?

As the FSB is 1066, is there any benefit in having DDR faster than 533
(half fsb), or would 667/800 DDR give better performance.

I've been told that 533 would be no slower than 667/800 as the fsb
cannot access the memory at full speed, so has to do it at half speed.

Is that true? If so, could i run the FSB at 800 and use 800 DDR?

The PC is for doing some CAE simulations, but primarily for video
editing.

As for HDD's. I intend to have a RAID system with up to 4 drives each
of 160GB,should i build a raid 0+1 giving 320G space and double access
speed, or RAID 5,which gives 480G space? IS RAID 0+1 faster than RAID
5 and can R5 rebuild everything if a drive fails? Should I source the
drives from different manufactures? (We have a lot of trouble with
Maxstors failing here at work, so I'll be avoiding them!).

Regards, Niv (SV650S)

 

Been doing a bit of benchmarking here with Kentsfield and C2Duo Processors
and different memory flavours.
In synthetic benchmarking there's not a hell of a lot of difference between
533 667 800, apart from price.
If you start running specific memory targetted benchmarks then you'll be
able to tell the difference.
For video editing then its worth taking the load off the CPU if you can, and
use a dedicated card - viewcast osprey or matrox RT.X if you can afford it.

Always best to stick with the same drive and mfr within a raid array imo.
Then at least you know they'll have been tested to work together.
I see the least returns and DOA on Hitachi Drives at the moment, closely
followed by WD.
The WD Raid Edition SATA drives seem very reliable.

 

Why not see what the mobo maker suggests?