More Consideration

Matisaro · Feb 19, 2002

So Matisaro, do you have any links/info on RAM sellers that use micron, I would love to research this further and do just what Rayston asked, which is find out the quality and specs of PCBs.

Nope, to do my search I simply looked for micron chips in the description. I dont know what companies would make the pcb's that the stores I linked to were selling, but the store advertised the chips are micron, and micron chips are some of the best.

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!

texas_techie · Feb 19, 2002

Thanks Matisaro. i did find some more info from micron.

quote 1: "The PCB is a critical part of the memory module. It enables your computer to access the memory. For this reason, Micron engineers place significant effort on correctly designing the PCB."

quote2: "The Micron Design Engineering group also interacts frequently with system manufacturers' engineers to optimize the design process and improve manufacturability of the customer's modules"

So im not sure how many third party folks actually seek Micron's help in making a quality PCB. But its in Microns interest to do so.
Also, I am finding there are some folks that make their own chip and PCB (like micron) and others who just buy the chips and make their own PCB. Whats odd is many companies have flip-flopped over time from making their own everything to just buying the chips. Some make their own at certain ram amounts (128, 256 etc).But will only buy the chips at lower speed or size rating and make the PCBs themselves.
In short, you dont know what the hell your getting unless you KNOW the company builds the memory from cradle to grave. (like crucial).
I hear muskin buys their chips, but is VERY picky about which chips so their sticks (modules) tends to be high quality. As you can see, I got a lot of crap to sort out when it comes to memory. When I find out who does what and why, I will post an article. BTW I found several obscure benchmarks that will punish memory (and no, its not whetstone drystone) and check for errors. One is called DocMem by CST Inc. The other is MemTest86 by Chris something. Havnt checked them out, maybe you might want to.

Benchmarks are like sex, everybody loves doing it, everybody thinks they are good at it.

tlaughrey · Feb 19, 2002

I'll just add my little 2 cents to this big debate. I read this quote from [H]ardOCP not too long ago which states their opinion about memory modules:

"Overall, let me interject this. Buy only DDR with Micron or Kingmax chips on it. Samsung, Infineon, and Nanya will not handle high end DDR needs based on our experiences. Keep in mind that you will now even find Crucial DDR Ram with Infineon chips. "

You can read the whole article <A HREF="http://www.hardocp.com/articles/hardestof21k/" target="_new">here</A> if you're interested.

Personally I stick with Corsair, but I've heard good things about Mushkin as well.

I made you look. But I can't make you see.Edited by tlaughrey on 02/19/02 10:33 AM.

ath0mps0 · Feb 19, 2002

Ray,

As I had to get some sleep last night, I couldn't join in the "discussion." Sorry for the late post.

What is a multi-rate per clock fad?

Using multiple signals per clock (Hz) i.e. DDR, QDR, etc.

Thusfar, the only processor with an FSB not equal to the external clock (that is set on the motherboard) is the Pentium 4, which has a quad-pumped FSB.

As you already conceded, and as I stated from the beginning, this is incorrect; the original K7 Athlon was the first x86 processor to multi-pump the FSB with a DDR 100MHz (200 effective).

While many people use the term "DDR" to indicate DDR SDRAM, DDR really has nothing to do with memory. It simply means 'double-data-rate' and was first used to refer to Athlon processor FSBs.

Usually this access is simply to the L1 cache. Occasionally it is to the L2 cache. Rarely, main memory must be accessed. We should note that the L1 cache on the Pentium 4 includes new technology. The instruction opcodes remain in a type of compiled state. This makes the effort of retrieving new instructions during a branch misprediction much more quick. You can in effect skip a few stages of the pipeline this way.

While this was the intention of Intel, practice proved different. The P4 is extremely memory bandwith hungry due primarily to branch mis-predictions and corresponding recomputes.

I expect all processors to use such technology in the future.

As I've stated before, AMD will probably include similar technology in upcomming processors. This kind of copying is common in the industry. It's just that AMD's will probably work better as they've had the benefit of Intel's mistakes....

While it does have a shorter pipeline, it also has less cache now. The Northwood Pentium 4 includes 512KB of L2 cache, surpassing that of the Athlon.

Actually, Athlon's L1 cache is much deeper than P4's new style L1 cache. In practice it has also proved more functional. While NW does have double Athlon's L2 cache, Intel had to add this to correct the perfomance deficit with the original P4. It still doesn't completely overcome the memory bandwidth intensity of the chip. It would need 2-10MB or more to scale that back to near Athlon levels, making the chip cost prohibitive and dumping the yield. This is why the high bandwidth FSB is so important to the p4 and why dual-channel RDRAM is required for highest performance.

This is true of any processor. Increase the clockspeed on a processor by X% and you will increase the amount of memory bandwidth it desires by X%. Note that the percentages do not change.

This is also true of any processor. It is why the Pentium 4 platform does not perform as well with DDR-SDRAM as it does with RDRAM. An RDRAM memory subsystem will deliver up to 100% more memory bandwidth to the processor.

Actually, because of its internal efficiencies, Athlon provides equivalent performance increases to P4 with smaller increases in cycles. Increase your Athlon clock 66MHz and you will have to increase your P4 100-125MHz to get the same performance increase.

Since the P4 is less efficient with memory bandwidth than the Athlon, larger clock and FSB increases will require larger memory bandwidth increases. Following this trend, memory bandwidth strangulation will come much sooner with the P4 and RDRAM than with the Athlon or with P4 mated to dual-channel DDR. As Intel scales the P4 to a 533MHz and then 600MHz FSB to achieve performance from the 3-5GHz chips, even dual-channel PC1066 (4266MBps) will fail to feed the hunger. Dual-channel DDR333 (5333MBps) or DDR400 (6400MBps) will be required. These are current shipping products. I have my doubts that RDRAM will scale this high with profitable yields; it would have to be running at 1600MHz! The memory manus can't even get the 1066Mhz stuff off the line yet. Maybe Intel will start to manufacture RDRAM?

I thought a thought, but the thought I thought wasn't the thought I thought I had thought.

FatBurger · Feb 19, 2002

Sorry I wasn't here for this conversation. Since my motherboard died, I can't check the boards from home until my new stuff gets here.

AMD_Man, I ordered a 1.6A and a TH7II-RAID from Newegg. There's been some confusion over payment (since I used a friend's card), but hopefully I'll have them by the end of the week.
I also picked up 512MB of Samsung RDRAM at a local shop on Friday night.

Check Overclockers.com's database if you haven't already. My goal is to get to a 133MHz FSB with no problems, anything above that is just a bonus. 133 would put my 1.6 at 2.1, and would probably outperform the 2.2 that a friend of mine just paid $600 for.

I recommend against DDR-SDRAM motherboards for the P4. They may be cheaper, but they don't overclock as well. Your choice, whether you want to save money on the CPU or motherboard and RAM. The savings is the same, but you're more of a man with a higher overclock

I won't bother commenting on anything else in this thread, since I don't really feel up to reading all of it closely enough.

Quarter Pounder Inside

AMD_Man · Feb 19, 2002

I won't bother commenting on anything else in this thread, since I don't really feel up to reading all of it closely enough.

hehe, relax, it's nothing of relevance. Just a bunch of disputing between Raystonn and Matisaro over RAM performance vs. price.

Anyway, could you please post your overclocking results with the P4 1.6A when you get it? I'm quite anxious to hear how high it can go, hehe.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the ULTIMATE PC processor

FatBurger · Feb 19, 2002

I know, I skimmed the thread. Didn't read it closely enough to pick out things to comment on, though.

Of course I'll let you know how well my 1.6A overclocks. I'll probably post a thread in the OCing section.

Quarter Pounder Inside

Grifter · Feb 19, 2002

haha, i love it
Am i the only one here that loves it when Matisaro and Raystonn argue ?
When i see those names pop up in a thread i go and get a snack and make sure im comforatable b4 i continue reading cuse i know im gona be sitting down for a long time. I didnt really count it but there must have been at least 10 posts each arguing over about $10 difference !! You cant help but loose the original point amongst the mess. Personally i like the battles cuse they are normally hell informative, its just a pain in the ass with contradictions. I dont know who to beleive !!
still it normally sorts it self out after a few hours. Looks like its fizzled out a bit now though

Trying is the first step to failure

labdog · Feb 19, 2002

sometimes, split hairs in 4 can give you a lot of informations but the end decison stays your.

note: forget this if you think im a "flamed" man

if you know you don't know, the way could be more easy.

labdog · Feb 19, 2002

lol, you haven't thought it before choice it ?

if you know you don't know, the way could be more easy.

labdog · Feb 19, 2002

oops, which flames ?

if you know you don't know, the way could be more easy.

labdog · Feb 19, 2002

there are NEW technologies.

i cant read the futur but if Intel will improve RD-Ram & Dual-Cores, maybe AMD will must innovate as well ?

if you know you don't know, the way could be more easy.

AMD_Man · Feb 19, 2002

lol, you haven't thought it before choice it ?

huh??

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the ULTIMATE PC processor

eden · Feb 19, 2002

I know, wasn't I right? Labdog doesn't detail much and posts short posts, which can be a pain indeed!

--
For the first time, Hookers are hooked on Phonics!!

labdog · Feb 19, 2002

do you think that inserted "AMD" in your unername can give you an people's impartial opinion, IMO ?

note:
sorry if you think im becoming 😱

if you know you don't know, the way could be more easy.

AMD_Man · Feb 19, 2002

I still don't understand what you're saying.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the ULTIMATE PC processor

eden · Feb 19, 2002

This guy just says it all right.
I totally agree that the RDRAM with P4 is just a way to keep the contract going with Rambus, and to ruin the potential the P4 has. Heck I suspect that they decided to make this processor be bandwidth hungry and with such pipeline for the sole purpose to keep Rambus with them! Why else would they do Dual Channel, and suddenly out of nowhere a company has this RAM that can do 3.2GB? It's all in the contract.
But what's done is done and now, and it's Intel's fault for depriving the P4 of its power. Think about it, DDR Dual-Channel would be twice better than RDRAM PC1066, and as DDR goes up faster than RDRAM in performance (we're at PC3000) it could've easily solved the bandwidth problem and we'd move on to other stuff like giving back the damn FPU and increasing L1 Cache, improve Decoder and stuff. (an article a while ago showed ALL the flaws of the P4, you could not believe it but it's all logical) Fact is if DDR was Dual-Channeled by Intel's licenses, it could've done wonders and RDRAM would not be there.
The only way right now that RDRAM would be worth it, is if they increase the data path, which THEY MUST if they want to make it better. They have to move to 32 bit or 64 bit, then RDRAM is gonna be the same as DDR but Dual Channeled and stays pleasing Rambus and Intel in the end... But then if it is at 64bit like DDR, what would differenciate the DDR from RDRAM then???

In any case I am sure P4 is not really just better with RDRAM, fact is Dual Channeled DDR woulda given it 4.2GB of bandwidth right from start! It's all blind talk, same as the Quake 3 or Movie Encoding being optimized for P4, yeah right, all buncha BS. It's simply the clock speed that does that, but at same clock, NW or Willy, the XP destroys the P4 in both apps, therefore the P4 is NOT architecturally a multimedia system at all. It's even weaker than it's little brother the Tualatin!

AMD_MAN you are doing the right thing waiting. Patience is a virtue you know. You could think you did a tremendous overclock, and 900MHZ Is huge but also risky, you'd also find out two weeks later the Tbred OCed that well, and is pretty much as performing as a P4 3GHZ....where do you find value then? DDR may not be a P4 solution but that's just market Bull, because if RDRAM was not Dual Channeled, it would've been so crappy and DDR would've been the choice from start. Dual Channel that and you got a better solution to the bandwidth hungry friend of yours...

--
For the first time, Hookers are hooked on Phonics!!Edited by Eden on 02/19/02 04:29 PM.

labdog · Feb 19, 2002

well, its no important, i stop it now.

Have a Nice Day.

if you know you don't know, the way could be more easy.

AMD_Man · Feb 19, 2002

Eden, this RDRAM vs. DDR RAM issue isn't very important anymore since the price difference between the two is now very small. The price difference between RDRAM+850 mobo+P4 isn't significantly different from the price of DDR+845D+P4 or Sis645 or VIA P4X266.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the ULTIMATE PC processor

MeTaLrOcKeR · Feb 20, 2002

Hey Mat.......

Do u remember about 6 months ago or so when me and Raystonn had a disagreement about the Athlon using a DDR Bus ??

You were the only one who actually backed me up...and i provided countless amounts of proof to..links galore..the whole shabang......lol.....

Oh as far as Ram goes...

I have a 256MB SDRAM Stick from Apacer.........BUT Apacer uses Infineon Chips........but anyways, i guess its true...with SDRAM/DDR SDRAM anyone can make the PCB for whatever chip they want to put on there....

-MeTaL RoCkEr

My Z28 can take your P4 off the line!

ath0mps0 · Feb 20, 2002

this RDRAM vs. DDR RAM issue isn't very important anymore since the price difference between the two is now very small.

Except for two things:

1. PC800 sucks for overclocking (can't go more than 10-15% with most modules) and PC1066 will probably be priced exhorbitantly and then will suck at overclocking the 533MHz FSB. If dual-channel DDR were available for the P4, there would be no issue as PC2100 DDR266 already performs on par with PC1066, stick for stick.

2. I detest RAMBUS (the company) for its fraudulant extortion of the memory manus and their outrageous royalties (that extra $$ a stick is pure profit to RAMBUS). That is why, on pricipal, I only buy Micron or Infineon DDR - they have never paid RAMBUS a royalty on DDR - and I will only purchase a P4/RDRAM based system if there are clear benefits for a particular task I (or a client) will be performing on a regular basis (like Lightwave 7b).

I thought a thought, but the thought I thought wasn't the thought I thought I had thought.

FatBurger · Feb 20, 2002

How much experience have you had overclocking PC800 modules?

Quarter Pounder Inside

ath0mps0 · Feb 20, 2002

Quite a bit. I agree that some of the newer ones (especially from Samsung) can go higher, but most of these are simply ramp-ups to PC1066 that the manus are letting through as PC800. Tom's could only get 18% out of their cherry-picked modules.

Plus, anyone that goes asynch just to get higher CPU clock takes a huge performance hit on memory. It would have to be a really significant increase to make it worth your while.

I thought a thought, but the thought I thought wasn't the thought I thought I had thought.

lhgpoobaa · Feb 20, 2002

i thought that most PC800 modules were pretty good at overclocking.... but it was the mobo clock generator that was holding them back from overclocking to PC1066 speeds?

i could be wrong of course

Overclocked athlon 1200C @ 8.5 x 166FSB + PC2700 = GOOD!

dhlucke · Feb 20, 2002

Checked the database. 33% don't make it beyond 2138 Mhz. The next 23% don't make it past 2390 Mhz.

You have a decent chance of getting a worthy overclock that can compete with a AXP2000+.

I suppose it's worth a try. Good luck.

God Bless America!

More Consideration

Splendid

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Illustrious

Splendid

Illustrious

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Splendid

Champion

Distinguished

Splendid

Champion

Distinguished

Splendid

Distinguished

Distinguished

Illustrious

Distinguished

Illustrious

Polypheme

Share this page