Building A New Rig

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

[NBS]Druidwitch wrote:
For memory you'll want DDR 400MHz CL2 or at most 2.5. Stay clear of CL3.
And you'll want two identical ones for dual channel to work.
Again, as I said to Keith, my level of knowledge on DDR is none existent
for all intents and purpopses. What is the difference between dual
channel pc3700 and CL2 400mhz ( my word SDRAM was so much simpler lol )

I checked a webstore that lists both denominations and it seems PC3700 =
400MHz, so you should be in the clear. If your store doesn't give you the
CL rating though I dunno how you'll go about getting that. As far as what
CL is I believe it stands for Cascade Level. Exactly what the impact is on
performance I have no idea except that a friend I trust adviced me to get 2
or 2.5 but stay clear of 3. So just forwarding that advice really. If it's
a braindead one presumably someone in the know here will correct me

- --
Frode

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.0.2

iQA/AwUBPwEseuXlGBWTt1afEQIFVACdGv4qdNpZ6sqYZhB2Nf1D2N +0LlEAoMc0
Ln0KGMQ5x9I2kAGndQniTABh
=zUbG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

As far as what
CL is I believe it stands for Cascade Level.

CL is short for 'Case Latency', which is the time delay (in clock cycles)
that passes before the RAM starts to carry out a read command after
receiving it. The lower the latency, the faster the memory.

That being said, I don't care what anybody tells you, the difference between
CL2.5 & CL3 is not going to be noticeable. I bought Crucial PC3200 (CL3)
for my computer, and for the hell of it, set (or overclocked) the CL to 2.5
in the BIOS, along with some other slightly more agressive timings, and
there is obviously no difference in performance that I can detect without
benchmarks. After all, the CL number refers to nanoseconds. Do you think
you will notice a difference between 2.5 nanoseconds and 3 nanoseconds?

--
LiveWire

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

LiveWire wrote:
As far as what
CL is I believe it stands for Cascade Level.
CL is short for 'Case Latency', which is the time delay (in clock
cycles)

Suspected I got that one wrong

After all, the CL
number refers to nanoseconds. Do you think you will notice a difference
between 2.5 nanoseconds and 3 nanoseconds?

I haven't given it any thought whatsoever. Although, if one was looking at
nanosecond delays that happened billions of times per second, it would add
up. I got CL3 by a delivery mistake (they're not supposed to even sell
them) and am waiting to get my replacements, but that's really just on
principle since my box currently rocks as far as I'm concerned.


- --
Frode

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.0.2

iQA/AwUBPwGFd+XlGBWTt1afEQL5iwCg8OZpGjYpFyovSmOFWc1RdN JnbGwAn2Ez
OaRMOT69OBgIUM6uW0iRRtKx
=wRxU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Almost, CL is CAS Latency. And CAS is itself short for Column Address Stobe
which
is active when the Column address is being loaded into to DRAM chip.

The CAS latency is then the number of ticks and/or nS after the CAS cycle
till
data in reads. Since it's usually speced in nS, the number of ticks varies
with the
actual clock being sent to the DRAM.

-Kent-

"LiveWire" wrote in message
news:etfMa.8496$fG.4223@sccrnsc01...
As far as what
CL is I believe it stands for Cascade Level.

CL is short for 'Case Latency', which is the time delay (in clock cycles)
that passes before the RAM starts to carry out a read command after
receiving it. The lower the latency, the faster the memory.

That being said, I don't care what anybody tells you, the difference
between
CL2.5 & CL3 is not going to be noticeable. I bought Crucial PC3200 (CL3)
for my computer, and for the hell of it, set (or overclocked) the CL to
2.5
in the BIOS, along with some other slightly more agressive timings, and
there is obviously no difference in performance that I can detect without
benchmarks. After all, the CL number refers to nanoseconds. Do you think
you will notice a difference between 2.5 nanoseconds and 3 nanoseconds?

--
LiveWire

Almost, CL is CAS Latency. And CAS is itself short for Column Address
Stobe
which

Oops...that's correct. I must be slipping, as I did learn that from a
hardware course I took a while back.

Thanks for the clarification.

--
LiveWire

"[NBS]Druidwitch" wrote:

The technical specs say the board can have a 800 FSB processor but is says
the boards FSB frequencies are 100 - 400 with 1Mhz increments, yet goes on
to say it works at 800Mhz??? Im lost on this one - does a processor control
the FSB or the motherboard? Either way can this board work at 800Mhz FSB
rather than just allow a 800 Processor??? God i'm dense lol.

The processor takes the oscillator frequency supplied by the board and
multiplies it internally to create the FSB speed, just as it does with the main
clock oscillator.

By the way any "good" motherboard with the same Intel chipset will also work at
this high level of performance. It's the chipset that allows the hyper threading
to be enabled in the processor, supports the 800MHz FSB, and the dual-channel
DDR.

Yes, PC3700 DDR is the fastest DDR (as of this moment ;-) available. Make sure
you get two sticks, as in a matched pair, because you'll get double the memory
bandwidth that way. That will help a lot if you do video editing (don't we all
dabble with DviX/VCD archiving these days? ;-). I think you should also see a
difference in gaming performance but check around before you take my word for it
, I'm not a true hardcore gamer.

Anyway, I plan to buy that board myself, and populate it with P4 2.4C, and two
sticks of PC 3700 DDR myself, and see how far I can push it. I haven't looked
forward to a board like this since the old Celeron 300A days (remember that
chip?! :-).

Cheers!
--Keith

"Frode" wrote in message ...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Eric Witte wrote:
I checked a webstore that lists both denominations and it seems PC3700 =
400MHz, so you should be in the clear. If your store doesn't give you
the
Actually PC3200 is 400Mhz, PC3500 is 434Mhz and PC3700 is 467Mhz.

The webstore I checked being sloppy then. It lists both PC3200 and PC3700
as 400 MHz. While another I checked now show them correctly as 400 and 467.
Thanks for the heads up.



- --
Frode

If it is cheap PC3700 it may be overclocked to get there

Eric

Read anandtech.com for P4 mobo info. Another data point.

"[NBS]Druidwitch" wrote:

Hi all

Sorry to post this in here but I couldnt find another newsgroup that would
be more appropriate so apologies to those who are bothered.

I am going to build a new PC ( my first attempt ) and would like to know a
few things before going ahead and buying the parts etc.

I have decided to go for a processor and motherboard that are both capable
of intel's hyper-threading, simply so that the system is forward compliant
to any further technologies that come about from this. The motherboard is a
gigabyte GA-8S648FX and on this I want to place a socket 478 p4 3.0ghz with
800mhz FSB, 1gb of DDR RAM 400mhz and a nVidia GeForce FX5900 256MB DDR

All I want to know is can anyone see and conflicting issues with these
components - any known bugs, compatibility problems etc

Any advice greatly appreciated

Cheers

Daniel

--
[NBS]Druidwitch
http://www.nbsnipers.com

")-()-(" wrote:

Read anandtech.com for P4 mobo info. Another data point.


Hard to believe the guy started that site when he was a high school student. He
has a lot of knowledge about the subject!


http://www.tomshardware.com/ is a very good site too.

He's not dumb! That's not to say that he's not biased, either. Money talks,
bull**** walks.. YMMV
-
Keith Clark stood up, at show-n-tell, and said:

")-()-(" wrote:

Read anandtech.com for P4 mobo info. Another data point.


Hard to believe the guy started that site when he was a high school
student. He has a lot of knowledge about the subject!


http://www.tomshardware.com/ is a very good site too.

--
Strontium

"I thought I'd lost you, somewhere. But you were, never, really ever
there
at all. And, I want to get free..."