If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
DDR Dual Channel vs. DDR2
Consider an Intel Processor (630) with an 800MHz FSB and the following
memory configurations. Assume 1GB total: 2 sticks DDR 400MHz (dual channel) 1 stick DDR2 800Mhz 2 sticks DDR2 800Mhz (dual channel) Is the DDR 400MHz configuration using the 800MHz front side bus to its maximum potential, or is the single channel DDR2 case faster. If so, why? Does DDR2 800Mhz running dual channel provide twice the bandwidth (1.6GHz)? If so, is it wasted since the FSB is 800Mhz? Thanks |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
DDR Dual Channel vs. DDR2
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
DDR Dual Channel vs. DDR2
wrote in message oups.com... Consider an Intel Processor (630) with an 800MHz FSB and the following memory configurations. Assume 1GB total: 2 sticks DDR 400MHz (dual channel) 1 stick DDR2 800Mhz 2 sticks DDR2 800Mhz (dual channel) Is the DDR 400MHz configuration using the 800MHz front side bus to its maximum potential, or is the single channel DDR2 case faster. If so, why? Does DDR2 800Mhz running dual channel provide twice the bandwidth (1.6GHz)? If so, is it wasted since the FSB is 800Mhz? Thanks it is actaully a 200 FSB for the 800 fsb and ddr 400 , its a synchronous thread gain. Performance would be gained with the threads, unless fsb 200 ,then it is the real improvement. width of work is the thread increase, actual root of fsb is the real speed. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
DDR Dual Channel vs. DDR2
It has come to my attention that there are no Northbridges that even
support DDR2-800. The highest supported seems to be 667MHz. Since the Intel 630's FSB is 200Mhz (800), it seems to me that low latency DDR400 will be the better performer, No? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
DDR Dual Channel vs. DDR2
In article . com,
wrote: It has come to my attention that there are no Northbridges that even support DDR2-800. The highest supported seems to be 667MHz. Since the Intel 630's FSB is 200Mhz (800), it seems to me that low latency DDR400 will be the better performer, No? DDR2-533 surpasses DDR400 in benchmarks. It was DDR2-400 which was slower than DDR400. For "native DDR2-800" support, try this product with a 975X chips. There may be others - this is the first one I found. P5WD2-E Premium http://www.asus.com/products4.aspx?m...l2=11&l3 =248 Intel doesn't mention this "native" support. It could be that DDR2-800 is not a JEDEC spec point, so Intel ignores anything which is not JEDEC approved. But that doesn't stop Intel from putting undocumented dividers in the chipsets, that allow stuff like that to be achieved. Search for "667" in here, to find references to the official DDR2-533 or DDR2-667 support. http://download.intel.com/design/chi...s/31015801.pdf This is the JEDEC doc I found the last time I looked. On PDF page 70, you can see that DDR2-800 is part of the standard, so no excuse for Intel not to include it. http://www.jedec.org/download/search/JESD79-2B.pdf Just one of those grey areas I guess. The constant battle between the motherboard manufacturers and Intel, to add features to attract customers... HTH, Paul |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Dual Channel memory | Igor | AMD x86-64 Processors | 2 | November 22nd 04 01:27 AM |
Memory suggestion | Norm | Asus Motherboards | 7 | October 23rd 04 03:23 PM |
Dual channel question | Augustus | Overclocking | 2 | July 2nd 04 09:03 AM |
Dual Channel Memory support | Bobby | General Hardware | 1 | April 29th 04 11:33 PM |
Dual channel DDR ? | Deadly_M | Overclocking | 18 | January 4th 04 03:25 PM |