DDR2 - MB specs... What the heck is "native support" as compared to standard?

Hey all!

Looking to upgrade and build a new puter. The specs of the MB, with
respect to memory says:

DDR2 Standard DDR2 667/533
Native DDR2 800 Support


What the heck is "native" support for DDR2800?

Thanks!

In article , kxdude4
says...
Hey all!

Looking to upgrade and build a new puter. The specs of the MB, with
respect to memory says:

DDR2 Standard DDR2 667/533
Native DDR2 800 Support


What the heck is "native" support for DDR2800?

It supports DDR2 800 without having to resort to elektrikery to do it,
i.e it natively supports the FSB without having to multiply one of the
others.


--
Conor

Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright
until you hear them speak.........

It means you don't have to overclock the motherboard's FSB to achieve a DDR
800 setting.

--
---------------------
DaveW
"kxdude4" wrote in message
...
Hey all!

Looking to upgrade and build a new puter. The specs of the MB, with
respect to memory says:

DDR2 Standard DDR2 667/533
Native DDR2 800 Support


What the heck is "native" support for DDR2800?

Thanks!

On Jul 9, 11:43 pm, "DaveW" wrote:
It means you don't have to overclock the motherboard's FSB to achieve a DDR
800 setting.

--
---------------------
DaveW"kxdude4" wrote in message

...



Hey all!

Looking to upgrade and build a new puter. The specs of the MB, with
respect to memory says:

DDR2 Standard DDR2 667/533
Native DDR2 800 Support

What the heck is "native" support for DDR2800?

Thanks!-

DDR RAM is SDRAM. Synchronous - capital S. It has its own clock. It
doesn't derive its clock from anywhere else i.e. doesn't derive from
the FSB, and doesn't use a multiplier.

thread: where's the multiplier?
ng: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking
date: Jun 2005
(says DDR RAM doesn't use any memory multiplier)


thread: fsb speed - why does it matter?
ng: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking
date: 2004
says that when the word Synchronous (the S in SD), is written with a
capital S, it means has a clock. SDRAM has its own clock. when the
word synchronous is written with a small s e.g. "memory run
synchronous to fsb". it means same speed. thanks to richard hopkins
for that one (so asynchronous means not synchronous). So, SDRAM can
be run asynchronously.

thread: Is Pseudo-Sync the same as "asynchronous mode"?
ng: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips
note: relevant, but not that useful.

I recall I once had FSB 100Mhz, and RAM at 133MHz.
Si Sandra said something like memory multiplier 4/3 , or x 4/3
Indeed.
100*4/3 is 133. But that's not how the machine gets the 133 !
Si Sandra was very misleading.


I think there is an advantge, when the FSB speed is the same as the
memory speed.. or maybe, when the effective speeds are the same.
Perhaps the term 'native' means that the FSB will run at that speed
too.
That doesn't seem so special to me.. Almost any system can run RAM at
the same speed as the FSB, and higher.

On Mon, 9 Jul 2007 15:43:21 -0700, "DaveW" wrote:

It means you don't have to overclock the motherboard's FSB to achieve a DDR
800 setting.


Thanks guys! I appreciate you taking the time to answer!

Aloha!

i think i learned after i read ur conversation above ,thank u guys
http://www.xowow.com

wrote:

i think i learned after i read ur conversation above ,thank u guys
http://www.xowow.com

that's excellent, but actually, all that happened, was some people
said DDR SDRAM used a multiplier, and I , pointing to another thread,
and arguing a case, said it didn't.

So, the original question goes unresolved.

You top posted daveW.

Original post.

Hey all!

Looking to upgrade and build a new puter. The specs of the MB, with
respect to memory says:

DDR2 Standard DDR2 667/533
Native DDR2 800 Support

What the heck is "native" support for DDR2800?


On Jul 9, 11:43 pm, "DaveW" wrote:
It means you don't have to overclock the motherboard's FSB to achieve a DDR 800 setting.


(note- he said DDR2 800, not DDR 800 - though it's not of much
consequence)

The speed of the FSB is independent of the speed of the Memory Bus.

I'm not even convinced of your terminology here.. "overclock the
fsb"!!!

you can increase the FSB speed to the maximum supported by the
motherboard and not more. In doing so, you may overclock the
processor. But you're not overclocking the FSB.
And this doesn't affect the memory bus speed - the speed the RAM runs
at..

However, searching, I just found a post.. Below indicates that some
chipsets , new ones too, DDR2 ones, may have a multiplier/divisor for
the RAM.
In which case.. DaveW's terminology of 'overclocking the fsb' is still
wrong.
And the memory bus speed would then be dependent on the FSB. It'd be
derived from the FSB speed, and a multiplier or divisor.

thread: AMD64x2 speed v.s. DDR2 memory speed?
ng: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus
date: july
googled: ddr2 800 200mhz

On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 06:35:37 -0700,
"
wrote:


wrote:

i think i learned after i read ur conversation above ,thank u guys
http://www.xowow.com

that's excellent, but actually, all that happened, was some people
said DDR SDRAM used a multiplier, and I , pointing to another thread,
and arguing a case, said it didn't.

So, the original question goes unresolved.


All of this could be avoided if people would just stop using
the wrong terms (which is why standard terminology exists).

There is no DDR2 800.
There is DDR2 PC(nnnn) memory, and there is a MHz clock rate
for the memory bus which is effectively (but not actually) a
2 x multiplier merely because double data rate transfers
twice per clock rate.

Whenever someone uses a wrong term like DDR2 800 we are left
to guess what it really means. Often the guess is accurate
but there is no real reason to introduce the potential for
being wrong when guessing, instead of just noting the
product chipset and what that chipset supports.

Unfortunately the OP didn't provide full details in the
post, describing only a "MB" not anything specific.

On Jul 10, 6:42 pm, kony wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 06:35:37 -0700,
"
wrote:



wrote:

i think i learned after i read ur conversation above ,thank u guys
http://www.xowow.com

that's excellent, but actually, all that happened, was some people
said DDR SDRAM used a multiplier, and I , pointing to another thread,
and arguing a case, said it didn't.

So, the original question goes unresolved.

All of this could be avoided if people would just stop using
the wrong terms (which is why standard terminology exists).

There is no DDR2 800.

I know what he means, looks standard to me. But
what does YOU mean?!!

Do you mean the terminology is wrong? It looks clear to me.
DDR2 RAM, with an effective speed of 800. Actual speed of 200. (or
rather. Supporting those/that speed i.e. that is the max speed of
memory bus that it has been tested to run stably on. that's the stock
speed)

I've seen that in a motherboard manual I read a few hours ago (to look
at the BIOS of some different motherboards out there at the moment.).
Since I don't get to play with the latest stuff and see the BIOS for
myself.. It said DDR2-800
And you can buy 512MB DDR2-800 e.t.c.

so it's specific. even specific enough for a motherboard manual.

If you're saying that the terminology is ok but they don't sell it,
then that's not true.. 'cos the motherboard manual said it, and it's
on ebay.

I think what you're saying, you also said in a related post..
thread: what is PC2 DDR ?
ng: alt.comp.hardware
date: june
link:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.c...a91d043ad6765c

I didn't understand you at the time.. but I think I do now..
I notice that the jedec document doesn't disagree with you.
It says DDR2 and it says PC2-xxxx But it doesn't say DDR2 800 e.t.c.

Are you saying it's not "legally" ok to say DDR 400 ? (we know what it
means. 200Mhz. DDR 400(200Mhz*2) )
put mhz after actual speed.. not after effective speed..

The PC notation lets one specify bandwidth..
But what if I want to specify the speed of memory bus supported by the
RAM?

I can't say DDR2 800 ?

All over the internet people say it and people know what they mean.
What should they say?

It's useful to have a notation for actual speed, effective speed,
bandwidth.
Not just for bandwidth! PC-xxxx or PC2-xxxx !



There is DDR2 PC(nnnn) memory, and there is a MHz clock rate
for the memory bus which is effectively (but not actually) a
2 x multiplier merely because double data rate transfers
twice per clock rate.


holy mackeral

using the term multiplier that way. Defining effective speed that way,
is just blurring concepts into smitherines. It's unbelievably
misleading.

A multiplier is an electronic thing for deriving one clock speed from
another.

The term effective speed with the memory bus, refers to a concept
called dual pumping or quad pumping. Putting more bits on the memory
bus in a clock cycle. When the term effective speed is used rather
than actual speed. It's not called 'effective' because effective
multiplier like you suggest. Fortunately nobody before you ever put
such misleading terminology in an explanation! The actual bus runs at
its speed, and the dual pumping or quad pumping of the bus gives an
effective speed. It's about putting more bits on the bus in a clock
cycle. Nothing to do with how a multiplier works.

Nobody means that when they speak of a memory multiplier.
si sandra misleadingly referred to a multiplier, at least it meant it,
as a multiplier does. i.e. it referred to the memory speed being a
multiple of the FSB. Nothing whatsoever to do with what you
suggest. . But if there was a multiplier, then it would be as si
sandra suggested. My RAM at 133 would've been FSB x 4/3. At least
their use of the term multiplier would've beent true if there was a
multiplier!


And when one of the first people to reply mentioned " multiplier "..
He wrote of not needing to multiply.. There was absolutely no way
that he shared your particular virtual meaning of memory
multiplier. .. Let's pretend that what he meant as consistent with
your meaning. Then look how ridiculous it gets. He wrote of not
needing to multiply. There is absolutely no way that he meant that the
DDR2 RAM with an effective speed of 800(200*4), would run at 200 -
that the effective speed would be dropped. He didn't mean un quad
pumping the memory bus.. Or un dual pumping it. It's not even possible
to do that anyway. And nobody would want to.





Whenever someone uses a wrong term like DDR2 800 we are left
to guess what it really means.

no guess work at all. DDR2 800 is a specific thing. The expression is
self-contained. There's no hole in it.

You want to know what chipset he has, that's an issue with the
motherboard. Not an issue with how he described his RAM.

I don't like the style of saying "you give me all the information, and
i'll figure it out".


I see it in networking newsgroups all the time.. People ask the OP
"how much do you want to spend".
It's better to say
"this is available in this price range, this is available in that
price range, e.t.c."

There's no point hiding the knowledge behind your analysis.

So, if things are different for different chipsets.. If I knew the
differences, I would write them out!
It's not wasted. It's archived, one can refer others to them.

It's better for the archives if information is organised. And threads
don't e.g. just turn into only being relevant for one particular model
of motherboard. or one chipset. Information should be complete.



Unfortunately the OP didn't provide full details in the
post, describing only a "MB" not anything specific.

he wasn't asking about particular MBs. He was asking a general
question about the RAM.

If I knew, and believed the answer depends,, then i'd tell him how it
depends. e.g. if his motherboard is of this chipset then x. If it has
tihs chipset then y.. There may be 6 different chipsets.

If he was really bad and didn't know what chipset he had, i'd tell him
how to find out given his motherboard (google!).

I'd do that rather than ask which motherboard he has.. Asking him like
that would be doing the analysis and hiding it, and just giving him
the answer.
It means the thread is only useful for that one motherboard. It means
if he wanted to buy another motherboard, he wouldn't know any
better.. It's just not techie friendly. That requirements analysis is
ok for a 90 year old end user, or maybe even any end user, if you're
feeling ungenerous . But I wouldn't ever do that in a techie
newsgroup. I think one should treat a techie how a techie would want
to be treated. He wants to expand his knowledge. Know how to solve
similar problems. Not just knowing the answer for one specific one.

And people searching the archives aren't going to get much out of a
thread that only addresses one particular motherboard.

I'm not saying i can do better. I lack the knowledge. I don't see that
many computers every day. Just my own old ones. I'm talking style of
answer here though.