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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
I've just read this from tomshardware, september last year: "Buyers enticed by dual channel DRAM should note one crucial thing: in theory, a dual-channel memory link does not bring any benefits since the data rate is limited by the FSB bus's bandwidth. It's fixed at a maximum 200 MHz (Athlon XP 3200+) to give a bandwidth of 3.2 GB/s. Even using fast dual DDR400 memory with an access time of 6.4 GB/s has no effect on the Front Side Bus bottleneck of 3.2 GB/s. With that in mind, it's really not so inappropriate to question dual-channel memory technology on the Socket A platform." should i suppose ain't worth paying for dual channel DDR? seems so... |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Minstro wrote:
I've just read this from tomshardware, september last year: "Buyers enticed by dual channel DRAM should note one crucial thing: in theory, a dual-channel memory link does not bring any benefits since the data rate is limited by the FSB bus's bandwidth. It's fixed at a maximum 200 MHz (Athlon XP 3200+) to give a bandwidth of 3.2 GB/s. Even using fast dual DDR400 memory with an access time of 6.4 GB/s has no effect on the Front Side Bus bottleneck of 3.2 GB/s. With that in mind, it's really not so inappropriate to question dual-channel memory technology on the Socket A platform." should i suppose ain't worth paying for dual channel DDR? seems so... Given a Nforce2 Ultra 400 based motherboard, using 2x256MB modules compared to 1x512MB module gives a memory bandwidth improvement of 2%. This is not a good reason to choose the Nforce2 chipset. Overclocking is the main reason I prefer the NF2. Stability is another. This is not to say VIA or SiS chipsets for Socket A are a poor choice. Asrock produces economical motherboards based on VIA and SiS chipsets which offer good overall performance. These are certainly worth a look. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Minstro wrote:
What about QDI Kudoz 7X series for a motherboard? AMD nForce2 ULTRA AN7 (uGuru) costs ................. 120 euros. AMD VIAKT400A KUDOZ 7X/400A-6AL costs ...... 66 euros. AMD VIAKT400A KUDOZ 7X/600A-6AL costs ...... 69 euros. Is it worth paying the double? I wouldn't use a Via board if you gave it to me. That isn't blind prejudice, it's from years of experience and having used a few. (Although, must admit, I haven't used a recent chipset one. Why would I? I've had nothing but trouble with them in the past and, if I've got them stable then I find they are slow). I use and strongly recommend the Soltek SL-75FRN2-L nForce2 Ultra 400 mobo. No fancy SATA, firewire or RAID, just a cheap, fast, very reliable and overclocker-friendly motherboard. I've built five systems using this board and haven't a had a problem yet. Plus, it runs my XP1800+ at 200Mhz x 10.5 for 2.1Ghz, dual channel for that extra 3-5% memory bandwidth. And that's not using fancy dual channel kits, just two modules of inexpensive PC3200 RAM of the same brand bought at the same time. My 2c. -- ~misfit~ "S.Heenan" escribió en el mensaje news:3SV8c.11355$R27.9118@pd7tw2no... I suggested the 2600+ retail model in the interest of economy. A motherboard using the Nforce2 Ultra400 chipset will maximize performance. Abit, Asus, and Gigabyte all make fine boards. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Minstro wrote:
Must confess i'm a bit confused; sure i think i'll take the Athlon XP 2600+ option, but, how many cores are available besides Barton for that model? why should i take Barton core? which are it's advantages? (up to now, i hadn't worried about cores; mean don't know nothing about them). Thanks for all the answers, they've been of great help. There have been four XP2600+ core Athlon XPs made. (To the best of my knowledge) The first ran on a 133Mhz FSB and was only produced in limited numbers, the second ran on a 166Mhz FSB. These were both Tbred B core CPUs with 256KB L2 cache and were multipier-unlocked. Now there is the Barton 2600+ with 512KB L2 cache and the Thornton 2600+ with 256KB L2 cache. Both are multiplier-locked although there may have been a few early Bartons that weren't. I wouldn't buy any of them, unless I had a board that was limited to 133Mhz FSB and could get my hands on a 133 model (next to impossible). I would get an XP2500+ and put it in an nForce board with PC3200 RAM and run it at 200Mhz FSB for XP3200+ speed. The extra L2 cache is equivalent to another 200Mhz speed as far as performance goes. (In my opinion/experience, depending on use). The 2500 model has a far greater chance of running on a 200Mhz FSB, virtually guaranteed, whereas, with the 2600 with it's higher multiplier, there is a chance it won't do it. If you're not OC'ing then go with whatever is the fastest Barton you can afford. -- ~misfit~ |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Prescott chip and motherboards.............. Intel, Pentium 4, Extreme, etc.. | Joe Donaldson | General | 7 | February 6th 04 08:24 AM |
intel board, fans on during standby. intel d875PBZ. | JohnJ | General | 0 | January 13th 04 06:14 PM |
Desperately need help installing OS with RAID on an Intel mobo | Nate | General | 10 | January 1st 04 08:17 PM |
WD360 + Intel 875PBZ + XP Problem | @drian | General | 0 | November 6th 03 12:10 PM |
Socket 7 to Socket A upgrade ? | philo | General | 1 | July 17th 03 11:41 PM |