Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

A message from Crucial

Last response: in CPUs
Share
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b } Memory
January 31, 2005 6:29:43 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

I sent Crucial an email, outlining the fact that I'd purchased
a 256MB stick of CL2 pc133 SDRAM (CT32M64S8D7E)
and I was asking their advice about the DIMM memory speed
setting in the bios. For example, you can set 6-3-3 (normal)
6-3-2 (enhanced) 6-2-3 (fast) etc,etc.

This is their response:
"Hello Dave,
Thank you for your email. I would recommend leaving part number
CT32M64S8D7E at the normal setting of 6-3-3. If you overclock the part
it will void the warranty of the memory module."



I can understand that recommendation if it's based on the
expected correct operation of the memory; but surely
choosing one of the faster timings is not overclocking,
and therefore should not violate the terms of the warranty.


What is crucial telling me?
Dave

More about : message crucial

January 31, 2005 10:00:29 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 15:29:43 -0800, da_test <davexnet02NO@SPAMyahoo.com>
wrote:

>I sent Crucial an email, outlining the fact that I'd purchased
>a 256MB stick of CL2 pc133 SDRAM (CT32M64S8D7E)
>and I was asking their advice about the DIMM memory speed
>setting in the bios. For example, you can set 6-3-3 (normal)
>6-3-2 (enhanced) 6-2-3 (fast) etc,etc.
>
>This is their response:
>"Hello Dave,
>Thank you for your email. I would recommend leaving part number
>CT32M64S8D7E at the normal setting of 6-3-3. If you overclock the part
>it will void the warranty of the memory module."
>
>
>
>I can understand that recommendation if it's based on the
>expected correct operation of the memory; but surely
>choosing one of the faster timings is not overclocking,
>and therefore should not violate the terms of the warranty.
>
>
>What is crucial telling me?
>Dave
>

If you run the ram out of spec (lower latency) then it's over clocking
and may cause problems.

If you're running Windows try running the free "CPU-Z" program, look at
the memory section and see if tells you what the timings are of the ram
sticks.

Ed
January 31, 2005 10:02:44 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 19:00:29 -0600, Ed <nomail@hotmail.com> wrote:
>If you're running Windows try running the free "CPU-Z" program, look at
>the memory section and see if tells you what the timings are of the ram
>sticks.

CPU-Z Link: http://www.cpuid.com/cpuz.php
Related resources
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b } Memory
January 31, 2005 10:02:45 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 19:02:44 -0600, Ed <nomail@hotmail.com> wrote:

>On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 19:00:29 -0600, Ed <nomail@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>If you're running Windows try running the free "CPU-Z" program, look at
>>the memory section and see if tells you what the timings are of the ram
>>sticks.
>
>CPU-Z Link: http://www.cpuid.com/cpuz.php
Thanks for the info, according to the SPD timings table,
the crucial stick at 133MHz, can support
CL2,
ras to cas 2
ras precharge 2
TRas 6

So to me, it looks as if Dimm memory of 6-2-2 is supported.
Now, the response from crucial is even more nonsensical than
it first seemed. Either that or the response from RusH is correct!

Dave
February 1, 2005 5:21:54 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

da_test <davexnet02NO@SPAMyahoo.com> wrote :

> What is crucial telling me?

"get lost, NEXT ..."

Pozdrawiam.
--
RusH //
http://randki.o2.pl/profil.php?id_r=352019
Like ninjas, true hackers are shrouded in secrecy and mystery.
You may never know -- UNTIL IT'S TOO LATE.
February 1, 2005 6:59:59 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

da_test <davexnet02NO@SPAMyahoo.com> wrote :

>
> Surely, by usng these DIMM speed settings all you're doing is
> accessing the memory past a speed it can (potentially) support.
> Does this put strain of the memory? I always thought the answer
> was no.

and it is NO. You cant brake silicon with high frequency, high voltage
is another thing.

Pozdrawiam.
--
RusH //
http://randki.o2.pl/profil.php?id_r=352019
Like ninjas, true hackers are shrouded in secrecy and mystery.
You may never know -- UNTIL IT'S TOO LATE.
February 1, 2005 7:00:00 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 03:59:59 +0000, RusH wrote:

> da_test <davexnet02NO@SPAMyahoo.com> wrote :
>
>>
>> Surely, by usng these DIMM speed settings all you're doing is
>> accessing the memory past a speed it can (potentially) support.
>> Does this put strain of the memory? I always thought the answer
>> was no.

They don't support it, so it *is* over-clocking. It costs them money to
answer you question. If it stops working tomorrow it costs them money to
replace it.

> and it is NO. You cant brake silicon with high frequency, high voltage
> is another thing.

Nonsense. Power is proportional to frequency. It *is* possible (though
not likely for memory) to burn out "silicon" with a higher frequency.

--
Keith
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b } Memory
February 1, 2005 11:21:05 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

da_test wrote:
> No. I didn't respond to them. Nor did I say I was actually
> "overclocking". It was just an inquiry. Secondly, according
> to CPUZ it actually supports 6-2-2 !

If the chip's own SPD says that it supports that speed, then that's the
speed it supports. Doesn't your computer have a "use SPD" or "default
timings" setting? Those are usually based off of the SPD settings.

Yousuf Khan
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b } Memory
February 1, 2005 12:15:50 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 08:21:05 -0500, Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@ezrs.com>
wrote:

>da_test wrote:
>> No. I didn't respond to them. Nor did I say I was actually
>> "overclocking". It was just an inquiry. Secondly, according
>> to CPUZ it actually supports 6-2-2 !
>
>If the chip's own SPD says that it supports that speed, then that's the
>speed it supports. Doesn't your computer have a "use SPD" or "default
>timings" setting? Those are usually based off of the SPD settings.
>
> Yousuf Khan
Yes it does have an SPD setting, but that's the interleave item.
I believe the interleave options are SPD, 4-way, 2-way or none.

The bios doc is a little sparse, but nowhere is it inferred that
that will affect the memory timings.
My bios does have a setting for cl2/cl3 and a separate one
for DIMM speed. The options are "normal" (622),
"enhanced"(632), "fast" (623), "faster" (622) and
"fastest" (522)

Default timing are obviously cl3/normal, but it's going to
choose that regardless of the memory capabilities.
Dave
February 1, 2005 2:21:20 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 18:48:47 -0800, da_test <davexnet02NO@SPAMyahoo.com>
wrote:

>So to me, it looks as if Dimm memory of 6-2-2 is supported.
>Now, the response from crucial is even more nonsensical than
>it first seemed. Either that or the response from RusH is correct!
>
>Dave

You could just set the BIOS to use "SPD" and it should set the timings
correctly, but that doesn't always work correctly with all boards and
ram sticks, I always set the ram timings manually to spec when I can.

You may want to test your setup with programs like Memtest86+
http://www.memtest.org/ and Prime95(Tests lots of Ram)
http://www.mersenne.org/freesoft.htm just to make sure it's working
error free.

Ed
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b } Memory
February 1, 2005 2:21:21 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 11:21:20 -0600, Ed <nomail@hotmail.com> wrote:

>On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 18:48:47 -0800, da_test <davexnet02NO@SPAMyahoo.com>
>wrote:
>
>>So to me, it looks as if Dimm memory of 6-2-2 is supported.
>>Now, the response from crucial is even more nonsensical than
>>it first seemed. Either that or the response from RusH is correct!
>>
>>Dave
>
>You could just set the BIOS to use "SPD" and it should set the timings
>correctly, but that doesn't always work correctly with all boards and
>ram sticks, I always set the ram timings manually to spec when I can.
>
>You may want to test your setup with programs like Memtest86+
>http://www.memtest.org/ and Prime95(Tests lots of Ram)
>http://www.mersenne.org/freesoft.htm just to make sure it's working
>error free.
>
>Ed
Ed, a couple of things, I've never had much luck with memory testers.
If I set the timing aggresively, I will/have errors in Windiws.
But memtest86+ never finds a problem.

Secondly, as I mentioned in another post in this thread,
in my bios SPD seems related to interleave only,
unless I'm misunderstanding something - but I don't
think I am. I checked the chipset values using wpcredit.
Dave
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b } Memory
February 1, 2005 3:33:55 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

In article <7vLLd.4982$Ck1.888924@news20.bellglobal.com>, bbbl67@ezrs.com
says...
>
>If the chip's own SPD says that it supports that speed, then that's the
>speed it supports. Doesn't your computer have a "use SPD" or "default
>timings" setting? Those are usually based off of the SPD settings.


I bought this Crucial memory 2x512 BL6464Z402 from

http://www.crucial.com/store/MPartspecs.Asp?mtbpoid=D53...
=A8V+Deluxe&WSPN=BL6464Z402

This web page text says 2-2-2-6 timing, so that was my expectation.

However, the Asus A8V BIOS according to CPUZ interprets the SPD as
2-2-2-8

My default setting is 2.5V. Memory specs says 2.8V.
Can that possibly affect SPD?
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b } Memory
February 1, 2005 3:58:13 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 12:33:55 -0600, Wayne Fulton <nospam@invalid.com>
wrote:

>In article <7vLLd.4982$Ck1.888924@news20.bellglobal.com>, bbbl67@ezrs.com
>says...
>>
>>If the chip's own SPD says that it supports that speed, then that's the
>>speed it supports. Doesn't your computer have a "use SPD" or "default
>>timings" setting? Those are usually based off of the SPD settings.
>
>
>I bought this Crucial memory 2x512 BL6464Z402 from
>
>http://www.crucial.com/store/MPartspecs.Asp?mtbpoid=D53...
>=A8V+Deluxe&WSPN=BL6464Z402
>
>This web page text says 2-2-2-6 timing, so that was my expectation.
>
>However, the Asus A8V BIOS according to CPUZ interprets the SPD as
>2-2-2-8
>
>My default setting is 2.5V. Memory specs says 2.8V.
>Can that possibly affect SPD?
Hi Wayne - don't know the answer to this.
Open up a new thread, you'll get better visibilty.
Dave
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b } Memory
February 1, 2005 7:37:32 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 09:25:02 -0800, da_test <davexnet02NO@SPAMyahoo.com>
wrote:

>On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 11:21:20 -0600, Ed <nomail@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 18:48:47 -0800, da_test <davexnet02NO@SPAMyahoo.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>So to me, it looks as if Dimm memory of 6-2-2 is supported.
>>>Now, the response from crucial is even more nonsensical than
>>>it first seemed. Either that or the response from RusH is correct!
>>>
>>>Dave
>>
>>You could just set the BIOS to use "SPD" and it should set the timings
>>correctly, but that doesn't always work correctly with all boards and
>>ram sticks, I always set the ram timings manually to spec when I can.
>>
>>You may want to test your setup with programs like Memtest86+
>>http://www.memtest.org/ and Prime95(Tests lots of Ram)
>>http://www.mersenne.org/freesoft.htm just to make sure it's working
>>error free.
>>
>>Ed
>Ed, a couple of things, I've never had much luck with memory testers.
>If I set the timing aggresively, I will/have errors in Windiws.
>But memtest86+ never finds a problem.

That's why Prime95 is a good follow-on to memtest86+ - it runs in the
Windows environment which does things which memtest86+ doesn't. If
Memtest86+ finds no errors, it usually means you can get Windows installed
OK, though I admit, not always. It's not a bad idea to use manually set
loose timings to get Windows installed.

>Secondly, as I mentioned in another post in this thread,
>in my bios SPD seems related to interleave only,
>unless I'm misunderstanding something - but I don't
>think I am. I checked the chipset values using wpcredit.

SPD states the operating timings for the DRAM, basically Tcas, Trcp, Trp,
Tras and command rate, some of which are stated as delay time rather than
cycles IIRC. Interleave is either on or off and in current DRAMs that
means 4-way or auto-precharge and is usually controllable by a BIOS
setting.

--
Rgds, George Macdonald
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b } Memory
February 1, 2005 7:37:33 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 16:37:32 -0500, George Macdonald
<fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> wrote:

>On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 09:25:02 -0800, da_test <davexnet02NO@SPAMyahoo.com>
>wrote:
>>Ed, a couple of things, I've never had much luck with memory testers.
>>If I set the timing aggresively, I will/have errors in Windiws.
>>But memtest86+ never finds a problem.
>
>That's why Prime95 is a good follow-on to memtest86+ - it runs in the
>Windows environment which does things which memtest86+ doesn't. If
>Memtest86+ finds no errors, it usually means you can get Windows installed
>OK, though I admit, not always. It's not a bad idea to use manually set
>loose timings to get Windows installed.
>
>>Secondly, as I mentioned in another post in this thread,
>>in my bios SPD seems related to interleave only,
>>unless I'm misunderstanding something - but I don't
>>think I am. I checked the chipset values using wpcredit.
>
>SPD states the operating timings for the DRAM, basically Tcas, Trcp, Trp,
>Tras and command rate, some of which are stated as delay time rather than
>cycles IIRC. Interleave is either on or off and in current DRAMs that
>means 4-way or auto-precharge and is usually controllable by a BIOS
>setting.
George, thanks for the info. I'll try and track down Prime95.
Regards,
Dave
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b } Memory
February 1, 2005 8:26:50 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 15:24:06 -0800, da_test
<davexnet02NO@SPAMyahoo.com> wrote:

>On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 16:37:32 -0500, George Macdonald

>>That's why Prime95 is a good follow-on to memtest86+ - it runs in the
>>Windows environment which does things which memtest86+ doesn't.

>George, thanks for the info. I'll try and track down Prime95.
>Regards,
>Dave
I just found something else that quickly detects memory problems.
Open an avi file in virtualdub, hold down the shift key and drag the
pointer.
It should snap to key frames. Progress thru the avi should be
smooth. With my memory timings a little too aggressive,
I got hiccups and the avi display cleared to grey screen.

I'm giving prime95 a try now.
regards,
Dave
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b } Memory
February 2, 2005 9:43:38 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

In article <g6evv09gukp303v0hcli5lkouu7tp7obpj@4ax.com>, Ed
<nomail@hotmail.com> writes
(snip)
>
>You may want to test your setup with programs like Memtest86+
>http://www.memtest.org/ and Prime95(Tests lots of Ram)
>http://www.mersenne.org/freesoft.htm just to make sure it's working
>error free.

Sorry?
Prime95 does not "test lots of RAM". From the readme :
" SETTING AVAILABLE MEMORY
The P-1 factoring step prior to running a Lucas-Lehmer test is more
effective if it is given more memory to work with. However, if you let
the program use too much memory then the performance of ALL programs
will suffer. The good news is that 98% of the time the program uses
less than 8MB. In fact, the program will work just fine if you instruct
the program to use only 8MB or less."
etc ...
--
Roger Hunt
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b } Memory
February 2, 2005 9:52:29 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 15:29:43 -0800, da_test
<davexnet02NO@SPAMyahoo.com> wrote:
>What is crucial telling me?

They are telling you that they believe in Corporate
PR-cover-our-ass-ism :p 


--
L.Angel: I'm looking for web design work.
If you need basic to med complexity webpages at affordable rates, email me :) 
Standard HTML, SHTML, MySQL + PHP or ASP, Javascript.
If you really want, FrontPage & DreamWeaver too.
But keep in mind you pay extra bandwidth for their bloated code
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b } Memory
February 2, 2005 11:00:36 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 17:26:50 -0800, da_test <davexnet02NO@SPAMyahoo.com>
wrote:

>On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 15:24:06 -0800, da_test
><davexnet02NO@SPAMyahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 16:37:32 -0500, George Macdonald
>
>>>That's why Prime95 is a good follow-on to memtest86+ - it runs in the
>>>Windows environment which does things which memtest86+ doesn't.
>
>>George, thanks for the info. I'll try and track down Prime95.
>>Regards,
>>Dave
>I just found something else that quickly detects memory problems.
>Open an avi file in virtualdub, hold down the shift key and drag the
>pointer.
>It should snap to key frames. Progress thru the avi should be
>smooth. With my memory timings a little too aggressive,
>I got hiccups and the avi display cleared to grey screen.
>
>I'm giving prime95 a try now.

If you want to really pound the memory and do nothing else with the system,
it's recommended to bump the priority up a touch... under Advanced/Priority
try 8 or 9.

--
Rgds, George Macdonald
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b } Memory
February 2, 2005 11:00:36 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 06:43:38 +0000, Roger Hunt <test@carewg.demon.co.uk>
wrote:

>In article <g6evv09gukp303v0hcli5lkouu7tp7obpj@4ax.com>, Ed
><nomail@hotmail.com> writes
>(snip)
>>
>>You may want to test your setup with programs like Memtest86+
>>http://www.memtest.org/ and Prime95(Tests lots of Ram)
>>http://www.mersenne.org/freesoft.htm just to make sure it's working
>>error free.
>
>Sorry?
>Prime95 does not "test lots of RAM". From the readme :
>" SETTING AVAILABLE MEMORY
>The P-1 factoring step prior to running a Lucas-Lehmer test is more
>effective if it is given more memory to work with. However, if you let
>the program use too much memory then the performance of ALL programs
>will suffer. The good news is that 98% of the time the program uses
>less than 8MB. In fact, the program will work just fine if you instruct
>the program to use only 8MB or less."
>etc ...

Run it and see. The Torture Test ran up to 900MB on my 1GB system the last
time I looked. I wonder if the para you quote is either out of date or
applies to everything but the Torture Test... IOW the real work. In that
respect, note that the Torture Test runs with a low priority on recent
versions, so possibly they shuffled things around without updating the
docs.

--
Rgds, George Macdonald
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b } Memory
February 2, 2005 11:36:21 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

da_test wrote:
> Secondly, as I mentioned in another post in this thread,
> in my bios SPD seems related to interleave only,
> unless I'm misunderstanding something - but I don't
> think I am. I checked the chipset values using wpcredit.
> Dave

Why do you think that's the case? The SPD has nothing to do with
interleave. The interleave is a factor that the system itself sets
through the BIOS & chipset, but it runs the RAM at whatever settings you
specified whether it's interleaved or not. Interleaving is outside the
control of each individual DIMM, it works at the memory bank level.

Yousuf Khan
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b } Memory
February 2, 2005 12:05:03 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 08:36:21 -0500, Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@ezrs.com>
wrote:

>da_test wrote:
>> Secondly, as I mentioned in another post in this thread,
>> in my bios SPD seems related to interleave only,
>> unless I'm misunderstanding something - but I don't
>> think I am. I checked the chipset values using wpcredit.
>> Dave
>
>Why do you think that's the case? The SPD has nothing to do with
>interleave. The interleave is a factor that the system itself sets
>through the BIOS & chipset, but it runs the RAM at whatever settings you
>specified whether it's interleaved or not. Interleaving is outside the
>control of each individual DIMM, it works at the memory bank level.
>
> Yousuf Khan
Hello Yousuf,
it's only because it's an option in my Bios.
Options for "bank interleave" are 4-way, 2-way, "off" or
"by spd"

When "by spd" is chosen, 4-way is used. I checked that
using pcredit. However, choosing that setting does not alter
the memory timings in the chipset registers.
They are still selected based on two other bios settings,
"cas latency" and "Dimm memory speed"

In other words there isn't a way in my bios to set cas latency
or dimm memory speed based on any info the RAM supplies;
rather, like most Bios' they have a default based on the
most conservative; ie. cl3 and 6-3-3.

regards,
Dave
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b } Memory
February 2, 2005 2:41:30 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

In article <O4XpIKAaaHACFwAO@carewg.demon.co.uk>, Roger Hunt
<test@carewg.demon.co.uk> writes

>Sorry?
>Prime95 does not "test lots of RAM".

Run the "Torture Test". One of the test options uses "lots of RAM".

--
Rarely do people communicate; they just take turns talking.
(source unknown)
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b } Memory
February 2, 2005 7:14:54 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

In article <evg1015d0vrgv42sc3t8tr45slqq6hk3qj@4ax.com>, George
Macdonald <fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> writes
>On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 06:43:38 +0000, Roger Hunt <test@carewg.demon.co.uk>
>wrote:
>>In article <g6evv09gukp303v0hcli5lkouu7tp7obpj@4ax.com>, Ed
>><nomail@hotmail.com> writes
>>(snip)
>>>You may want to test your setup with programs like Memtest86+
>>>http://www.memtest.org/ and Prime95(Tests lots of Ram)
>>>http://www.mersenne.org/freesoft.htm just to make sure it's working
>>>error free.
>>
>>Sorry?
>>Prime95 does not "test lots of RAM". From the readme :
(snip)
>
>Run it and see. The Torture Test ran up to 900MB on my 1GB system the last
>time I looked. I wonder if the para you quote is either out of date or
>applies to everything but the Torture Test... IOW the real work. In that
>respect, note that the Torture Test runs with a low priority on recent
>versions, so possibly they shuffled things around without updating the
>docs.
>
Ah, I see. I stand corrected.

The thing is I run P95 23.8.1 24/7, and have been for seven years or so
as a permanent fixture and long-term stability check and also as part of
GIMPS (M34406129 ATM), and have never run any torture test - just
factoring integers, so I missed that.
(If you want to convert a Mersenne integer to decimal and boggle at the
size use Mprint, http://www.apfloat.org/apfloat/ )

Apologies to all and thanks for putting me right.

Regards
--
Roger Hunt
February 2, 2005 7:35:37 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 09:25:02 -0800, da_test <davexnet02NO@SPAMyahoo.com>
wrote:

>Ed, a couple of things, I've never had much luck with memory testers.
>If I set the timing aggresively, I will/have errors in Windiws.
>But memtest86+ never finds a problem.
>
>Secondly, as I mentioned in another post in this thread,
>in my bios SPD seems related to interleave only,
>unless I'm misunderstanding something - but I don't
>think I am. I checked the chipset values using wpcredit.
>Dave

Prime 95 works best for me, I mainly use memtest86 when building a new
system, if you can't pass at least a few passes you know something is
out od wack. ;p

Not sure, I've only had one or two boards where the bios let you change
interleave and it was a separate option, check the mobo manual.

Ed
February 2, 2005 7:38:11 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 09:05:03 -0800, da_test <davexnet02NO@SPAMyahoo.com>
wrote:

>In other words there isn't a way in my bios to set cas latency
>or dimm memory speed based on any info the RAM supplies;
>rather, like most Bios' they have a default based on the
>most conservative; ie. cl3 and 6-3-3.
>
>regards,
>Dave

Maybe it's time to upgrade the mobo? ;p
Ed
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b } Memory
February 2, 2005 9:18:35 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 08:36:21 -0500, Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@ezrs.com> wrote:

>da_test wrote:
>> Secondly, as I mentioned in another post in this thread,
>> in my bios SPD seems related to interleave only,
>> unless I'm misunderstanding something - but I don't
>> think I am. I checked the chipset values using wpcredit.
>> Dave
>
>Why do you think that's the case? The SPD has nothing to do with
>interleave. The interleave is a factor that the system itself sets
>through the BIOS & chipset, but it runs the RAM at whatever settings you
>specified whether it's interleaved or not. Interleaving is outside the
>control of each individual DIMM, it works at the memory bank level.

You are soooo stuck in the '80's, YK.

There *are* banks in them there drams, son. And they can be configured via
MSRs/EMSRs that exist inside the drams...

/daytripper (Better start reading some recent vintage dram specs ;-)
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b } Memory
February 2, 2005 10:29:42 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 08:36:21 -0500, Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@ezrs.com> wrote:

>da_test wrote:
>> Secondly, as I mentioned in another post in this thread,
>> in my bios SPD seems related to interleave only,
>> unless I'm misunderstanding something - but I don't
>> think I am. I checked the chipset values using wpcredit.
>> Dave
>
>Why do you think that's the case? The SPD has nothing to do with
>interleave. The interleave is a factor that the system itself sets
>through the BIOS & chipset, but it runs the RAM at whatever settings you
>specified whether it's interleaved or not. Interleaving is outside the
>control of each individual DIMM, it works at the memory bank level.

Not sure what you're saying there but interleaving, as it applies to modern
DIMMs, works at the memory chip level - all SDRAM chips >16Mb used in PCs
have 4 banks right on the chip; the 16Mb chips had 2 banks. Years ago,
Dave T told me that there was a plan to go to 8 banks with 256Mb[IIRC]
chips but I guess it fell victim to backwards compatibility with chipsets,
chipset cost... or maybe even inertia.

The DDR SPD doc I have, from IBM, is old and maybe out of date but it seems
to show that there are fields in SPD for both "physical banks" on the
module, for which the term rank is preferred now, and the SDRAM device
banks. In fact the device banks field caters for going to 255 banks;
oddly, the "rank" fields cater for having different sizes of memory on each
side of a module and even different sized and width chips.

When you set the "interleave" in BIOS Setup it's the control on device
banks which you are setting: 0/off, 2 or 4. Off just runs the chips with
auto-precharge. The different chipsets have different ways of handling
this device interleave of banks: on their better chipsets, Intel has
generally allowed all 4 banks on every rank to be kept open simultaneously
and favored an idle timer for precharge; VIA has generally allowed only 2
ranks to have open banks simultaneously and precharged when an address went
to a 3rd rank. In the absence of docs, I've no idea how nVidia handles
things nor AMD.s 64s but I haven't tried to ferret that out.

BTW, I believe that device banks is/was one of Rambus' infringement claims
against SDRAM - their DRDRAM devices had 32 banks of which 16 could be open
simultaneously - the sense amps were shared between adjacent banks. They
also proposed changing to a different scheme for their later DRDRAM, with 4
"independent" banks, just like SDRAM, but I beleive it was abandoned due to
lack of interest by chipset mfrs, notably Intel.

--
Rgds, George Macdonald
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b } Memory
February 2, 2005 10:29:42 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 16:14:54 +0000, Roger Hunt <test@carewg.demon.co.uk>
wrote:

>In article <evg1015d0vrgv42sc3t8tr45slqq6hk3qj@4ax.com>, George
>Macdonald <fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> writes
>>On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 06:43:38 +0000, Roger Hunt <test@carewg.demon.co.uk>
>>wrote:
>>>In article <g6evv09gukp303v0hcli5lkouu7tp7obpj@4ax.com>, Ed
>>><nomail@hotmail.com> writes
>>>(snip)
>>>>You may want to test your setup with programs like Memtest86+
>>>>http://www.memtest.org/ and Prime95(Tests lots of Ram)
>>>>http://www.mersenne.org/freesoft.htm just to make sure it's working
>>>>error free.
>>>
>>>Sorry?
>>>Prime95 does not "test lots of RAM". From the readme :
>(snip)
>>
>>Run it and see. The Torture Test ran up to 900MB on my 1GB system the last
>>time I looked. I wonder if the para you quote is either out of date or
>>applies to everything but the Torture Test... IOW the real work. In that
>>respect, note that the Torture Test runs with a low priority on recent
>>versions, so possibly they shuffled things around without updating the
>>docs.
>>
>Ah, I see. I stand corrected.
>
>The thing is I run P95 23.8.1 24/7, and have been for seven years or so
>as a permanent fixture and long-term stability check and also as part of
>GIMPS (M34406129 ATM), and have never run any torture test - just
>factoring integers, so I missed that.

Wow, your system gets a real workout then - care to share its specs and, of
course brand/type of memory?

>(If you want to convert a Mersenne integer to decimal and boggle at the
>size use Mprint, http://www.apfloat.org/apfloat/ )

Thanks.

--
Rgds, George Macdonald
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b } Memory
February 3, 2005 5:12:00 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

In article <l5q201hp39kstu6a8sjb1n6b69b8cvi6se@4ax.com>, George
Macdonald <fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> writes
>>
>>The thing is I run P95 23.8.1 24/7, and have been for seven years or so
>>as a permanent fixture and long-term stability check and also as part of
>>GIMPS (M34406129 ATM), and have never run any torture test - just
>>factoring integers, so I missed that.
>
>Wow, your system gets a real workout then - care to share its specs and, of
>course brand/type of memory?
>
It all really started when I bought a FIC VA-503+, stuck a P166MMX on it
and discovered that it overclocked amazingly well - 2.5x100MHz,
absolutely solid with P95 at all times, for 18 months. Then I played
with a K6-2, K6-2+ etc etc, until meltdown occurred a year ago.

The replacement system had to be bought in a hurry - a quick but rather
boring Asus a7n8x-x, XP2800 and 2x256 + 1x512MB PC3200.
Even though it's an unlocked XP2800 this a7n8x-x does not like 200 MHz
FSB and all my overclocking attempts have so far been fruitless ...

.... until a couple of hours ago that is, when I learnt in
alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd, of a modded BIOS (1010-XMOD2_2T) for
the a7n8x-x that lets it function at 200MHz FSB, and by golly it does
too!
(Warning - slight niggles - F1 key would not exit Awdflash, reboot
resulted in power cycling, CMOS had to be cleared, but only once and OK
since)
For the first time now, it is purring at 10.5x200MHz, std voltages, and
p95 is purring too. I haven't yet started twiddling voltages etc, but
w98se works fine with 11x200Mhz, std volts, even though p95 falls over
sooner or later.
But this is early days - very encouraging early results and I'm
optimistic that I can get this system much much quicker than it is,
and I hope maybe soon to compete with these XP-M owners who post and
boast about the awesome speeds that they obtain.
Time to play. (dreams .... 2700MHz ... finding Mersenne prime ...)

Regards
--
Roger Hunt
!