K7S5a rev3.1 and high-density ram

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.elitegroup (More info?)

Anyone had any luck using the 'high' density (cheaper) SDram in their K7S5a? (SD
ram, not DDR)
Or does this MB require the low density SDram?
Reason: I will probably be upgrading my mb/cpu within a year and I could use
more ram for Half-Life two.
At present, I have a XP2100 (at 138/138) and only 384MB of SDram (256+128). I
was thinking of buying a 512MB stick to add to the 256MB stick for a total of
768MB of ram.
I am using a Radeom 8500LE 128MB AGP vid card.
Any other suggestions?
Thanks.
10 answers Last reply
More about k7s5a rev3 high density
  1. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.elitegroup (More info?)

    I bought the following memory which will not work in my K7S5A Pro
    version 5.0:
    Micron MT4VDDT1664AG-335C3 PC2700U-25331-C1

    dk


    On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 13:41:47 -0700, "Buffalo"
    <eric(nospam)@nada.com.invalid> wrote:

    >Anyone had any luck using the 'high' density (cheaper) SDram in their K7S5a? (SD
    >ram, not DDR)
    >Or does this MB require the low density SDram?
    >Reason: I will probably be upgrading my mb/cpu within a year and I could use
    >more ram for Half-Life two.
    >At present, I have a XP2100 (at 138/138) and only 384MB of SDram (256+128). I
    >was thinking of buying a 512MB stick to add to the 256MB stick for a total of
    >768MB of ram.
    >I am using a Radeom 8500LE 128MB AGP vid card.
    >Any other suggestions?
    >Thanks.
    >
  2. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.elitegroup (More info?)

    Duffaukid wrote:

    > I bought the following memory which will not work in my K7S5A Pro
    > version 5.0:
    > Micron MT4VDDT1664AG-335C3 PC2700U-25331-C1
    >
    > dk

    How does this memory fail? Is it all recognized during POST, or does
    it behave in an erratic manner? I had a problem with some Kingston VR
    where it was detected but failed a RAM test at around 256MB on a 512MB
    stick. I guess I am wondering if other brands and sizes had the same
    problem.
    >
    >
    >
    > On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 13:41:47 -0700, "Buffalo"
    > <eric(nospam)@nada.com.invalid> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Anyone had any luck using the 'high' density (cheaper) SDram in their K7S5a? (SD
    >>ram, not DDR)
    >>Or does this MB require the low density SDram?
    >>Reason: I will probably be upgrading my mb/cpu within a year and I could use
    >>more ram for Half-Life two.
    >>At present, I have a XP2100 (at 138/138) and only 384MB of SDram (256+128). I
    >>was thinking of buying a 512MB stick to add to the 256MB stick for a total of
    >>768MB of ram.
    >>I am using a Radeom 8500LE 128MB AGP vid card.
    >>Any other suggestions?
    >>Thanks.
    >>
    >
    >
  3. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.elitegroup (More info?)

    On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 14:02:48 GMT, Ken <user@domain.invalid> wrote:

    >Duffaukid wrote:
    >
    >> I bought the following memory which will not work in my K7S5A Pro
    >> version 5.0:
    >> Micron MT4VDDT1664AG-335C3 PC2700U-25331-C1
    >>
    >> dk
    >
    > How does this memory fail? Is it all recognized during POST, or does
    >it behave in an erratic manner? I had a problem with some Kingston VR
    >where it was detected but failed a RAM test at around 256MB on a 512MB
    >stick. I guess I am wondering if other brands and sizes had the same
    >problem.

    Sounds like it was 'high density' RAM.

    It isn't that 'high density' never works, it depends on how much RAM
    you're trying to install.

    'Standard' RAM chips are organized a DEPTH x 8 Bits. E.g. 32x8, 64x8,
    etc. That means 8 of the chips make up a 64 bit wide rank (memory bus
    is 64 bits wide). "Double Sided" is an old term to describe a stick
    with 16 chips, 8 on each side. And with DEPTH x 8 chips that makes for
    2 ranks (or, again in an older style terminology: 2 'banks').

    'High Density' chips are DEPTH x 4 bits so it takes 16 to make a 64
    bit wide memory rank. And this is why "double sided" is no longer the
    favored description because when x8 chips are used "Double sided"
    means "double rank" but with x4 chips it takes both sides and 16 chips
    to make the ONE, single, rank.

    Now to the problem. A memory 'slot' is usually designed for 'standard'
    x8 chips and memory sticks containing 2 ranks. That is how the
    'capacity' will be described. I.E. the K7S5A says it can handle up to
    "1 gig" with two DDR slots, and that means 512Meg per slot, which
    means 256 Meg PER RANK. (2 ranks per slot, 2 slots, etc)

    But a 'high density' memory stick crams the 512 Meg into ONE RANK by
    using 16 deeper (twice as deep) x4 bit width chips. And this is how
    they arrive at the confusing term 'high density'. The chips themselves
    are no higher in density than the x8 chips but since they are
    organized as x4 they can cram more 'bytes' into a single rank because
    16 chips make up a rank rather than 8, not that it helps make the
    stick itself any 'higher' in 'density' because you can still only get
    16 chips mounted on the thing.

    So, a 512 Meg 'high density' stick puts 512 Meg in ONE RANK and a
    'standard' density 512 Meg stick is two 256 Meg Ranks. Same size, same
    'density'. It's the RANK organization that's different.

    Since the memory slot on a K7S5A is two 256 Meg Ranks, a standard
    density 512 Meg stick will work but a 'high density' 512 Meg stick
    will not.

    However, a 'high density' 256 Meg stick probably will since it crams
    the 256 Meg into ONE RANK and the K7S5A can handle 256 Meg ranks.

    For example, I'm running SDRAM on my K7S5A and, as it turns out, one
    is 'standard' x8 density and the other is 'high density x4. But
    they're both 256 Meg sticks and they both work. Damn irritating,
    however, as they were both bought at the same time inside the same
    package label, and same part number, with 16 chips on each so they
    look identical (Kingston) but they are NOT the same thing. Doesn't
    matter to my K7S5A but it means I can not use the 'high density' one
    in my other motherboards because they support 128 Meg ranks (256 Meg
    per slot but NOT in 'high density').

    So, in a nutshell, if you're looking for 512 Meg sticks, make sure the
    spec says they use x8 chips. But, if you're not trying to get 1 gig
    then two 256 meg 'high density' sticks will be cheaper.


    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 13:41:47 -0700, "Buffalo"
    >> <eric(nospam)@nada.com.invalid> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>Anyone had any luck using the 'high' density (cheaper) SDram in their K7S5a? (SD
    >>>ram, not DDR)
    >>>Or does this MB require the low density SDram?
    >>>Reason: I will probably be upgrading my mb/cpu within a year and I could use
    >>>more ram for Half-Life two.
    >>>At present, I have a XP2100 (at 138/138) and only 384MB of SDram (256+128). I
    >>>was thinking of buying a 512MB stick to add to the 256MB stick for a total of
    >>>768MB of ram.
    >>>I am using a Radeom 8500LE 128MB AGP vid card.
    >>>Any other suggestions?
    >>>Thanks.
    >>>
    >>
    >>
  4. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.elitegroup (More info?)

    On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 14:02:48 GMT, Ken <user@domain.invalid> wrote:

    >Duffaukid wrote:
    >
    >> I bought the following memory which will not work in my K7S5A Pro
    >> version 5.0:
    >> Micron MT4VDDT1664AG-335C3 PC2700U-25331-C1
    >>
    >> dk
    >
    > How does this memory fail? Is it all recognized during POST, or does
    >it behave in an erratic manner? I had a problem with some Kingston VR
    >where it was detected but failed a RAM test at around 256MB on a 512MB
    >stick. I guess I am wondering if other brands and sizes had the same
    >problem.

    --snip

    It was never recognized.
    I think I stuck it in another computer I have and it worked fine.

    It is critical that you pay attention to the above post about
    density.

    PJ
  5. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.elitegroup (More info?)

    "flipper" <flipper@fish.net> wrote in message
    news:6mpn11dqvgd728j49vc9bg6nlpflegbp10@4ax.com...
    > On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 14:02:48 GMT, Ken <user@domain.invalid> wrote:
    >
    > >Duffaukid wrote:
    > >
    > >> I bought the following memory which will not work in my K7S5A Pro
    > >> version 5.0:
    > >> Micron MT4VDDT1664AG-335C3 PC2700U-25331-C1
    > >>
    > >> dk
    > >
    > > How does this memory fail? Is it all recognized during POST, or does
    > >it behave in an erratic manner? I had a problem with some Kingston VR
    > >where it was detected but failed a RAM test at around 256MB on a 512MB
    > >stick. I guess I am wondering if other brands and sizes had the same
    > >problem.
    >
    > Sounds like it was 'high density' RAM.
    >
    > It isn't that 'high density' never works, it depends on how much RAM
    > you're trying to install.
    >
    > 'Standard' RAM chips are organized a DEPTH x 8 Bits. E.g. 32x8, 64x8,
    > etc. That means 8 of the chips make up a 64 bit wide rank (memory bus
    > is 64 bits wide). "Double Sided" is an old term to describe a stick
    > with 16 chips, 8 on each side. And with DEPTH x 8 chips that makes for
    > 2 ranks (or, again in an older style terminology: 2 'banks').
    >
    > 'High Density' chips are DEPTH x 4 bits so it takes 16 to make a 64
    > bit wide memory rank. And this is why "double sided" is no longer the
    > favored description because when x8 chips are used "Double sided"
    > means "double rank" but with x4 chips it takes both sides and 16 chips
    > to make the ONE, single, rank.
    >
    > Now to the problem. A memory 'slot' is usually designed for 'standard'
    > x8 chips and memory sticks containing 2 ranks. That is how the
    > 'capacity' will be described. I.E. the K7S5A says it can handle up to
    > "1 gig" with two DDR slots, and that means 512Meg per slot, which
    > means 256 Meg PER RANK. (2 ranks per slot, 2 slots, etc)
    >
    > But a 'high density' memory stick crams the 512 Meg into ONE RANK by
    > using 16 deeper (twice as deep) x4 bit width chips. And this is how
    > they arrive at the confusing term 'high density'. The chips themselves
    > are no higher in density than the x8 chips but since they are
    > organized as x4 they can cram more 'bytes' into a single rank because
    > 16 chips make up a rank rather than 8, not that it helps make the
    > stick itself any 'higher' in 'density' because you can still only get
    > 16 chips mounted on the thing.
    >
    > So, a 512 Meg 'high density' stick puts 512 Meg in ONE RANK and a
    > 'standard' density 512 Meg stick is two 256 Meg Ranks. Same size, same
    > 'density'. It's the RANK organization that's different.
    >
    > Since the memory slot on a K7S5A is two 256 Meg Ranks, a standard
    > density 512 Meg stick will work but a 'high density' 512 Meg stick
    > will not.
    >
    > However, a 'high density' 256 Meg stick probably will since it crams
    > the 256 Meg into ONE RANK and the K7S5A can handle 256 Meg ranks.
    >
    > For example, I'm running SDRAM on my K7S5A and, as it turns out, one
    > is 'standard' x8 density and the other is 'high density x4. But
    > they're both 256 Meg sticks and they both work. Damn irritating,
    > however, as they were both bought at the same time inside the same
    > package label, and same part number, with 16 chips on each so they
    > look identical (Kingston) but they are NOT the same thing. Doesn't
    > matter to my K7S5A but it means I can not use the 'high density' one
    > in my other motherboards because they support 128 Meg ranks (256 Meg
    > per slot but NOT in 'high density').
    >
    > So, in a nutshell, if you're looking for 512 Meg sticks, make sure the
    > spec says they use x8 chips. But, if you're not trying to get 1 gig
    > then two 256 meg 'high density' sticks will be cheaper.
    >
    Thanks for the in-depth explanation.
  6. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.elitegroup (More info?)

    DO NOT PURCHASE SDRAM!!!


    I recently upgraded to 1GB of DDR 333 (2x512mb GB Micro) from 512MB of
    SDRAM PC133 (2X256mb) and it it obvious to me that the K7S5A is a DDR board,
    not a SDRAM board. I should try to test is against a KT133 board tp prove
    my point.

    Since I upgraded, I have notice a definite speed improvement

    Much more stable in AGP operations

    Much more stable

    And here, DDR is cheasper than SDRAM

    I used to run with 384MB (256 pc-133+128 PC-100) I then upgraded to 512mb
    (2x256 pc-133) but I had stability issues and the computer was not reliable
    playing doom3 or unrar of large files or moving large files from one hard
    disk to another hard disk Since I upgraded to DDR, everything is much
    improved.


    Even if you install one 512MB DDR333 module, you will se a major
    improvement from your current configuration and I think that 512MB of DDR
    will be faster than 768MB of SDRAM.

    I do some CAD with my computer and this is why I decided to go with 1 GB
    since I am ofter running 3 CAD program at the same time.

    Charles Leblanc
    K7S5A Ver 1
    XP-M 2500+@ 2800+
    1024Meg of DDR333 running 266 cas2.5
    120Gb + 40GB DMA100
    ATi 9000pro
    Win2K


    "Buffalo" <eric(nospam)@nada.com.invalid> wrote in message
    news:-qqdnQO9goA92offRVn-1w@comcast.com...
    > Anyone had any luck using the 'high' density (cheaper) SDram in their
    K7S5a? (SD
    > ram, not DDR)
    > Or does this MB require the low density SDram?
    > Reason: I will probably be upgrading my mb/cpu within a year and I could
    use
    > more ram for Half-Life two.
    > At present, I have a XP2100 (at 138/138) and only 384MB of SDram
    (256+128). I
    > was thinking of buying a 512MB stick to add to the 256MB stick for a total
    of
    > 768MB of ram.
    > I am using a Radeom 8500LE 128MB AGP vid card.
    > Any other suggestions?
    > Thanks.
    >
    >
  7. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.elitegroup (More info?)

    "Charlez" <charlez@millenium.act> wrote in message
    news:KW5Wd.844$gJ3.187@clgrps13...
    > DO NOT PURCHASE SDRAM!!!
    >
    >
    > I recently upgraded to 1GB of DDR 333 (2x512mb GB Micro) from 512MB of
    > SDRAM PC133 (2X256mb) and it it obvious to me that the K7S5A is a DDR board,
    > not a SDRAM board. I should try to test is against a KT133 board tp prove
    > my point.
    >
    > Since I upgraded, I have notice a definite speed improvement
    >
    > Much more stable in AGP operations
    >
    > Much more stable
    >
    > And here, DDR is cheasper than SDRAM
    >
    > I used to run with 384MB (256 pc-133+128 PC-100) I then upgraded to 512mb
    > (2x256 pc-133) but I had stability issues and the computer was not reliable
    > playing doom3 or unrar of large files or moving large files from one hard
    > disk to another hard disk Since I upgraded to DDR, everything is much
    > improved.
    >
    >
    > Even if you install one 512MB DDR333 module, you will se a major
    > improvement from your current configuration and I think that 512MB of DDR
    > will be faster than 768MB of SDRAM.
    >
    > I do some CAD with my computer and this is why I decided to go with 1 GB
    > since I am ofter running 3 CAD program at the same time.
    >
    > Charles Leblanc
    > K7S5A Ver 1
    > XP-M 2500+@ 2800+
    > 1024Meg of DDR333 running 266 cas2.5
    > 120Gb + 40GB DMA100
    > ATi 9000pro
    > Win2K

    Appreciate your input.
    Can I use the newer high-density DDR333 ram modules?
    I am running Win98SE.
    Thanks.
  8. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.elitegroup (More info?)

    Flipper,
    I think you meant that either DDR or SDRAM high-density (64x4) chips had the
    same limitations when using 512MB chips.
    Is that correct?
    Thanks.


    "Buffalo" <eric(nospam)@nada.com.invalid> wrote in message
    news:24ydnU3c0a2niLTfRVn-vA@comcast.com...
    >
    > "Charlez" <charlez@millenium.act> wrote in message
    > news:KW5Wd.844$gJ3.187@clgrps13...
    > > DO NOT PURCHASE SDRAM!!!
    > >
    > >
    > > I recently upgraded to 1GB of DDR 333 (2x512mb GB Micro) from 512MB of
    > > SDRAM PC133 (2X256mb) and it it obvious to me that the K7S5A is a DDR board,
    > > not a SDRAM board. I should try to test is against a KT133 board tp prove
    > > my point.
    > >
    > > Since I upgraded, I have notice a definite speed improvement
    > >
    > > Much more stable in AGP operations
    > >
    > > Much more stable
    > >
    > > And here, DDR is cheasper than SDRAM
    > >
    > > I used to run with 384MB (256 pc-133+128 PC-100) I then upgraded to 512mb
    > > (2x256 pc-133) but I had stability issues and the computer was not reliable
    > > playing doom3 or unrar of large files or moving large files from one hard
    > > disk to another hard disk Since I upgraded to DDR, everything is much
    > > improved.
    > >
    > >
    > > Even if you install one 512MB DDR333 module, you will se a major
    > > improvement from your current configuration and I think that 512MB of DDR
    > > will be faster than 768MB of SDRAM.
    > >
    > > I do some CAD with my computer and this is why I decided to go with 1 GB
    > > since I am ofter running 3 CAD program at the same time.
    > >
    > > Charles Leblanc
    > > K7S5A Ver 1
    > > XP-M 2500+@ 2800+
    > > 1024Meg of DDR333 running 266 cas2.5
    > > 120Gb + 40GB DMA100
    > > ATi 9000pro
    > > Win2K
    >
    > Appreciate your input.
    > Can I use the newer high-density DDR333 ram modules?
    > I am running Win98SE.
    > Thanks.
    >
    >
  9. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.elitegroup (More info?)

    On Fri, 4 Mar 2005 19:57:46 -0700, "Buffalo"
    <eric(nospam)@nada.com.invalid> wrote:

    >Flipper,
    >I think you meant that either DDR or SDRAM high-density (64x4) chips had the
    >same limitations when using 512MB chips.
    >Is that correct?
    >Thanks.

    Yes. The addressing is the same.


    >"Buffalo" <eric(nospam)@nada.com.invalid> wrote in message
    >news:24ydnU3c0a2niLTfRVn-vA@comcast.com...
    >>
    >> "Charlez" <charlez@millenium.act> wrote in message
    >> news:KW5Wd.844$gJ3.187@clgrps13...
    >> > DO NOT PURCHASE SDRAM!!!
    >> >
    >> >
    >> > I recently upgraded to 1GB of DDR 333 (2x512mb GB Micro) from 512MB of
    >> > SDRAM PC133 (2X256mb) and it it obvious to me that the K7S5A is a DDR board,
    >> > not a SDRAM board. I should try to test is against a KT133 board tp prove
    >> > my point.
    >> >
    >> > Since I upgraded, I have notice a definite speed improvement
    >> >
    >> > Much more stable in AGP operations
    >> >
    >> > Much more stable
    >> >
    >> > And here, DDR is cheasper than SDRAM
    >> >
    >> > I used to run with 384MB (256 pc-133+128 PC-100) I then upgraded to 512mb
    >> > (2x256 pc-133) but I had stability issues and the computer was not reliable
    >> > playing doom3 or unrar of large files or moving large files from one hard
    >> > disk to another hard disk Since I upgraded to DDR, everything is much
    >> > improved.
    >> >
    >> >
    >> > Even if you install one 512MB DDR333 module, you will se a major
    >> > improvement from your current configuration and I think that 512MB of DDR
    >> > will be faster than 768MB of SDRAM.
    >> >
    >> > I do some CAD with my computer and this is why I decided to go with 1 GB
    >> > since I am ofter running 3 CAD program at the same time.
    >> >
    >> > Charles Leblanc
    >> > K7S5A Ver 1
    >> > XP-M 2500+@ 2800+
    >> > 1024Meg of DDR333 running 266 cas2.5
    >> > 120Gb + 40GB DMA100
    >> > ATi 9000pro
    >> > Win2K
    >>
    >> Appreciate your input.
    >> Can I use the newer high-density DDR333 ram modules?
    >> I am running Win98SE.
    >> Thanks.
    >>
    >>
    >
  10. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.elitegroup (More info?)

    In article <KW5Wd.844$gJ3.187@clgrps13>, Charlez <charlez@millenium.act>
    writes

    >Since I upgraded, I have notice a definite speed improvement

    I find that hard to believe. You'll get a 5-8% improvement by going to
    DDR. Not enough to notice.

    >Much more stable in AGP operations
    >
    >Much more stable

    Your SDRAM was either faulty or you had one of the K7S5As that don't
    like working with two sticks.

    I run Linux on my S5A:

    [mdt@linuxbox mdt]$ uptime
    04:59:03 up 145 days, 8:39, 3 users, load average: 0.02, 0.06, 0.00
    ^^^^^^^^^^^

    >And here, DDR is cheasper than SDRAM

    Can't argue with that.

    >I used to run with 384MB (256 pc-133+128 PC-100) I then upgraded to 512mb
    >(2x256 pc-133) but I had stability issues and the computer was not reliable
    >playing doom3 or unrar of large files or moving large files from one hard
    >disk to another hard disk

    This is a known fault with some 'S5As when running with 2 sticks of
    SDRAM. I note you have a v1. Mine (a v3.1) runs fine with two 256Mb
    PC133 sticks.

    >I think that 512MB of DDR
    >will be faster than 768MB of SDRAM.

    You'd be completely wrong, but don't let me stop you.

    --
    ..sigmonster on vacation
Ask a new question

Read More

Elitegroup SDRAM RAM Motherboards