A7N8X-E Deluxe dual channel noticable?

[SCORPIO]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

I have now got an Asus A7V600 with an Athlon XP3200 running at 11*215.
Mem sticks are Corsair DDR 400 Pc 3200 Value edition Cas 2,5

Is it worth it to buy the A7N8X-E Deluxe wich has Dual Channel DDR400 .
I dont mind if the mem turns out to not working ant dual mode, I'll trade
them in for proper working ones then.
But is it wotrth the money buying this mobo and will I notice the
difference?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 17:44:42 +0200, Scorpio wrote:

> I have now got an Asus A7V600 with an Athlon XP3200 running at 11*215.
> Mem sticks are Corsair DDR 400 Pc 3200 Value edition Cas 2,5
>
> Is it worth it to buy the A7N8X-E Deluxe wich has Dual Channel DDR400 .
> I dont mind if the mem turns out to not working ant dual mode, I'll trade
> them in for proper working ones then.
> But is it wotrth the money buying this mobo and will I notice the
> difference?

Nope. There won't be any noticable difference. Don't waste your time and
money..

--
Abit KT7-Raid (KT133) Tbred B core CPU @2400MHz (24x100FSB)
My server http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php
Verizon server http://mysite.verizon.net/res0exft/cpu.htm

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

Scorpio Wrote:
> I have now got an Asus A7V600 with an Athlon XP3200 running at 11*215.
> Mem sticks are Corsair DDR 400 Pc 3200 Value edition Cas 2,5
>
> Is it worth it to buy the A7N8X-E Deluxe wich has Dual Channel DDR400
> .
> I dont mind if the mem turns out to not working ant dual mode, I'll
> trade
> them in for proper working ones then.
> But is it wotrth the money buying this mobo and will I notice the
> difference?
If you have to buy new memory I would say it's not worth the cost.

Dual channel memory improves performance by 10% max.


--
Stephen Bowden

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

"Wes Newell" <w.newell@TAKEOUTverizon.net> wrote in message
newsan.2005.04.20.18.48.05.915934@TAKEOUTverizon.net...
> On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 17:44:42 +0200, Scorpio wrote:
>
>> I have now got an Asus A7V600 with an Athlon XP3200 running at 11*215.
>> Mem sticks are Corsair DDR 400 Pc 3200 Value edition Cas 2,5
>>
>> Is it worth it to buy the A7N8X-E Deluxe wich has Dual Channel DDR400 .
>> I dont mind if the mem turns out to not working ant dual mode, I'll trade
>> them in for proper working ones then.
>> But is it wotrth the money buying this mobo and will I notice the
>> difference?
>
> Nope. There won't be any noticable difference. Don't waste your time and
> money..
>
> --
> Abit KT7-Raid (KT133) Tbred B core CPU @2400MHz (24x100FSB)
> My server http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php
> Verizon server http://mysite.verizon.net/res0exft/cpu.htm
>

Just a follow-up. I was curious if dual channel actually interferes with
overclocking and hitting faster FSB speeds. We had problems overclocking a
dual channel board when the RAM modules were not matched, but were the same
model number and vendor. Going to single channel solved all our woes.

Has anyone achieved faster speeds by switching to single channel? I may
have to test it might self when I am not so busy.

The reason I am curious is that my system at 217x11.5 was Prime stable, but
I was periodically losing the NIC. When I went with 213x12, I was Prime
stable and was maintaining my network connection. I would like to get to
2.6 GHz and I was wondering if the dual channel was getting in my way. BTW,
I have 2 GB of RAM because I do some memory intensive calculations.

Best wishes,

Pete







Best wishes,

Pete

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

On Thu, 05 May 2005 02:05:16 GMT, "Peter Harrington"
<pharring@columbus.rr.com> wrote:
>Just a follow-up. I was curious if dual channel actually interferes with
>overclocking and hitting faster FSB speeds. We had problems overclocking a
>dual channel board when the RAM modules were not matched, but were the same
>model number and vendor. Going to single channel solved all our woes.
>
>Has anyone achieved faster speeds by switching to single channel? I may
>have to test it might self when I am not so busy.

It's easier to run faster and stable with a singe channel setup.

Dual channel just adds more complications for the memory system.

It's only really a problem if you use cheap memory.

Various tech websites are full of old articles about benchmarked races
between all kinds of silly technology. single, dual, hyperthreaded,
with the NEW extensions, with the faster memory, what CAS ????, etc..

and you know what ? The games are so bloated these days none of that
will get you more than a dozen frames per second difference.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

<agustine@benedictsass.com> wrote in message
news:0ivl71hc293btn76e5lhecf274l2ks86u6@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 05 May 2005 02:05:16 GMT, "Peter Harrington"
> <pharring@columbus.rr.com> wrote:
>>Just a follow-up. I was curious if dual channel actually interferes with
>>overclocking and hitting faster FSB speeds. We had problems overclocking
>>a
>>dual channel board when the RAM modules were not matched, but were the
>>same
>>model number and vendor. Going to single channel solved all our woes.
>>
>>Has anyone achieved faster speeds by switching to single channel? I may
>>have to test it might self when I am not so busy.
>
> It's easier to run faster and stable with a singe channel setup.
>
> Dual channel just adds more complications for the memory system.
>
> It's only really a problem if you use cheap memory.
>
> Various tech websites are full of old articles about benchmarked races
> between all kinds of silly technology. single, dual, hyperthreaded,
> with the NEW extensions, with the faster memory, what CAS ????, etc..
>
> and you know what ? The games are so bloated these days none of that
> will get you more than a dozen frames per second difference.
>
>
Yesterday, I did this experiment. I switched my system from dual channel to
single channel. I have two 1 GB ram sticks and overclocking 12x214. I am
using the Matlab bench program, because MATLAB consumes the largest amount
of CPU on my systems. For the FFT test, there was a substantial loss in
performance when I switched to single channel. The FFT is the most
representative test for my computations.

My goal for stability was to hit 12x218 because that is the speed of my RAM.
Both single and dual channel failed the Prime95 torture test in about a
minute at this speed, so I did not see any justification for not using dual
channel.

Best wishes,

Pete