This may be the ram of choice for AM2

[cisco]

This might be one of the top sellers for ddr2, with timings @ 3.2.2.9 not bad with the ability to go 4.5.4.15 @1000mhz. I'm sure much like Nvidia, AMD's stop over in ddr2 land won't be too long anyway with ddr3 on the horizon.

http://www.anandtech.com/memory/showdoc.aspx?i=2732

 

[MadModMike]

This might be one of the top sellers for ddr2, with timings @ 3.2.2.9 not bad for ddr800. I'm sure much like Nvidia, AMD's stop over in ddr2 land won't be long anyway with ddr3 on the horizon.

http://www.anandtech.com/memory/showdoc.aspx?i=2732

Those are worthless to a P4/Conroe, because even @ 1333MHz, the FSB can't handle that, and that's a FACT, not Fanboyism.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time

 

[gr8mikey]

Those are worthless to a P4/Conroe, because even @ 1333MHz, the FSB can't handle that, and that's a FACT, not Fanboyism.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time

How do you know? As you have stated many times previously, conroe is not here yet.

 

[cisco]

I think it will make a much larger impact with AMD AM2. But the article claims that conroe will benefit as well. Since they nolonger use pukeburst.

 

[MadModMike]

Those are worthless to a P4/Conroe, because even @ 1333MHz, the FSB can't handle that, and that's a FACT, not Fanboyism.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time

How do you know? As you have stated many times previously, conroe is not here yet.

Uhm...you're not listening...the CPU has nothing to do with how fast it can access RAM you Moroff, if the FSB in a Conroe is 1066MHz or 1333MHz, let's do math, shall we?

1333x64/8=10,664MB/s - Max Extreme Edition FSB (Provided Intel can MAKE 3.33GHz Conroe w/ that bus)

800x128/8=12,800MB/s - Max T-Band for DDR2-800

Let's do an A64 for Sh!ts and giggles..

∞*800/8=(-∞,∞) Max T-Band. (You do understand Alg2, right?)

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time

 

[gr8mikey]

Good assumption, but its all just theory until you plug it in and run the benches.

Remember: theory and reality don't always coincide

 

[MadModMike]

Good assumption, but its all just theory until you plug it in and run the benches.

Remember: theory and reality don't always coincide

.....Are you stupid?....That is a serious question, are you mentally challenged? I am not joking....

You don't understand anything, and that isn't an insult, but a concern. Please get help immediately.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time

 

[Grimmy]

Taking a stab at this..

I guess what mike is saying..

Conroe can do 1333 FSB.

That DDR2 1000 (PC2 8000) is rated for 1000 FSB.

So, I would say... that would be harsh to try to push the memory another 333mhz.

 

[FITCamaro]

Good assumption, but its all just theory until you plug it in and run the benches.

Remember: theory and reality don't always coincide

Math is not an assumption. He's telling you the actual maximum transfer rates of each.

The point he was trying to make is that the maximum transfer rate of Intels FSB at 1333MHz is not even equal to that of DDR2-800, much less DDR2-1000. So the extra speed for an Intel processor is worthless. Now the tighter timings would make a difference though.

 

[MadModMike]

Taking a stab at this..

I guess what mike is saying..

Conroe can do 1333 FSB.

That DDR2 1000 (PC2 8000) is rated for 1000 FSB.

So, I would say... that would be harsh to try to push the memory another 333mhz.

No, that's not what I'm saying, let me reiderate:

A front side bus of 1333MHz for Conroe provides 10,664MB/s because it is a 64-bit wide Data Bus (1333x64/8 ) and that is NOT theory, it is PHYSICAL limitation.

DDR2-800 is 800MHz and provides 12,800MB/s because it is 128-bit wide (In Dual Channel) and that is NOT theory, it is PHYSICAL limitation

The Athlon64 Memory Controller is UNLIMITED bandwidth (as fast as the RAM is) and therefore it is ∞ (also known as INFINITY) ∞*RAM/8=∞ that is the NON-THEORY bandwidth, but PHYSICAL limitation.

DDR2-1066 is 17GB/s+, and if you get there, you'd need almost a 2GHz FSB on Conroe to get that, whereas an A64 can handle that with nothing new, see the limitation?

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time

 

[FITCamaro]

You beat me to finishing my edit.

 

[Grimmy]

Taking a stab at this..

I guess what mike is saying..

Conroe can do 1333 FSB.

That DDR2 1000 (PC2 8000) is rated for 1000 FSB.

So, I would say... that would be harsh to try to push the memory another 333mhz.

No, that's not what I'm saying, let me reiderate:

A front side bus of 1333MHz for Conroe provides 10,664MB/s because it is a 64-bit wide Data Bus (1333x64/8 ) and that is NOT theory, it is PHYSICAL limitation.

DDR2-800 is 800MHz and provides 12,800MB/s because it is 128-bit wide (In Dual Channel) and that is NOT theory, it is PHYSICAL limitation

The Athlon64 Memory Controller is UNLIMITED bandwidth (as fast as the RAM is) and therefore it is ∞ (also known as INFINITY) ∞*RAM/8=∞ that is the NON-THEORY bandwidth, but PHYSICAL limitation.

DDR2-1066 is 17GB/s+, and if you get there, you'd need almost a 2GHz FSB on Conroe to get that, whereas an A64 can handle that with nothing new, see the limitation?

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time

Ahhh.... I'm jumping through too many posts.

Yes I see... I think:

(1333)10664<(800)12800<AM2(1066)17000.

 

[MadModMike]

You beat me to finishing my edit.

Hehehe, I'm a fast typer (over 110wpm fyi )

I think it's necessary for this too:

An "Expert" is going to come in here and lambast me about Woodcrest, so I have taken the liberty upon myself to shoot them down before they can start:

Woodcrest w/ DIB (2 FSB's):

1333MHzx2=2666MHz (Provided they are Linerally/Striped scaled, which I DOUBT severely). That's 2666x64/8=21,328MB/s Max T-Band, that's farely nice...

Let's look @ the FB-DIMM's it's going to use....

The max channels for FB-DIMM's is Six-Channel, so let's use 1000MHz as our base for this...

1000x384/8=48,000MB/s Max T-Band for FB-DIMM DDR2-1000 (Provided the MC on the NB ever SCALES that high, highly unlikely as well).

So now we got 21GB/s and 48GB/s....hmm....see a problem here?....

Now let's look at a Socket F Dual CPU AMD Opteron 64 setup...

2 CPU's = 2 Memory Controllers (The 1207 pins can allow for almost 4 MC's per CPU, but we won't go there) and thus is now ∞*∞ for Memory Bandwidth limitation....Let's do more math....

48GB/s per Node x2 = 96GB/s Max T-Band for Dual Opty 64's using FB-DIMM DDR2-1000, use NUMA to aggregate the Memory, and you're lookin at REAL-WORLD bandwidth of over 85GB/s....compared to Woodcrest REAL-WORLD of, say, 16GB/s....

Yea.....you see now how the FSB is a PoS....

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time

 

[Grimmy]

I'm getting too old for this ****.

 

[WINDSHEAR]

interesting math, dude. Nice work.

I agree the FSB is pretty crappy. Have known about it's bad limitations for quite a while. But...

question... why the assumption of 384? or 6*64. What if it is 128? I don't know whether or not it will be 128bit or 64bit. Do you know?

thanks

 

[MadModMike]

interesting math, dude. Nice work.

I agree the FSB is pretty crappy. Have known about it's bad limitations for quite a while. But...

question... why the assumption of 384? or 6*64. What if it is 128? I don't know whether or not it will be 128bit or 64bit. Do you know?

thanks

Good question, let me go find out.

EDIT: Found out, it is 72-bit, I'll post again with updated speeds.
EDIT2: The FSB is still 64-bit (IIRC) but FB-DIMM's are 72-bit, which means it's even WORSE than what I posted, LOL.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time

 

[MadModMike]

**UPDATE USING CORRECT FB-DIMM DATA WIDTHS**

Woodcrest w/ DIB (2 FSB's):

1333MHzx2=2666MHz (Provided they are Linerally/Striped scaled, which I DOUBT severely). That's 2666x64/8=21,328MB/s Max T-Band, that's farely nice...

Let's look @ the FB-DIMM's it's going to use....

The max channels for FB-DIMM's is Six-Channel, so let's use 1000MHz as our base for this...

1000x432/8=54,000MB/s Max T-Band for FB-DIMM DDR2-1000 (Provided the MC on the NB ever SCALES that high, highly unlikely as well).

So now we got 21GB/s and 54GB/s....hmm....see a problem here?....

Now let's look at a Socket F Dual CPU AMD Opteron 64 setup...

2 CPU's = 2 Memory Controllers (The 1207 pins can allow for almost 4 MC's per CPU, but we won't go there) and thus is now ∞*∞ for Memory Bandwidth limitation....Let's do more math....

54GB/s per Node x2 = 108GB/s Max T-Band for Dual Opty 64's using FB-DIMM DDR2-1000, use NUMA to aggregate the Memory, and you're lookin at REAL-WORLD bandwidth of over 95GB/s....compared to Woodcrest REAL-WORLD of, say, 16GB/s....

Yea.....you see now how the FSB is a PoS....

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time

 

[9-inch]

...

 

[9-inch]

Owned. :lol:

 

[Clarity]

Good assumption, but its all just theory until you plug it in and run the benches.

Remember: theory and reality don't always coincide

Math is not an assumption. He's telling you the actual maximum transfer rates of each.

The point he was trying to make is that the maximum transfer rate of Intels FSB at 1333MHz is not even equal to that of DDR2-800, much less DDR2-1000. So the extra speed for an Intel processor is worthless. Now the tighter timings would make a difference though.

True. I have a slight divergence - isn't math technically theoretical? I remember hearing that somewhere...

 

[MadModMike]

Good assumption, but its all just theory until you plug it in and run the benches.

Remember: theory and reality don't always coincide

Math is not an assumption. He's telling you the actual maximum transfer rates of each.

The point he was trying to make is that the maximum transfer rate of Intels FSB at 1333MHz is not even equal to that of DDR2-800, much less DDR2-1000. So the extra speed for an Intel processor is worthless. Now the tighter timings would make a difference though.

True. I have a slight divergence - isn't math technically theoretical? I remember hearing that somewhere...

2+2=4...but could it be 65???? Hmm...Nope, it's 4.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time

 

[FITCamaro]

The only math that could technically be theoretical is the math they come up with when they can't solve something so they in essence make it up. But no one can prove that they're wrong so the answer becomes right. Ready to shoot yourself in the head yet?

 

[WINDSHEAR]

interesting math, dude. Nice work.

I agree the FSB is pretty crappy. Have known about it's bad limitations for quite a while. But...

question... why the assumption of 384? or 6*64. What if it is 128? I don't know whether or not it will be 128bit or 64bit. Do you know?

thanks

Good question, let me go find out.

EDIT: Found out, it is 72-bit, I'll post again with updated speeds.
EDIT2: The FSB is still 64-bit (IIRC) but FB-DIMM's are 72-bit, which means it's even WORSE than what I posted, LOL.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time

yeah... cuz the FSB still runs at 21GBs/sec :roll: it just really sucks....

 

[MU_Engineer]

A few other things do use the memory bandwidth, especially if you have integrated video and to a much lesser extent, Ethernet and sound. But yes, a 1333MHz FSB should mean that anything above DDR2-800 in dual channel is overkill.

 

[MadModMike]

A few other things do use the memory bandwidth, especially if you have integrated video and to a much lesser extent, Ethernet and sound. But yes, a 1333MHz FSB should mean that anything above DDR2-800 in dual channel is overkill.

DDR2-800 is already overkill, I wouldn't recommend anything above DDR2-667 unless you're overclocking.

Another thing to note, in a Dual CPU Woodcrest, CPU Coherency also has to eat away the bandwidth of the FSB.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time