Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

1066 RAM for motherboard

Last response: in Motherboards
Share
July 16, 2009 2:55:32 PM

I've been looking to buy the Gigabyte motherboard GA-MA790X-UD4P (at Newegg #N82E16813128387) with 2 kits of OCZ Platinum 4GB (Newegg # N82E16820227298).

Comments at Newegg have been critical of this RAM being able to work at 1066 on this motherboard. OCZ has responded with:
........................
Manufacturer Response:Hello, we are sorry that you had problems. Some of the Gigabyte boards seem to have trouble running higher speeds with tight timings. In our opinion this is a BIOS issue, but our memory does work fine with a few setting changes.

Manufacturer Response:Hello, we are sorry that you had problems running 8gb (2 kits). We do not guarantee 1066mhz when running 2 kits. 8gb puts twice the memory load on your motherboard and memory controller. Your memory controller is the limiting factor here and not the memory. We sell these kits as 4gb and they are rated at a 4gb load.
.......................
This motherboard is designed to accept up to 16 GB of RAM! What's up? I'm running XP prof now, avoiding Vista totally, but probably switching to Window 7 eventually. Can't this motherboard take (at least) 8 GB of 1066 speed RAM? Or do I need to settle for 4GB total?

More about : 1066 ram motherboard

a b V Motherboard
a b } Memory
July 16, 2009 3:08:19 PM

The comments from OCZ tech support make perfect sense. DDR2 8500 1066Mhz. is simply overcockable DDR2 6400 800MHz standard. There is no Jedec standard for DDR2 1066MHz. The MB's BIOS will default the 1066Mhz. capable RAM to 800Mhz. standard. RAM speed, timimgs and voltage will have to be set manually to 1066Mhz. What OCZ tech support states is true. Your MB will support 2 x 4GB kits or eight gigs of RAM. Manual adjustment of the speed, timings and voltage will be necessary for anything above JEDEC default values..
July 16, 2009 3:55:15 PM

Thanks, Badge, just what I needed!
Related resources
a c 177 V Motherboard
a b } Memory
July 16, 2009 6:16:17 PM

I would recommend this:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
instead; I have eight G on a DS5 at 1080, a tenth of a volt below rated; another four on a different mfg MOBO, at 1066, again a tenth low; and, have 'walked' two people through overclocks with different MOBOs, getting at least rated speed, always below volts...

PS - I will research what we need to do to acommodate 8G on an AMD setup - with the Intels, it is necessary to 'bump' the MCH (Memory Controller Hub, or northdridge) voltage a tenth to get 4 sticks to work...
a b V Motherboard
a b } Memory
July 16, 2009 7:11:33 PM

I have the same RAM, 8GB at 1066Mhz. on an ASUS 780G. Unless overclocking, just set to 1066 Mhz. @ 2.0v in BIOS. Same with currently running X38 and P965 with 8 GB RAM. Manually adjust. OCZ has been known for releasing 'picky' RAM for years. HTH.

Edit I was referring to bilbat's RAM in my 780G.
July 16, 2009 8:43:53 PM


by "acommodate" (bilbat) are you referring to all the intel reference under specs at Newegg for N82E16820231166? I was going to dodge that RAM completely for the AMD board.

I was also looking at G. Skill (N82E16820231241) 5-6-6-18 Cas Latency 5 @ 2.v. Make any difference?
a c 177 V Motherboard
a b } Memory
July 17, 2009 1:59:50 AM

Quote:
by "accommodate" (bilbat) are you referring to all the intel reference under specs at Newegg for N82E16820231166? I was going to dodge that RAM completely for the AMD board.


Nothing re the specs; I'll try to explain what I mean:

A computer bus is, effectively, a large number of parallel circuits, switching synchronously to transfer information. Obviously, as it's binary information, the circuits must be able to transition from zero to one, 'off' to 'on', where off is represented by, say, less than 15% of the overall 'drive' voltage, separated from the on range by a sort of 'no-man's-land' of a 'transitional' voltage, while on is represented by say, more than 85% of the drive voltage. Now, these states cannot be detected as a percent of something - they must be 'figured out' by a comparator circuit with an actual fixed pair of physical voltages (and this is not exactly true, as these 'windows' can actually be set on the fly by the more advanced northbridges - but that's a subject for another write-up - let's just look at a couple fixed voltage 'windows'); now, the more loading there is to a circuit, the more the 'driving' voltage will drop (much like Vdroop in a CPU - the faster & higher the loading, the greater the voltage drop), so when you go from one stick of memory to four, the number of gates being driven quadruples, and often the voltage drop of the bus signal itself gets low enough so that at one end or the other (i.e., either the MCH [MemoryControlHub - or northbridge] or the memory's selection gates), the bus isn't being driven 'high' enough for those comparator circuits to clearly, concisely, and consistently 'detect' the high state - they remain in that no-man's-land: indeterminacy! So, to compensate (at least in an Intel), we 'bump up' the MCH voltage a tenth or two, to 'accomodate' the four sticks...That's, in a nutshell, why a setup that is fine with one stick of RAM often won't work for four... Now, this might cause you to wonder - 'where is this voltage going to?' I mean, it goes in one end of the circuit, so it's gotta come back on the return line, right? Well, actually, no - you're transitioning several hundred transistor junctions, and each transition of each transistor converts a little increment of electrical energy (in the form of voltage) to heat energy, and that little increment 'disappears' from the circuit - the faster the bus, the more transitions, which is why 'fast' stuff heats up worse - that's why you cool extremely overclocked RAM, and why it's never a bad idea to cool your northbridge, either, especially if you're going to be running four sticks of really fast RAM:

As long as I'm in an explaining mood - I'll say a bit about timing. Besides very finicky voltage windows, this stuff is happening really fast - so that individual events are timed in nanoseconds, and the actual 'validation windows' to detect events occur in picoseconds. Besides loading of the bus, there are other effects from their physical nature. You can see that your RAM slots are physically at differing distances from the northbridge which 'talks' to them... Electrical signals are not instantaneous - they travel at a fixed rate through their conductors (albeit one hell of a fast rate!). The board designers try their damnedest to keep the lengths of the actual board traces the same by making the closer ones 'meander "/\/\/\" so they all have trace lengths that are in the same ball-park; however, there is a problem inherent in this solution, as well. Zig-zagging traces have capacitance and inductance; these are very tiny effects, but at the speeds we are talking about (remember - 10 to the minus twelfth second), everything adds up. Capacitance and inductance effectively store energy, which means they 'ramp up' while storing, and 'ramp down' discharging it - so a signal we start out with looking sorta like this: |_| winds up like this: \_/ which screws with these timing windows - so there's only so much the board designer can do for these timing differences without exacerbating the problem. That is why, with the newer northbridges, you'll find separate timing adjustments for the different memory channels - so you can, eventually, tweak these variances out of existence to optimize your memory speeds...

OK - I gotta post this and proof it, and make tomorrow's coffee! Then, I'll come back and write up a bit of a comparo of those two models of RAM... I hope I made this a little clearer - if you have any questions, please feel free to ask - if you're wondering about something, someone else will too, and I usually aim at using these tutorial sort of bit and pieces over and over...

Bill
a c 177 V Motherboard
a b } Memory
July 17, 2009 2:59:02 AM

Quote:
I was also looking at G. Skill (N82E16820231241) 5-6-6-18 Cas Latency 5 @ 2.v. Make any difference?


First, a bit of a basic 'intro to GB memory 101':

'Lots of memory that will work never makes the approved list - it's endemic to the industry. For GBs, what appears to happen is the approved memory list is made up when the MOBO is introduced from sticks they have been provided samples of, and never updated thereafter; in addition, many of the memory manufacturers that you'll see there you've never heard of, as (and I've said this before) I'm sure you can pick them up at any gas station in Taiwan, but they're not to be had here. That's also why, for a lot of boards, there are scads of 512M and 1G sticks, but few 2x2s and 4x2s...

You can always use faster RAM with any modern CPU/MOBO setup - you're just likely to have to set it up manually in the BIOS to take advantage of it. Pretty much all DDR2 ram is actually DDR2/800; they 'speed-bin' it, i.e., test and select the sticks that will work at either lower (faster) latencies, or higher (faster) speeds, or both, and sell it at a premium as 2/1066, 2/1200, and so on. JEDEC spec'd RAM has a little EEPROM chip in it that stores the set-up information/tables for running it at 800 at various FSB (Front System Bus) speeds - has the preferred memory multiplier and timing info - this is called an SPD (Serial Presence Detect) just to confuse us; faster, higher rated sticks may (but don't necessarily) contain another set of tables (called an EPP - this one makes sense - Extended Performance Profile, or sometimes XMP - the same, but eXtended Memory Profile ) that will tell the BIOS what multiplier/latncies to use at its higher rated speed - BUT - not all BIOS are created equal: some will read this EPP automatically, and set the RAM at the higher speed; some will require intervention (on a lot of GBs, it's "Load Optimized Defaults" [but, to keep it more confusing - not all BIOS with the "Load Optimized Defaults" fuction actually use it to set the EPP]), and some just plainly don't know the EPP exists (if it does) and you have to set the higher speed manually!

Now, you have control over the basic system clock (I'm going to cal it B_CLK), once you start manually timing the MOBO through the BIOS. B_CLK times four is your FSB (once again, Front System Bus); B_CLK times your memory multiplier is your DRAM rate; B_CLK times your CPU's multiplier is your CPU frequency.

Examples: if you set your system clock to 333, you will need a 2.4 memory multiplier (333 x 2.4 = 799.blahblahblah) to run your RAM at 800, and if the CPU multiplier is, say, 8.5, you will get a CPU clock of 2.83GHz; at that same B_CLK you would need a memory multiplier of 3.2 (3.2 x 333 = 1065.6) to take advantage of 1066 RAM. Now, lots of CPUs that are rated at a 1333 nominal FSB will run a lot faster, sometimes with a little more 'oomph' from a voltage increase; for example, I run a Q9550 that is rated at 1333 FSB (333 B_CLK) times an eight point five multiplier, for a 2.83GHz speed. It will comfortably run with the B_CLK well over 450 - and here's where faster RAM comes in. The smallest RAM multiplier available from a MCH (Memory Control Hub - or 'NorthBridge') is 2.0, but, with a 2.0 multiplier, that means at a 450 clock, your RAM will need to run at 900 (again, 450 B_CLK x 2 = 900), which most 800 RAM just won't do! This is referred to as a 'RAM limited bus', meaning the CPU can't run a B_CLK any higher than (roughly) half the RAM's available speed - and thus, the need for faster RAM. Mind you, this only applies if you both can, and intend to, run your FSB above 1600 (once again, a B_CLK of 400+ times 4 gives you a 1600+ FSB)...

To further complicate matters, people often misunderstand the actual quantitative speed improvements inherent in faster ram... Here's the mistake: 1066 is 33% higher than 800 ([1066-800]/800 = 266/800 = .33), so 1066 RAM must be a third faster than 800, right? Not so! You have to figure in latencies. Most 800 will run at 4-4-4-12, while most 1066 is rated at 5-5-5-15, or, even worse, 5-5-5-18. Here's how to appraise the situation in reality: at 800 MHz, a RAM bus cycle is 1.25 μSec long (1000/800); at 1066 (1000/1066), it is roughly .938 μSec long - so, with an 800 stick at a 4 average latency, a RAM bus transaction takes 1.25 (cycle time) times 4 (latency), or 5μSec, while at 1066 it is .938 (cycle time) times 5 (latency), for a transaction time of (roughly) 4.7μSec - so you see, by going to nominally 33% faster RAM, you actually gain three tenths of a μSec per transaction - .3 (transaction gain) over 5(transaction total) = .06, for a real-world improvement of 6%

My experience with 'GB-friendliness' by manufacturer has been: mushkin - GBs love mushkin, but it's pricey, and the speed selection is limited; G.Skill - works well, has a functional EPP, and will usually also run at 'auto' settings, unless you run four sticks; OCZ - likewise; Kingston, Crucial, & Corsair - seem to account for most of the problems I see here with RAM (wich, of course, could possibly be due to the fact that more people buy them, as they're generally cheap), with Crucial having a few times had problems with apparent 'degrading' over time, i.e., a previously working OC simply 'goes bad', and MemTest86+ shows it to be RAM...


So OK - let's look at those two different G.Skill models: we'll call the 5-5-5-15 model "A", and the 5-6-6-18 model "B"; here, we'll need a little different math. I want to point out that these calculations are 'rule of thumb' use only - they do not reflect the actual use of the RAM in system! Each one of the numbers quoted (and another dozen we don't often look at) represents the number of clock cycles needed to accomplish a particular physical aspect of accessing your memory, which is arranged like an Excel spreadsheet into rows by columns. The first number, for example, is the CAS, which stands for Column Address Strobe, which is the period required to 'select' and lock-in a particular column. It is stated as the amount of time (in memory bus cycles) between asserting a column reading command and the time the memory has it ready to process. From the beginning of the CAS to the end of the CAS is the latency. The lower the time of these in cycles, the higher the memory performance. I will do a simple averaging operation to get a sort of 'sum effect' of all these timings - the actual timings in your machine will obviously depend on the 'mix' of operations in your real-world data access - and I don't know if I've ever seen an actual statistical compilation of what that mix, on average, really is - therefore, my simplification!

So, for the sake of simplicity, I'll just take an average of the four 'most often quoted' timings: CAS (tCL) - Column Address Strobe; tRCD - RAS to CAS Delay (Row Address Strobe to Column Address Strobe delay); tRP - Row Precharge; and tRAS - Minimum RAS Active (the amount of time between a row being activated by precharge and deactivated). For RAM "A" we'll call an average memory cycle (5+5+5+15)/4, or 7.5 clocks; for "B", (5+6+6+18)/4, or 8.75 clocks. As both these sticks are clocked at the same rate, we don't actually have to calculate the relevant cycle times in nanoseconds - the 'raw' numbers will do: (8.75-7.5) / 8.75 gives 1.25 / 8.75, or about .14 - "A" is roughly fourteen percent faster than "B", at the same clock. This is actually a bigger gain than we calculated for going from optimally timed DDR2-800 to optimally timed DDR2-1066!
July 17, 2009 12:07:45 PM

Whoa. I'm stunned. Let me read this and get right back to you in about a year. Thanks a ton, this is really overwhelming, but precisely what I need. And fascinating! And your machine looks like the temple to the Great God of ZERO and ONE!! Absolutely beautiful! Makes me feel like going out and buying a really nice abacus. Let me noodle this seriously for a while....... Thanks!
July 18, 2009 2:45:09 AM

bilbat said:

My experience with 'GB-friendliness' by manufacturer has been: mushkin - GBs love mushkin, but it's pricey, and the speed selection is limited; G.Skill - works well, has a functional EPP, and will usually also run at 'auto' settings, unless you run four sticks;

Just for information sake, I'm running a GA-EP45-UD3R Rev 1.1 with F9 BIOS and 8GB G.Skill PI DDR2-800 RAM in a 4 x 2GB configuration and things are runing just fine. I've also got a Q9550 CPU, and am running the FSB at 367, giving me a 3.2Ghz CPU and my RAM is 1:1 with the CPU at 734Mhz (with a 2.0B setting). My RAM timings are 4-4-4-12 and contrary to G.Skill documentation, that's happening with 1.8V versus 1.9.

July 18, 2009 1:11:46 PM

Thanks, pparks1, for making the decisions more difficult. I was just about to put a note in here.....

bilbat, great info, I’ve read it, reread it and am still letting it soak in. Takes a while for me. Lots of numbers there, and I really got lost with the numbers for the timings, but I am getting more of an idea about how the stuff works. Seems (hate to be crude) that the 1066 speed stuff is mostly marketing. 800 has been around for a while, tried and proved, and if you want to bump it up (and you have the right material) it’s a better, and often equal way to go. So I landed on mushkin 4GB (2 x 2GB), N82E16820146731 at newegg, thinking x2 @ $100 wasn’t too bad. Until pparks1 showed up. (Just kidding, thanks again, I enjoy every bit of info I can get!) And I had also looked at G.SKILL 4GB (2 x 2GB) (N82E16820231122) among others. And then I reread that the memory you (bilbat) recommended (N82E16820231166) is 1066. Oh well. It’s fascinating to learn about!
a c 177 V Motherboard
a b } Memory
July 18, 2009 1:47:14 PM

Like I said, the big selling point of 1066 RAM isn't the speed increase of the memory itself (which is marginal, at best), it's the fact that it allows you to run an FSB over 2000. Not many boards (or CPUs, for that matter) can get to that territory, but a goodly number can get well above 1600 - which is roughly the limit with DDR2/800...
July 18, 2009 3:15:18 PM

This is really beyond what I want to do, but it's still interesting. When you're running a FSB over 2000, what specifically are you setting in the BIOS? When I read 800 for the RAM speed, how does that relate to settings in BIOS? Presently I have an older Abit motherboard and I think it's set something like 150 X 14 for 2100 GHz. Are you saying you do 2000 X 14 (something) for (something ungodly) GHz?
a c 177 V Motherboard
a b } Memory
July 18, 2009 7:19:01 PM

I still have to look up (again) how this works on AMDs; I just, basically, don't do AMD... On the Intels, you set the system clock - the system clock times your CPU's multiplier gives you the CPU speed; the system clock times your memory multiplier gives your DDR speed, and the system clock time four gives you the FSB (FrontSideBus) speed. My CPU (a Q9550) has an eight and a half multiplier, so to get a 4 GHz CPU, I have to set at least 471 MHz for my system clock - 471 x 8.5 = 4003.5...
July 20, 2009 2:48:37 PM

fatFranky: Here is the exact RAM that I got from NewEgg. It's been solid and I've used G.Skill in past builds and have been very happy: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

As bilbat explained, the FSB speed for Intels is Quad Pumped. Meaning that you take the FSB speed and divide by 4 to get the clock speed. So, 1333mhz divided by 4 is 333Mhz. So, if you take a chip like the Intel Q9550 (2.83ghz), it has a locked multiplier of 8.5 x the single FSB speed of the CPU (locked meaning that it's hard coded right in the processor so there is nothing you can do about it). So, take the 333Mhz and multiply by 8.5 and you get the clock speed of the CPU....2.83Ghz.

When you begin to overclock, you start to raise the single FSB speed from defaults (in my example, 333) and raise to say 360. Now, you have 360 x 8.5 = 3.06Ghz. If you raised the FSB speed a bit more to 376, you now have 376 x 8.5 = 3.20Ghz. Raise the FSB speed a bit more to 400, you know have 400 x 8.5= 3.400Ghz.

Now, with DDR2 RAM, it's double data rate. So, DDR2 800 divided by 2 is 400Mhz. So, if you run your FSB speed at 400Mhz than your RAM would be running at 800Mhz...or it's rated capacity. However, to run your DDR2 at full speed, means that the Intel Q9550 CPU would have to run at 400 x 8.5 = 3.4Ghz. And with an overclock from 2.83 Ghz to 3.40Ghz...you are in the territory where you have to start investing in aftermarket coolers and watch temps and stability (since not all CPU's overclock equally).

With my Gigabyte Board, I can manually set my RAM speeds...however it's based on a multiplier of either 2.0 or 2.4. So, since I'm running an overclock to 3.2Ghz, I've got a FSB setting of 376Mhz. So, my RAM at 2x is actually running 752Mhz. However, If I tried to set my mobo to the 2.4x setting, I would get 367 x 2.4 = 881Mhz....probably a little faster than my 800Mhz RAM is going to want to go. So, if I really wanted to run 881...I would have instead invested in 1066 RAM to provide that extra headroom.

Instead, I opted to get lower latency timings (4-4-4-12) than faster RAM which naturally has higher latency timings. I'm just running my DDR2 800 at 752Mhz....to maintain my 376FSB speed x 8.5 to get my CPU clock at 3.2Ghz. That RAM leaves me plenty of room to move my CPU up to 3.4Ghz (400 x 8.5), if I want to do so. But at 3.4Ghz, I have to start changing out cooling fans and heatsinks since the Intel cooler cannot handle those speeds and maintain a cool temperature and I just don't really want to do that.
a c 177 V Motherboard
a b } Memory
July 20, 2009 3:19:39 PM

Quote:
But at 3.4Ghz, I have to start changing out cooling fans and heatsinks since the Intel cooler cannot handle those speeds and maintain a cool temperature and I just don't really want to do that.


Man, you've got that right! I discovered, by an accident of bad planning, that you don't want to be in a smallish room with a 'way overclocked' system either - even in winter, with an outside wall and a marginal furnace heat vent, it was getting to eighty-five F! That's how I wound up doing this:


radiator in the basement ceiling, one floor below the system!
July 20, 2009 10:48:05 PM

yipes, I'm breaking out in a sweat just thinking about this stuff! I'd be fun to overclock a little, but I'd be nervous about cooking the machine. Can I assume the AMD (I like the Callisto processor, N82E16819103680) will work maybe similar to your intel stuff?

I found this at Newegg: N82E16820231219, G.SKILL HK 4GB (2 x 2GB) that looks pretty decent. (NOT that I'm discounting the Mushin that you, bilbat, recommended. It'll be one of the other.) I like this Xigmatek heatsink, N82E16835233025, (but maybe with a 120mm fan), so I'm weary of those kinda big heat spreaders on the G. skill that you, pparks1, mentioned. Seems I've read that GBs tend to have the RAM placement too close to the cpu, hence heat spreaders might hit the bottom of the heatsink?
July 22, 2009 2:32:39 PM

that is, "leery" of those kinda big high spreaders....... sorry
a c 177 V Motherboard
a b } Memory
July 22, 2009 10:07:24 PM

RAM dimensions, i.e., the width of the spreaders seems to be completely unavailable (and, if I hadn't worked with and owned G.Skill, with 100% success, I'd be leery just looking at their web site: <sic> "Serch for memory"?? Ye god - I hope I'm doing better with my Mandarin (via Rosetta) than they're doing with their English! I do have dimensions and pictures of the heatsink, and a picture of the motherboard - and that should do us...

I'll shoot a few pictures, and do a little write-up on how to scale drawings (and/or pictures) to get a rough (say = or - , maybe, two millimeters) pre-purchase idea of whether things will fit. I, and several people on this board, have had good luck with G.Skill F2-8500CL5D (N82E16820231166), and I happen to have a couple pieces laying around 'loose' that I can put a caliper on, to get an actual width (bought six to pick the fastest four...) that we may be able to compare just from pictures of the RAM - to me, they look pretty close.

I've got a couple quick time commitments to deal with - will try to get back in, say, two hours...
July 23, 2009 9:56:14 PM

Just curious, but when I look at the G. Skill you mentioned (N82E16820231166) I read that it has 1,575 comments that go back to 2/18/08, which tells me this is kinda (relatively) old RAM. The stuff I found (N82E16820231219) has only 77 comments, but still with an 88% approval rating. New stuff? Does this matter?
a b V Motherboard
a b } Memory
July 23, 2009 10:03:21 PM

Send G. Skill Tech support an email and ask a detailed question regarding which RAM is best for your system specifically.
a b V Motherboard
a b } Memory
July 27, 2009 11:29:12 PM

Even if your board supports OCZ Plats 1066, steer AWAY... I purchased 2 kits 5 months ago and had to RMA 3 times.. I'm done with OCZ....Went back to G.Skill and everything is butter.....

Want proof? Just read this :

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductReview.aspx?Item=N...

the positives outweigh the negatives but it's not worth the risk IMO.... I gambled an lost...

If you want stable RAM @ 1066 get G.Skill and don't look back....

As far as DDR2 goes OCZ sucks bigtime, on the other hand their DDR3 works flawless
a c 177 V Motherboard
a b } Memory
July 27, 2009 11:42:45 PM

I had, until recently, considered them kind of equals; however, several people seem to have had, well, peculiarities with OCZ, and they even appear to acknowledge on their support forum that it is unpredictable: not only responds differently on MOBOs with differing northbridges, but sometimes, differently on same MOBOs from same manufacturers; have had several good experiences, both here and on my own systems, with the G.Skill F2-8500CL5D; will probably stock up on a few more next time NE lowers the price...
a b V Motherboard
a b } Memory
July 27, 2009 11:52:16 PM

In all , I just want peeps to stay away from this part # OCZ2P10664GK

Even the tech I spoke to @ OCZ told me that they were having MAJOR issues with different batches on several models.... He was the one that suggested I switched to G.Skill....coming from a tech at OCZ, that is just crazy.......

As far as the testing goes.... OCZ has failed to make sure their modules don't skimp on Q&A....

a c 177 V Motherboard
a b } Memory
July 28, 2009 12:57:35 AM

That's hilarious! G.Skill should use that for an ad: "OCZ sent me!"
a b V Motherboard
a b } Memory
July 28, 2009 2:41:56 AM

I know!!! to this date i still don't know where he got the nutz to say that...If his boss herd him, he would be toast....

In all, i just post these messages to keep peeps from buying bad modules.... it's kinda sad to build a PC with high hopes and have the ram crap out on you... it's just not fair... GO G.SKILL!!!!! IMO G.SKILL owns the competition.....Dominator's and Hyper X's are not far behind....
a b V Motherboard
a b } Memory
July 28, 2009 4:49:55 PM

fatFranky said:
I've been looking to buy the Gigabyte motherboard GA-MA790X-UD4P (at Newegg #N82E16813128387) with 2 kits of OCZ Platinum 4GB (Newegg # N82E16820227298).

Comments at Newegg have been critical of this RAM being able to work at 1066 on this motherboard. OCZ has responded with:
........................
Manufacturer Response:Hello, we are sorry that you had problems. Some of the Gigabyte boards seem to have trouble running higher speeds with tight timings. In our opinion this is a BIOS issue, but our memory does work fine with a few setting changes.

Manufacturer Response:Hello, we are sorry that you had problems running 8gb (2 kits). We do not guarantee 1066mhz when running 2 kits. 8gb puts twice the memory load on your motherboard and memory controller. Your memory controller is the limiting factor here and not the memory. We sell these kits as 4gb and they are rated at a 4gb load.
.......................
This motherboard is designed to accept up to 16 GB of RAM! What's up? I'm running XP prof now, avoiding Vista totally, but probably switching to Window 7 eventually. Can't this motherboard take (at least) 8 GB of 1066 speed RAM? Or do I need to settle for 4GB total?


I tested these yesterday and they worked fine on a UD4P (790x) @ 1066Mhz :

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

only con here is there are no reviews due to the fact that they are new.. I spoke to a tech last night @ OCZ and he told me the Plats #OCZ2P10664GK have a flaw mostly with the AMD controller and he suggested to use these new AMD edition modules....

btw 4GB will run stable @ 1066Mhz, 8Gb will run stable @ 800Mhz / you cannot run 8Gb's @ 1066Mhz due to the memory controller....
!