Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

does P4 support DDR SDRAM?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
February 11, 2002 3:02:59 PM

Does anybody know if Pentium 4 supports DDR SDRAM? The articles I've been reading make it sound like only Athlon does.

More about : support ddr sdram

February 11, 2002 4:08:58 PM

It depends on chipset. I believe <b><A HREF="http://www.intel.com/design/chipsets/845/" target="_new"><font color=red>I-845</A></b></font color=red> chipset is the one that supports DDR-RAM.

:smile: Good or Bad have no meaning at all, depends on what your point of view is.
Related resources
February 11, 2002 4:13:47 PM

I know, thanks. I meant I-845 chipset is one of them that supports DDR-RAM for P4.

:smile: Good or Bad have no meaning at all, depends on what your point of view is.
February 11, 2002 4:21:29 PM

In order of fastest to slowest, all the chipsets that support DDR-SDRAM:

Sis645
Via P4X266a
Via P4X266
Intel 845D

<font color=orange>Quarter</font color=orange> <font color=blue>Pounder</font color=blue> <font color=orange>Inside</font color=orange>
February 11, 2002 4:48:22 PM

the P4 supports ddr, sdram, rdram but the best mem for it is RDRAM no matter what a AMDmongrel/Micron memory fanboy says.

"<b>AMD/VIA!</b>...you are <i>still</i> the weakest link, good bye!"
February 11, 2002 5:05:46 PM

Fatburger your order is incorrect

I845D is the fastest
P4X266A
P4X266
SiS645 has memory bandwidth of PC600 but the system overall is slower than the above baords.

I have worked with all the above boards.

SiS650 is the Micro form factor SiS645, also note that the <A HREF="http://www.amptron.com/Images/p4-935lmsd.jpg" target="_new">CPU is not square to the HSF retetion mech</A>. this can be a problem with a lot of aftermarket HSF that put copper core in center.

<A HREF="http://www.amptron.com/Images/P4-925LSD.jpg" target="_new">Via P4M266</A> is also a Micro FF, just like the SiS650 the CPU is not centered.

The original I845 chipset supports PC100/PC133 SDRAM

SDRAM and DDR SDRAM boards are slower than the RDR based motherboards, so go with RDR for best performance.
February 11, 2002 7:18:54 PM

Yeah Right... the i845D is the fastest?
i guess Anandtech, toms hardware Guide, Tech-Report, Xbitlabs and a buch of other Hardware web sites dont know how to benchmark...

the I845D - is the best for overclocking maybe.

This post is best viewed with common sense enabled
February 11, 2002 7:25:15 PM

No, Fugger is wrong. I believe he's comparing their overclockablity not their performance at default speeds.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
February 11, 2002 8:17:08 PM

That order is from reviews on various websites, your own experience can of course be different.

<font color=orange>Quarter</font color=orange> <font color=blue>Pounder</font color=blue> <font color=orange>Inside</font color=orange>
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
February 11, 2002 8:19:24 PM

Yes, Intel 845 does
February 11, 2002 8:42:36 PM

First of all you're new here but I will assume to passed by the front page of Tom's Hardware. You said you roamed some articles, and I believe you did not. Not to be rude or anything but don't people at least check the articles before asking such questions? Anywhere you go in CPU guides, you will have the answer more detailed than any of us could do, and they provide 2nd details like the chipsets that do them and the types recommended. Please read the THG articles next time before jumping to the Community like that, I consider it rather disrespectful to ignore Tom's website and going to the community that reads it and discusses it.

--
The other day I heard an explosion from the other side of town.... It was a 486 booting up...
February 11, 2002 9:35:33 PM

and its proly hard to get a personal opinion about the P4X266/266A as there are so few around.

there was also toms article about the lacklustre aladin by Ali.
now THATS the slowest DDR P4 chipset about... if it ever comes to fruition

Overclocked athlon 1200C @ 8.5 x 166FSB + PC2700 = GOOD! :smile:
February 11, 2002 10:07:47 PM

yes it does support ddr, but it runs best with rdram.. also the price difference is negligible now.

<i>My life wasn't complete untill I tried sse-2 optimized pong</i>
February 11, 2002 11:14:17 PM

You never know if Ali will release a good rev like the C one!
Then there is VIA, and SiS, but I really like SiS for doing such a low price high performant chipset for P4, it truly is attractive, is 100$ CDN less than Asus P4T with i850s and DDR 333 is just a glimpse higher than RDRAM so it really should make P4 more affordable and attractive. But not for me anyway, it's still underperforming...

--
The other day I heard an explosion from the other side of town.... It was a 486 booting up...
February 11, 2002 11:16:22 PM

As most of you know I punnished these boards, oveclocking was just one aspect. I reported the problems I saw and listed issues that needed to be fixed.

Intel application accelerator is needed on Intel based motherboards, and if its not loaded by the review sites then all benchmarks will be wrong with lower scores than normal. Kinda like having bad 4 in 1 drivers loaded.

This is an easy way to show AMD in favorable light in benchmarks by not loading this application.
February 12, 2002 12:11:50 AM

Dude, I'd like some bench proof to see the increase and if it is this much.
And second, even in SSE 2 optimized apps, the AXP was able to compete and win, so Intel has to go further than that if they want a powerful set of instructions to work even at lower clock speeds. This shows that it's pointless to buy low speed P4s anytime.

--
The other day I heard an explosion from the other side of town.... It was a 486 booting up...
February 12, 2002 7:22:32 AM

Quote:
This is an easy way to show AMD in favorable light in benchmarks by not loading this application.



Its a good thing that reviewers dont need to do that to show amd performance in a good light ;-)

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
February 12, 2002 2:07:49 PM

A little off topic here but based on personal experience the Intel App Accel DOES make a large difference.. I have used and not used it to test it on my pee 3\800eb and not only does it bench better when installed , there is a noticable difference across the board when doing actual work \ games with it installed .. one side note though .. on my system ( the pee 3, I also have a p-IV northwood, soyo dragon sis 645 based rig) Clonecd will not record correctly to my old yamaha 16x recorder with it installed

lagger

<b><font color=blue>Checking under my north AND south bridges for trolls</font color=blue>
February 12, 2002 2:52:50 PM

Just as Intel updates their chipset-supporting software, so do all other chipset makers, therefore, you will constantly get a range of benchmarks depending on the version of the software you use. I notice a lot of difference when moving from one version of the 4-in-1s to another, whether for better or for worse.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
February 12, 2002 4:24:59 PM

very true amdman I have had experience with 3 verisons of the intel files .. the first 2 were ata drivers and the 3rd, the app accel replaced those and was by far the fastest of the bunch

<b><font color=blue>Checking under my north AND south bridges for trolls</font color=blue>
February 12, 2002 6:59:03 PM

I could've sworn that was the name of the app that ran when Defrag started in Win98. It was also called Intel App Launch Accelerator with the Intel logo on Defrag. Is there any relation to both and also why hasn't this app been more known or advertised if it's so revolutionary? Do you think this actually unlocks some P4 performance, or P4 is still worse per clock?

--
The other day I heard an explosion from the other side of town.... It was a 486 booting up...
February 12, 2002 7:36:26 PM

Quote:
Its a good thing that reviewers dont need to do that to show amd performance in a good light ;-)

BS from a lame troll. Go troll another thread or go back to blowing goats. And you were claiming you dont troll in another thread... G1
February 12, 2002 7:50:07 PM

Fugger, are you saying that they don't use App Accelerator? Do you have any proof to back up that statement? In any case, as any other chipset support driver, performance will vary depending on the system.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
February 13, 2002 4:55:11 AM

Quote:
In reply to:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Its a good thing that reviewers dont need to do that to show amd performance in a good light ;-)



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BS from a lame troll. Go troll another thread or go back to blowing goats. And you were claiming you dont troll in another thread... G1



That was not a flame, not was it bs, I am sorry you are personally threatened by people who have different oppinions.

Have a nice day.

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
February 13, 2002 11:01:14 AM

This is what I mean Mat, he trolls at innocent askers...

--
The other day I heard an explosion from the other side of town.... It was a 486 booting up...
February 14, 2002 3:28:56 AM

I am in total agreement, everyone knows what fugger is, and where he should stick his advice.

But I do not care about what he says enough to bother refuting his crap anymore. He can call me names in other threads all he wants, and he can post bs, I will calmly reply he is wrong, and move on.

Flaming the trolls just dosent help anything.

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
!