I have been a avid reader of Tom's site for a long time. I often use it as a source of reference, even referring clients and friends here to get more detailed info than I can provide in a brief conversation.
I come here myself to make determinations as to what I will invest in next. It was cause of Tom's early report on Rambus that made me hold off from getting into a P4.
Finally when I felt I had rung all the performance out of my P3-1ghz, that I finally decided to look into a P4. I was going to get a P4 2.4ghz (B) 533mhz model.
I then initially the night before going to get a P4B533 with the Intel 845E chipset. I then read up on Tom's site about how the 845G, actually performed better than the 845E chipset and supported better memory.
For me I didn't need the onboard graphics as a GeForce 3 Ti500 was more than capable
I figured, well I am paying an extra $40 (the Asus P4B533 using the 845E I could have bought for about $145, the P4B533-V using the 845G was about $185) to get a slightly faster memory use. Sure some would say the small margin of difference at times between DDR266 and DDR333 isn't that significant. But since I want to ring the best performance out of my DDR motherboard, might as well get the mobo that will support the best DDR memory and has an Intel chipset (I am very partial to using only Intel chipsets - never have been let down, even if I do lose a little performance over a Via or SiS chipset).
However to say I am upset, is an understatement. I have already sent an e-mail to Tom about this fact. I decided to look at why Asus says PC2100 but Tom said PC2700. As I dug deeper into Intel Specs, I noticed they never once mentioned DDR333 (PC-2700) support, only DDR266 (PC2100).
I then looked back at Tom's article on the subject. And he said it plain and simple how the 845G was better cause it supported the DDR333 memory. He didn't say it would in the future as one post on this forum stated (that Intel has new 845G planned that will support). He didn't say, if you alter the default motherboard settings, or make any setting that could void the warranty (i.e. overclocking - which I never do cause it isn't worth voiding the warranty).
If this was a mistake in his article it is a major one. It can be viewed as misleading or a severe oversight. Since I know thousands, maybe millions come to this site for up to date and correct information on all topics related to computers, many depend on getting the information that you can't find in many generic web sites.
If Intel is wrong and Tom had the right information, then he needs to state where he got his facts and why Intels specs differ from his. If he overclocked or altered default settings, he then should state that and what affect it could for example on your warranty (meaning is it overclocking, risking damage to the components, or just a simple change that should be a big problem).
So am I upset, yes. I depended on this site to give me the right scoop and I relied and trusted it to make a decision that now can have a long term impact on me, as you can't take a motherboard back to a computer store and say "I got bad information on the board specs."
I apologize if anyone feels this is harsh or unfair to make any comment like the above. Since I know Tom and his staff work hard to provide a service to the users/community. However if there is an issue with something posted, it needs to be corrected quickly or commented on.
I hope to hear back on my e-mail I sent.
I would like to know others feelings on this information. If I buy the PC2700 memory what changes if any will need to be made to the bios settings. And will these changes in any way risk my motherboard, hardware or compenents warranty or ability to perform according to the specs (yes I know it will obviously perform better, what I am talking about wear and tear on the part is stressed beyond what is considered standard).
And someone even stated, that it is the 533mhz (166mhz) operation of the newer P4's that will allow for the use of and advantages of the PC2700 (DDR333) memory, then if a 845E and 845G both are based on the same design, fundamentally and both take advantage of the 533mhz in the new P4 models, then shouldn't the 845E be able to take advantage then of this same memory.
More about :p4b533 intel 845g ddr333 comments premature
ill try to keep this short...
the 845E and 845G are the same chipset...the only difference is that the 845G has onboard video and "unofficial" support for pc2700 ram...
when you put pc2100 ram in both chipsets...they run almost identically...
anyways...the reason you dont see intel advertising pc2700 support is because it isnt supported (thats why i said...err...wrote...errr...typed "unsupported")...however...the 845G is more than capable of running ram at pc2700 speeds...its just a matter of changing the memory ratio in the BIOS....so...tom isnt really wrong....and niether is intel...
I'm in exactly the same position as the original poster... I have a P3 1ghz and am about to upgrade to a P4 2.26 533. In reading documentation on mobo manufacturer sites (looked at Asus, MSI, Gigabyte, etc.), I only saw DDR 333/2700 mentioned twice. Once, on a forum where the official response was that the motherboard will "recognize" the DDR 333 and another time it was actually mentioned deep in the tech specs on the mobo.
Anyway, how easy/tough is going to be to change settings on the 845G mobo to accomodate DDR 333? Also, would DDR 3000 (as opposed to 2700) be worth it or just overkill on a 845G board?
The problem is if you look through the article is never says, Unsupported, unofficial, bios mod or anything of the sort. He says "supports". The author doesn't specify what you are stating by "unofficial."
Cause once again the question is, if all is required is the bios changes/settings, then what makes the 845G and different from the 845E in regards to the memory (yes I know about the integrated graphics, etc., I am only dealing with the memory issues).
See the problem. If 845E and G are so much alike, but one supposedly can support DDR 333, then in that article it is saying, it is better to get the G chipset cause of DDR333 "SUPPORT" over the E until Intel includes it (that is in the last few paragraphs of the review.
So that still remains a problem that needs to be answered or corrected as it is incorrectly presented.
Plus if it was a bios/jumper setting, it would have stated. Right now I want to use DDR333 but if it is not truly supported or requires altering the bios in any way that can be classified as "overclocking" then that article is invalid.
So I stand by original assertion, that article either needs to be corrected or justification for such statements presented.
Trust me I am not trying to be stubborn, just asking for a clear response.
I went to Sharky Extreme and if you read their article, there is a MAJOR difference in wording that is at the other end of the spectrum, and I think is more forthright with proper answers. Here is the clip I wanted you to read and then compare.
From Sharky Extreme, Page 2:
"But like i845E, the i845G does not fully utilize a 333 MHz memory bus, and instead includes support for PC133, DDR200 and DDR266.
Although we have seen a few DDR333 benchmarks for the i845G, for now at least, we are sticking with the DDR200/266 i845G specifications that Intel has provided us. We also read some of the manufacturer specs for upcoming i845G motherboards and DDR266 was the fastest option listed. This has all the markings of an unofficial or undocumented feature that may be brought out later or enabled through an overclocking feature of particular motherboards. So if you require PC2700 with your i845G, please check the manufacturer's specs before ordering." The link to read the whole article of course, http://www.sharkyextreme.com/hardware/motherboards/arti...
Now if you go read the article on Tom's site for Attack of the clones 845E and 845G, you will see the wording is vastly different.
Tom doesn't say, unsupported, undocumentated, it states the 845G is better cause it "supports" DDR333. That is the bone or issue of contention. Is that another sites states the DDR333 support is not official or official spec, yet Tom's article states it is supported.
So don't take my comments the wrong way, and I appreciate your help. This is not me being stubborn but striving for the truth and desire that sites correct any misstatements that can lead the consumer astray or force them to have to double or triple check info since past info is not reliable or correct.