|
Home > Archive > alt.certification.a-plus > February 2004 > DDR vs. SD RAM
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
|
|
| natural_4u 2004-02-24, 12:24 am |
| Just on anyone's opinion, would you rather have 1 GB of SDRAM PC 133 or
512MB of DDRAM PC266
with a Pentium 4 2.4 b GHZ
Thanks in advance for your opinions!!!
| |
| David BlandIII 2004-02-24, 3:24 am |
| It all depended upon whether I was going for speed or needed the most
memory.
--
David Bland
"natural_4u" <ask@me.com> wrote in message
news:fdA_b.591110$JQ1.186211@pd7tw1no...
> Just on anyone's opinion, would you rather have 1 GB of SDRAM PC 133 or
> 512MB of DDRAM PC266
>
> with a Pentium 4 2.4 b GHZ
>
>
> Thanks in advance for your opinions!!!
>
>
| |
| Doug Scott 2004-02-24, 4:24 am |
| Natural_4u,
> Just on anyone's opinion, would you rather have 1 GB of SDRAM PC 133 or
> 512MB of DDRAM PC266
Personally, I'd always go for extra RAM. As soon as you start loading the
system, it starts paging, and once it does that you're constrained by the
speed of the disk - a 5% reduction in accessing RAM is nothing compared
to the extra thousands of percent taken to access the copy on disk, bring
it in, and start executing it.
---
Doug
dwscott@ieee.org
| |
|
|
| Barry Watzman 2004-02-24, 12:25 pm |
| You do not want SDRAM with any Pentium 4 under any circumstances. It
will cost you the equivalent of about 25% of the CPU speed (e.g. your
2.4 GHz will perform more like 1.8 GHz).
You either want DDR or RDRAM (Rambus; no longer being sold for new
desktop systems, but still used in some older motherboards and also in
some networking systems).
Also, in most cases, any one motherboard will take one and only one type
of memory, for any given system, it's usually not a choice (there were a
FEW systems that could take both SDRAM and early DDR, however).
natural_4u wrote:
> Just on anyone's opinion, would you rather have 1 GB of SDRAM PC 133 or
> 512MB of DDRAM PC266
>
> with a Pentium 4 2.4 b GHZ
>
>
> Thanks in advance for your opinions!!!
>
>
| |
| Creative Door 2004-02-24, 1:24 pm |
| Yes, i had one of those early systems that could handle both sd and ddr, i
started out with sd, and upgraded to ddr eventually, i wasn't expecting any
huge difference, but to my surprise the system sure ran a lot faster after
the switch. I would definately recommend the DDR, 512 megs is good for most
stuff, unless your running some memory intensive software, go with the ddr
"natural_4u" <ask@me.com> wrote in message
news:fdA_b.591110$JQ1.186211@pd7tw1no...
> Just on anyone's opinion, would you rather have 1 GB of SDRAM PC 133 or
> 512MB of DDRAM PC266
>
> with a Pentium 4 2.4 b GHZ
>
>
> Thanks in advance for your opinions!!!
>
>
| |
|
|
"Barry Watzman" <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote in message
news:403B8325.1040307@neo.rr.com...
> You do not want SDRAM with any Pentium 4 under any circumstances. It
> will cost you the equivalent of about 25% of the CPU speed (e.g. your
> 2.4 GHz will perform more like 1.8 GHz).
>
> You either want DDR or RDRAM (Rambus; no longer being sold for new
> desktop systems, but still used in some older motherboards and also in
> some networking systems).
>
> Also, in most cases, any one motherboard will take one and only one type
> of memory, for any given system, it's usually not a choice (there were a
> FEW systems that could take both SDRAM and early DDR, however).
Actually I have a board that takes both SDRAM and DDR. You can use only one
at a time. I bought it because at the time I didn't have enough money for
new RAM and still wanted to upgrade later.
I don't remember what model I used. I've since broken the AGP slot on that
board and gotten another but the link below is to a page that describes one
that does take both.
http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProdu...talog=22&depa=1
Personally I'd recommend the DDR because it runs so much faster.
AG
| |
| Tom MacIntyre 2004-02-24, 3:24 pm |
| On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 07:51:38 GMT, "David BlandIII" <dbland5@msn.com>
wrote:
>It all depended upon whether I was going for speed or needed the most
>memory.
I have rather limited needs myself as far as RAM goes. I am trying to
imagine a (home) scenario where 512 M was not enough. I suspect that
they must exist, but can anyone outline a specific scenario where the
HDD is being paged when there is 512M of physical RAM, in other words,
a scenario where 512M of physical RAM is insufficient to support the
OS and running software (other than a server)? Thanks.
Tom
| |
| David BlandIII 2004-02-24, 4:24 pm |
| Tom,
I have 512MB DDR installed in my PC and I frequently run into RAM problems.
I sometimes keep my MBD's memory utility running so I can look at the RAM
allocation dynamically and on many occasions I run into the "swap meet"
blues.
It all depends upon how many and what kinds of applications you run
concurrently.
I can easily get bogged down when opening several pages of my net browser
while running my Music Match program and a multimedia app or two in the
back-
ground. Another problem that I frequently get that prompts me to plan to up
my
RAM to 1 GB is that I seem to have more than one problem with applications
that fail to release their memory upon termination. Thus after closing one
such app
and launching another my system quickly turns into a vat of molasses. The
extra
memory will keep me from having to reboot as often.
Lastly running concurrent programs that deal with video playback or
streaming,
image manipulation and or music will bring 512MB RAM to its knees very
quickly.
So it all depends on you usage habits. Just my two cents worth.
--
David Bland
"Tom MacIntyre" <tom__macintyre@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1e8n30tgra6ihoq73ndlac9l1
501lp33j1@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 07:51:38 GMT, "David BlandIII" <dbland5@msn.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> I have rather limited needs myself as far as RAM goes. I am trying to
> imagine a (home) scenario where 512 M was not enough. I suspect that
> they must exist, but can anyone outline a specific scenario where the
> HDD is being paged when there is 512M of physical RAM, in other words,
> a scenario where 512M of physical RAM is insufficient to support the
> OS and running software (other than a server)? Thanks.
>
> Tom
| |
| natural_4u 2004-02-24, 7:24 pm |
| From what I've read, there is a lot of opinions on using both, meaning... it
couldn't hurt with either opinions. I currently have 1 GB of SDRAM PC 133,
so I'm gonna stick with this for now and when I have enough money to spare,
I will upgrade to 1GB of DDR.
Also, I do watch a lot of video and play a lot of music and have a TV
tuner... so I guess the extra RAM will will come in handy.
"natural_4u" <ask@me.com> wrote in message
news:fdA_b.591110$JQ1.186211@pd7tw1no...
> Just on anyone's opinion, would you rather have 1 GB of SDRAM PC 133 or
> 512MB of DDRAM PC266
>
> with a Pentium 4 2.4 b GHZ
>
>
> Thanks in advance for your opinions!!!
>
>
| |
|
| Tom - Using Photoshop with big files does it every time. Most of my clients
who do ad work using Photoshop like to run a Gig - more is possible.
David - MusicMatch I stay away from - tends to hog memory and not release it
cleanly (I think perhaps a combination issue, but only happened for me with
MM).
I have also noticed that some other MultiMedia apps are chronic for that
exact same issue too.
| |
|
| Hey dood
You will find that 512 of DDR will totally cream 1 Gb of SD. However since
it appears that you have one of the earlier MotherBoards I am not certain if
you would get the full benefit of DDR, but the increase from 133 to 266
would certainly not go astray.
| |
| Barry Watzman 2004-02-25, 2:24 pm |
| DDR memory is not particularly stable. The timing and noise margins are
poor, and reliability decreases significantly if there are multiple
modules installed. The BIOS on many motherboards actually slows down
the memory timing (automatically) to regain reliability when multiple
modules are used. RDRAM (Rambus) was (is) a FAR better memory type, but
unfortunately, for political reasons and due to collusion among memory
makers, it did not become the prevailing desktop memory type.
Almost all of the negative views of Rambus (both the company and the
memory) were lies spread by it's opponents. If you want to begin to
really understand what happened, the opinion by the judge in the FTC
case, just released yesterday, is fascinating reading. It can be found
on the FTC web site:
http://www.ftc.gov/os/adjpro/d9302/...ialdecision.pdf
This document is not for the timid, it's a single-spaced, 340 page, 19
megabyte file that covers the whole ungodly mess in excruciating detail
(but it's VERY well written). It's the result of a 3-year investigation
and trial that ended up being the longest administrative law case in
FTC history. The parties’ post trial briefs totaled 443 pages, there
were 4,879 proposed findings of fact, 11,806 pages of transcript and
2,200 admitted exhibits. Again, if you have a negative opinion of
Rambus (either the company OR the memory), almost everything that you
think that you knew was a lie.
David BlandIII wrote:
> Tom,
>
> I have 512MB DDR installed in my PC and I frequently run into RAM problems.
> I sometimes keep my MBD's memory utility running so I can look at the RAM
> allocation dynamically and on many occasions I run into the "swap meet"
> blues.
>
> It all depends upon how many and what kinds of applications you run
> concurrently.
> I can easily get bogged down when opening several pages of my net browser
> while running my Music Match program and a multimedia app or two in the
> back-
> ground. Another problem that I frequently get that prompts me to plan to up
> my
> RAM to 1 GB is that I seem to have more than one problem with applications
> that fail to release their memory upon termination. Thus after closing one
> such app
> and launching another my system quickly turns into a vat of molasses. The
> extra
> memory will keep me from having to reboot as often.
>
> Lastly running concurrent programs that deal with video playback or
> streaming,
> image manipulation and or music will bring 512MB RAM to its knees very
> quickly.
> So it all depends on you usage habits. Just my two cents worth.
>
| |
| Tom MacIntyre 2004-02-25, 5:24 pm |
| On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 20:07:24 GMT, "David BlandIII" <dbland5@msn.com>
wrote:
>Tom,
>
>I have 512MB DDR installed in my PC and I frequently run into RAM problems.
>I sometimes keep my MBD's memory utility running so I can look at the RAM
>allocation dynamically and on many occasions I run into the "swap meet"
>blues.
>
>It all depends upon how many and what kinds of applications you run
>concurrently.
>I can easily get bogged down when opening several pages of my net browser
>while running my Music Match program and a multimedia app or two in the
>back-
>ground. Another problem that I frequently get that prompts me to plan to up
>my
>RAM to 1 GB is that I seem to have more than one problem with applications
>that fail to release their memory upon termination. Thus after closing one
>such app
>and launching another my system quickly turns into a vat of molasses. The
>extra
>memory will keep me from having to reboot as often.
>
>Lastly running concurrent programs that deal with video playback or
>streaming,
>image manipulation and or music will bring 512MB RAM to its knees very
>quickly.
>So it all depends on you usage habits. Just my two cents worth.
What OS? Is it RAM problems, or resource problems?
I only have 160M of RAM running W2k, and I have about 60M free with 13
applications running (Office stuff, several browsers, a few small
games).
Tom
| |
| David BlandIII 2004-02-25, 6:24 pm |
| Barry,
I haven't had the chance to study up on RAM as in depth as I'd like, but do
you think
that is the problem with being able to add much more than 1GB of DDR to a
system?
I'm getting kind of tired of seeing MB companies pitch the fact that their
motherboards
can use up to 3 or 4 GB of RAM only to find out time and time again from the
memory
mfgs that sticks of 1GB or larger are unstable or can't be utilized in
Dual-channel mode
or aren't recommended at all for more than 2 sticks, etc. Damn it, I want by
2 Gigs;
and I want it in two sticks so I can up it to 3 or 4 if I want! :-)
--
David Bland
"Barry Watzman" <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote in message
news:403CEA40.7090805@neo.rr.com...
> DDR memory is not particularly stable. The timing and noise margins are
> poor, and reliability decreases significantly if there are multiple
> modules installed. The BIOS on many motherboards actually slows down
> the memory timing (automatically) to regain reliability when multiple
> modules are used. RDRAM (Rambus) was (is) a FAR better memory type, but
> unfortunately, for political reasons and due to collusion among memory
> makers, it did not become the prevailing desktop memory type.
>
> Almost all of the negative views of Rambus (both the company and the
> memory) were lies spread by it's opponents. If you want to begin to
> really understand what happened, the opinion by the judge in the FTC
> case, just released yesterday, is fascinating reading. It can be found
> on the FTC web site:
>
> http://www.ftc.gov/os/adjpro/d9302/...ialdecision.pdf
>
> This document is not for the timid, it's a single-spaced, 340 page, 19
> megabyte file that covers the whole ungodly mess in excruciating detail
> (but it's VERY well written). It's the result of a 3-year investigation
> and trial that ended up being the longest administrative law case in
> FTC history. The parties’ post trial briefs totaled 443 pages, there
> were 4,879 proposed findings of fact, 11,806 pages of transcript and
> 2,200 admitted exhibits. Again, if you have a negative opinion of
> Rambus (either the company OR the memory), almost everything that you
> think that you knew was a lie.
>
>
> David BlandIII wrote:
>
problems.[color=blue]
RAM[color=blue]
browser[color=blue]
up[color=blue]
applications[color=blue]
one[color=blue]
The[color=blue]
>
| |
| David BlandIII 2004-02-25, 6:24 pm |
| It's both. While you can't get around the old resource issue you can
alleviate the
swap meet issue with more RAM. Like I said, I frequently watch as my RAM
reaches it's limit on the ol' RAM-o-meter!
--
David Bland
"Tom MacIntyre" <tom__macintyre@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:0l3q305natnl0crbfq878r3vg
2bfdcpcls@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 20:07:24 GMT, "David BlandIII" <dbland5@msn.com>
> wrote:
>
problems.[color=blue]
up[color=blue]
applications[color=blue]
one[color=blue]
>
> What OS? Is it RAM problems, or resource problems?
>
> I only have 160M of RAM running W2k, and I have about 60M free with 13
> applications running (Office stuff, several browsers, a few small
> games).
> Tom
| |
| Barry Watzman 2004-02-25, 11:24 pm |
| At some level, you are correct. The stability of DDR decreases
significantly as modules are added; and to a much lesser degree, it also
decreases on a single module as the module has more and more chips on it
(which is required for larger module sizes). The issues are noise on
the memory bus, crosstalk, jitter (or timing stability) and
"transmission line" type problems. It's quite possible you can't, in
practice, actually reach the "theoretical maximum" memory configuration.
The particular brand of memory module also becomes a factor, you may
find brands or combinations of brands that work, and others that don't
work. Getting to 1 gig is easy, but getting to two gigs is more
difficult. RDRAM, which uses a terminated, impedance controlled serial
bus, is MUCH more stable than DDR, but it's more expensive, and none of
the RDRAM systems will support an 800 MHz FSB CPU as there is no RDRAM
chipset currently made with such support.
My suggestion would be an Asus P4C800-E Deluxe with 4 DDR 3200 modules
of 512 megs each (probably the best way to go), or for RDRAM an Asus
P4T533-C with four 512 meg PC1066 RDRAM modules.
David BlandIII wrote:
> Barry,
>
> I haven't had the chance to study up on RAM as in depth as I'd like, but do
> you think
> that is the problem with being able to add much more than 1GB of DDR to a
> system?
> I'm getting kind of tired of seeing MB companies pitch the fact that their
> motherboards
> can use up to 3 or 4 GB of RAM only to find out time and time again from the
> memory
> mfgs that sticks of 1GB or larger are unstable or can't be utilized in
> Dual-channel mode
> or aren't recommended at all for more than 2 sticks, etc. Damn it, I want by
> 2 Gigs;
> and I want it in two sticks so I can up it to 3 or 4 if I want! :-)
>
| |
| David BlandIII 2004-02-26, 2:24 am |
| Barry,
You must be psychic because that's precisely the MB/memory combination I was
looking at. Unfortunately after talking to the tech at ASUS he said that the
P4C800E
hadn't been certified for more than two sticks of even their 512MB PC3200
RAM.
And even with that memory, it wasn't recommended for use in dual channel
mode;
I think.
On the bright side, the tech at Mushkin did say that their new dual pack of
level II
DDR400 memory (#103-956) (512MB sticks) would work with the P4C800E in
dual channel mode but then I still couldn't get past 2 Gigs. Those dual
packs also
cost $340 a pop ($680 for 2GB RAM and I still can't get more than the 2 Gigs
:-)
Do you know of any high-end Mobos that use RDRAM??
--
David Bland
"Barry Watzman" <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote in message
news:403D6F93.1010901@neo.rr.com...
> At some level, you are correct. The stability of DDR decreases
> significantly as modules are added; and to a much lesser degree, it also
> decreases on a single module as the module has more and more chips on it
> (which is required for larger module sizes). The issues are noise on
> the memory bus, crosstalk, jitter (or timing stability) and
> "transmission line" type problems. It's quite possible you can't, in
> practice, actually reach the "theoretical maximum" memory configuration.
> The particular brand of memory module also becomes a factor, you may
> find brands or combinations of brands that work, and others that don't
> work. Getting to 1 gig is easy, but getting to two gigs is more
> difficult. RDRAM, which uses a terminated, impedance controlled serial
> bus, is MUCH more stable than DDR, but it's more expensive, and none of
> the RDRAM systems will support an 800 MHz FSB CPU as there is no RDRAM
> chipset currently made with such support.
>
> My suggestion would be an Asus P4C800-E Deluxe with 4 DDR 3200 modules
> of 512 megs each (probably the best way to go), or for RDRAM an Asus
> P4T533-C with four 512 meg PC1066 RDRAM modules.
>
>
> David BlandIII wrote:
do[color=blue]
a[color=blue]
their[color=blue]
the[color=blue]
want by[color=blue]
>
| |
| SBFan2000 2004-02-26, 4:24 am |
| I don't know if you would consider it high-end since it is over 1 year old
but I used a Gigabyte P4Titan533 (can't remember exact model #) with PC1066
ECC RDRAM and the thing has been solid as a rock. I did this back in March
2003 so I'm sure they have more advanced models but I'm still very happy
with this system! Asus lied to me, twice about a Athlon thunderbird board
and that left a bad impression on me. I specifically went to Gigabyte for
that reason. I don't trust anything asus says anymore!
"David BlandIII" <dbland5@msn.com> wrote in message
news:5Eg%b.8261$921.5108@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
> Barry,
>
> You must be psychic because that's precisely the MB/memory combination I
was
> looking at. Unfortunately after talking to the tech at ASUS he said that
the
> P4C800E
> hadn't been certified for more than two sticks of even their 512MB PC3200
> RAM.
> And even with that memory, it wasn't recommended for use in dual channel
> mode;
> I think.
>
> On the bright side, the tech at Mushkin did say that their new dual pack
of
> level II
> DDR400 memory (#103-956) (512MB sticks) would work with the P4C800E in
> dual channel mode but then I still couldn't get past 2 Gigs. Those dual
> packs also
> cost $340 a pop ($680 for 2GB RAM and I still can't get more than the 2
Gigs
> :-)
>
> Do you know of any high-end Mobos that use RDRAM??
>
> --
> David Bland
>
> "Barry Watzman" <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:403D6F93.1010901@neo.rr.com...
but[color=blue]
> do
to[color=blue]
> a
> their
from[color=blue]
> the
> want by
>
>
| |
| Barry Watzman 2004-02-26, 1:24 pm |
| If you wanted to go with RDRAM, the best choice would be an Asus
P4T533-C. It's a totally solid motherboard, but I don't believe that
it's still in new production. But you can find lots of them on E-Bay,
they usually go for about $50 to $70 (you can probably find some "new"
ones in stock somewhere for about twice that much).
The big drawback is that it doesn't support any 800 MHz FSB CPUs; the
best CPU for this is the 3.06 GHz 533 MHz bus P4, which does have
hyperthreading. The board also has USB 2, as well as onboard audio and
LAN (these can be disabled if desired). You will need four 512 meg
PC1066 184-pin 16-bit RDRAM modules, which will be very expensive. But
it will get you to 2 gigs reliably.
David BlandIII wrote:
> Barry,
>
> You must be psychic because that's precisely the MB/memory combination I was
> looking at. Unfortunately after talking to the tech at ASUS he said that the
> P4C800E
> hadn't been certified for more than two sticks of even their 512MB PC3200
> RAM.
> And even with that memory, it wasn't recommended for use in dual channel
> mode;
> I think.
>
> On the bright side, the tech at Mushkin did say that their new dual pack of
> level II
> DDR400 memory (#103-956) (512MB sticks) would work with the P4C800E in
> dual channel mode but then I still couldn't get past 2 Gigs. Those dual
> packs also
> cost $340 a pop ($680 for 2GB RAM and I still can't get more than the 2 Gigs
> :-)
>
> Do you know of any high-end Mobos that use RDRAM??
>
| |
| Barry Watzman 2004-02-26, 1:24 pm |
| I believe that you are referring to the Gigabyte GA8-IHXP (or was it
IXHP -- something like that). It was the other leading high-end
motherboard using 16-bit RDRAM. Gigabyte used the 850e chipset with the
ICH4 controller hub on that board, a combination that Intel did not
recommend or support, because there is a slight voltage mis-match
between the I/O lines of the two chips. SOME users reported a variety
of odd probems with that board, many of them involving the serial ports,
and consequently I never recommended it.
Actually my favorite motherboard of all time -- the one I still prefer
to use in new builds even today -- is the Asus P4T533 (no suffix, it's
totally different from the P4T533-C). This was Asus last RDRAM
motherboard and it uses 32 bit RDRAM (RIMM4200 with 232-pin sockets)
rather than the far more common 16-bit RDRAM (184-pin sockets). It is
truly a wonderful motherboard, and I have 5 of them here. However,
there are two "gotchas" with this board: First, some of the early ones
have a problem in the CPU Vcore power supply and are unstable (this
problem was fixed in later production and you can RMA the early boards
to Asus for rework). Second, it only has two memory sockets, and as far
as I know one gig is the upper memory limit, which rules it out for this
thread since the whole thread was about getting to 2 gigs reliably.
SBFan2000 wrote:
> I don't know if you would consider it high-end since it is over 1 year old
> but I used a Gigabyte P4Titan533 (can't remember exact model #) with PC1066
> ECC RDRAM and the thing has been solid as a rock. I did this back in March
> 2003 so I'm sure they have more advanced models but I'm still very happy
> with this system! Asus lied to me, twice about a Athlon thunderbird board
> and that left a bad impression on me. I specifically went to Gigabyte for
> that reason. I don't trust anything asus says anymore!
>
> "David BlandIII" <dbland5@msn.com> wrote in message
> news:5Eg%b.8261$921.5108@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
>
>
> was
>
>
> the
>
>
> of
>
>
> Gigs
>
>
> but
>
>
> to
>
>
> from
>
>
>
| |
| David BlandIII 2004-02-26, 4:24 pm |
| What kind of work do you do Barry? You seem to be up on your tech specs a
bunch.
--
David Bland
"Barry Watzman" <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote in message
news tq%b.34993$6t5.830@fe3.columbus.rr.com...
> I believe that you are referring to the Gigabyte GA8-IHXP (or was it
> IXHP -- something like that). It was the other leading high-end
> motherboard using 16-bit RDRAM. Gigabyte used the 850e chipset with the
> ICH4 controller hub on that board, a combination that Intel did not
> recommend or support, because there is a slight voltage mis-match
> between the I/O lines of the two chips. SOME users reported a variety
> of odd probems with that board, many of them involving the serial ports,
> and consequently I never recommended it.
>
> Actually my favorite motherboard of all time -- the one I still prefer
> to use in new builds even today -- is the Asus P4T533 (no suffix, it's
> totally different from the P4T533-C). This was Asus last RDRAM
> motherboard and it uses 32 bit RDRAM (RIMM4200 with 232-pin sockets)
> rather than the far more common 16-bit RDRAM (184-pin sockets). It is
> truly a wonderful motherboard, and I have 5 of them here. However,
> there are two "gotchas" with this board: First, some of the early ones
> have a problem in the CPU Vcore power supply and are unstable (this
> problem was fixed in later production and you can RMA the early boards
> to Asus for rework). Second, it only has two memory sockets, and as far
> as I know one gig is the upper memory limit, which rules it out for this
> thread since the whole thread was about getting to 2 gigs reliably.
>
>
> SBFan2000 wrote:
>
old[color=blue]
PC1066[color=blue]
March[color=blue]
board[color=blue]
for[color=blue]
PC3200[color=blue]
also[color=blue]
it[color=blue]
configuration.[color=blue]
>
| |
| David BlandIII 2004-02-26, 4:24 pm |
| Thanks for the advice. I'll go an check it out now. I always did like those
Gigabyte boards.
--
David Bland
"Barry Watzman" <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote in message
news:403E320A.7020107@neo.rr.com...
> If you wanted to go with RDRAM, the best choice would be an Asus
> P4T533-C. It's a totally solid motherboard, but I don't believe that
> it's still in new production. But you can find lots of them on E-Bay,
> they usually go for about $50 to $70 (you can probably find some "new"
> ones in stock somewhere for about twice that much).
>
> The big drawback is that it doesn't support any 800 MHz FSB CPUs; the
> best CPU for this is the 3.06 GHz 533 MHz bus P4, which does have
> hyperthreading. The board also has USB 2, as well as onboard audio and
> LAN (these can be disabled if desired). You will need four 512 meg
> PC1066 184-pin 16-bit RDRAM modules, which will be very expensive. But
> it will get you to 2 gigs reliably.
>
>
> David BlandIII wrote:
was[color=blue]
the[color=blue]
PC3200[color=blue]
of[color=blue]
Gigs[color=blue]
>
| |
| David BlandIII 2004-02-26, 4:24 pm |
| LOL, I meant ASUS. What would Freud say about that?
--
David Bland
"Barry Watzman" <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote in message
news:403E320A.7020107@neo.rr.com...
> If you wanted to go with RDRAM, the best choice would be an Asus
> P4T533-C. It's a totally solid motherboard, but I don't believe that
> it's still in new production. But you can find lots of them on E-Bay,
> they usually go for about $50 to $70 (you can probably find some "new"
> ones in stock somewhere for about twice that much).
>
> The big drawback is that it doesn't support any 800 MHz FSB CPUs; the
> best CPU for this is the 3.06 GHz 533 MHz bus P4, which does have
> hyperthreading. The board also has USB 2, as well as onboard audio and
> LAN (these can be disabled if desired). You will need four 512 meg
> PC1066 184-pin 16-bit RDRAM modules, which will be very expensive. But
> it will get you to 2 gigs reliably.
>
>
> David BlandIII wrote:
was[color=blue]
the[color=blue]
PC3200[color=blue]
of[color=blue]
Gigs[color=blue]
>
| |
| SBFan2000 2004-02-26, 4:24 pm |
| say what you will I the love it! :-) I use all the ports, 2 serial,
parralel, both usb, and lan, never had any problems. Also use 4 added USB
2.0 ports. I've never had it freeze or anything. I only have to restart it
after playing a few older games that I suspect aren't releasing memory
correctly! (Gets slow after exiting the games) Gets reset once in a blue
moon, I just love the thing!
Thankfully I am not one of those user that had problems.
"Barry Watzman" <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote in message
newstq%b.34993$6t5.830@fe3.columbus.rr.com...
> I believe that you are referring to the Gigabyte GA8-IHXP (or was it
> IXHP -- something like that). It was the other leading high-end
> motherboard using 16-bit RDRAM. Gigabyte used the 850e chipset with the
> ICH4 controller hub on that board, a combination that Intel did not
> recommend or support, because there is a slight voltage mis-match
> between the I/O lines of the two chips. SOME users reported a variety
> of odd probems with that board, many of them involving the serial ports,
> and consequently I never recommended it.
>
> Actually my favorite motherboard of all time -- the one I still prefer
> to use in new builds even today -- is the Asus P4T533 (no suffix, it's
> totally different from the P4T533-C). This was Asus last RDRAM
> motherboard and it uses 32 bit RDRAM (RIMM4200 with 232-pin sockets)
> rather than the far more common 16-bit RDRAM (184-pin sockets). It is
> truly a wonderful motherboard, and I have 5 of them here. However,
> there are two "gotchas" with this board: First, some of the early ones
> have a problem in the CPU Vcore power supply and are unstable (this
> problem was fixed in later production and you can RMA the early boards
> to Asus for rework). Second, it only has two memory sockets, and as far
> as I know one gig is the upper memory limit, which rules it out for this
> thread since the whole thread was about getting to 2 gigs reliably.
>
>
> SBFan2000 wrote:
>
old[color=blue]
PC1066[color=blue]
March[color=blue]
board[color=blue]
for[color=blue]
PC3200[color=blue]
also[color=blue]
it[color=blue]
configuration.[color=blue]
>
| |
| David BlandIII 2004-02-26, 4:24 pm |
| I found some on PriceGrabber.com for $113 but Jesus H - $250 to $300 for
512MB
of RDRAM!!!!!! No wonder people are shouting conspiracy! :-)
--
David Bland
"Barry Watzman" <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote in message
news:403E320A.7020107@neo.rr.com...
> If you wanted to go with RDRAM, the best choice would be an Asus
> P4T533-C. It's a totally solid motherboard, but I don't believe that
> it's still in new production. But you can find lots of them on E-Bay,
> they usually go for about $50 to $70 (you can probably find some "new"
> ones in stock somewhere for about twice that much).
>
> The big drawback is that it doesn't support any 800 MHz FSB CPUs; the
> best CPU for this is the 3.06 GHz 533 MHz bus P4, which does have
> hyperthreading. The board also has USB 2, as well as onboard audio and
> LAN (these can be disabled if desired). You will need four 512 meg
> PC1066 184-pin 16-bit RDRAM modules, which will be very expensive. But
> it will get you to 2 gigs reliably.
>
>
> David BlandIII wrote:
was[color=blue]
the[color=blue]
PC3200[color=blue]
of[color=blue]
Gigs[color=blue]
>
| |
| Barry Watzman 2004-02-26, 8:24 pm |
| At the moment I'm unemployed.
I am an EE with an MBA, I've been a product manager for technology
products for several decades, including PCs with some of the major PC
makers. I have about a dozen patents and copyrights, and I'm A+ &
Network+ certified.
David BlandIII wrote:
> What kind of work do you do Barry? You seem to be up on your tech specs a
> bunch.
>
| |
| Barry Watzman 2004-02-26, 9:24 pm |
| RDRAM really is not that expensive in the smaller modules, I often get
pairs of PC1066 128's (256 megs total) for about $70 -- about $35 per
module. The best place to buy is on E-Bay. The problem is when you
want the large size modules. 256's are not too bad, but the 512 meg
modules are a killer. This is true to an extent with the faster grades
of DDR also, a friend just spent over $200 for two 512 meg DDR3200
modules. The only way to get lots of memory is to use large modules,
and the large modules get disproportionately expensive.
David BlandIII wrote:
> I found some on PriceGrabber.com for $113 but Jesus H - $250 to $300 for
> 512MB
> of RDRAM!!!!!! No wonder people are shouting conspiracy! :-)
>
| |
| David BlandIII 2004-02-26, 10:24 pm |
| So you're basically just winging it. :-)
--
David Bland
Now what chance do I stand to get a job?????? :-(
"Barry Watzman" <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote in message
news:403E9704.20503@neo.rr.com...
> At the moment I'm unemployed.
>
> I am an EE with an MBA, I've been a product manager for technology
> products for several decades, including PCs with some of the major PC
> makers. I have about a dozen patents and copyrights, and I'm A+ &
> Network+ certified.
>
>
> David BlandIII wrote:
a[color=blue]
>
|
|
|
|
|