Printable View
ok .. to match the bandwidth needed for these chips. you need DCDDR.. but will single channel work too? or do you need two ram sticks just like how you needed for the RDRAM? because i plan on getting the best ran i can get now (one stick of 256mb) and when i get enough money get another stick of 256mb..
will that work?
I think all canterwood boards are dual ddr only. Could be wrong though. Although I hope not since that's why I cancelled my order for a 2.4c
so basically i cant used single channel DDR ram? plz be wrong about that..
My friend says get the 2.4GHz running 133fsb because you have more headroom to overclock. also he said running ram async will decrease stability and performance. Colossus disagrees, but he loses lots of performance running async. Could explain, Colossus why your score didnt really go up. dude you went from 198fsb with your old cpu to 292 with your new one(did you use more than 1.6v) and yet the only performance increases you get is cause of HT which helps you multitask but your game fps didnt go up
well the main reason i'm getting the p4.. is the HT.. HT seems to increase preformance by alot.. and why the 2.4ghz B version? dude the 2.4C version can go well over 3ghz on defual voltage.. all you need is good ram and you can hit well over 3ghz easy.. maybe get some PC3700 ram and that would give you well over a 1ghz worth of FSB.. which is amazing.. show me a 2.4B version processor that can do 3.5ghz on 1.7vcore...
and running at Async doesn't decrease your stability.. why would it? but it would decrease your preformance because your limited to your ram bandwidth.. but stability? explain why that would decrease your stability??
thats what my friend said, he says do not run async! well youd lose more performance than you think. Yea get the best ram you can, maybe youll be able to run 220-230fsb in sync for the ram. Dont worry about clock speed, go for the HT
Canterwood and Springdale can work in a DDR or DCDDR configuration ;)
You dont need the two sticks of ram, but it does help.
dual channel decreases your overclock. a 512mb single channel is nice though
Wrong again TB1Ghz... Its not like that with the new boards!
Old ones yet.. The Single Channel DDR didnt like two sticks of memory and wouldnt overclock as high... But DCDDR went to 292 and SCDDR went to 292 :)
what voltage is your cpu at? you told me that mobo was limited to 1.6 and you couldnt get past 275fsb with ht enabled........
Old news :)
1.60v @ 292FSB :)
thunderbird. tell your friend he is wrong on most counts.
if you would read Zroc's review (posted at many places) you would see, the hit going from 1:1 down to 5:4 is around 2%. not much of a hit, and you can oc like mad from there. basically a 300 fsb would only require mem speed of 240.
the fact he said stability would be lessened by going asynch kills his credibility.
sharkypinoy, as Colossus has said, you can run these boards in single channel, but performance would kinda sucked. it would suffice till you can afford a new stick of ram.
grrr, if i weren't tied up with these damn shuttles (building 5 for a friend) as well as 4 other various machines, i prolly would have already broken down and bought a ic7-g. but i am holding out for the epox version, as i am an epox fanboy.
: I can copy and paste your im
: wow
: I want to tell him that running async kills performance and reduces stability
: he thinks you are an idiot
: who?
: that guy running async
: ..what guy running async?
: the p4 owner
: goes by the name of Colossus
: let him be then
: would he be better running a lower fsb and ram in sync
: no
: he wouldent
: its a totally different deal on a p4
: what about stability loss
: ..
: if your ram and nb/cpu are stable
: maybe that only applies for amd platforms
: what stability loss would you have?
: basicaly
: on a intel platform
: you run your ram as fast as you can
: and your fsb as fast as you can
: async or sync
: doesnt matter
: and on amd you want to always run sync
: on a amd, it does
: another thing, I told him whyd he need to upgrade, he had a 2.4b that did 198fsb for 3.58GHz
: and he spent like $500 for a 2.4c at 292fsb for 3.5GHz and his performance didnt go up either
: I thought such a high fsb should have helped
: it does
: then hes doing something wrong if his 3dmark score didnt increase
: maybe
: its all about running the ram at like 500mhz+
: basically his HT is all thats helping him
: heh
: so his ram is holding him back
: nfi
: I'm not really a p4 specialist
: but the 875 rigs I have seen
: I would have sold that rig and went back to his old rig
: have all been at 3.6+
: and have gained tons from going to 1ghz+ fsb
: he had big trouble getting to 2.5GHz
: all for no gains
: err 3.5GHz
: and I think he sold his champ 2.4b that did 3.58
: meh
: he's fukt something up or something
: nfi
: that was supprising, not many people sell overclocking champs
: those that do charge big time
: like, he should get quite a good performance increase from going to that much higher fsb
: like that one guy who wanted $100 for an xp1700+ that did 2GHz
: he should be at 22k marks
: uhh
: heh
: :x
: nearly +100 fsb should give him another 2k marks
: ...
: I got +500 marks per +33fsb
: so what
: thats a totally different platform
: a totally different chip
: inferior to amd?
: and a totally different nb
: they dont work anything close to the same
: I cant understand why people are so quick to defend Intel
: amd is far more efficient MHz per MHz and alot cheaper too
: they give an excuse like "amd is unable to get 3GHz so they use BS optimizations"
: if the p4 was just a little bit better of a proc
: I would be jumping on the canterwood bandwagon right now
: totally
: intel's chipsets are ****ing strong
: they also say amd had to join IBM to get .13 microns while Intels going to use .09
: uhh, ok..
: good for them
: is amd gonna get .09 too
: they will need it
: yeah at some point
: not in the immediate future though
: Intel idiots say amd is gonna be regulated to low end like they were before the famous athlons
: dude they are at like 1.8ghz with their flagship chip
: they dont NEED .09
: cause they are running out of optimizations
: amd is using 1mb cache now cause thats all they can do now]
: yeah it seems like they are running out of ideas
: they need to do some redesigning
: still
: find a way to get higher clock speeds
: if they can get the clocks on the hammer up to 2.5
: 2.5+
: they will be w00ping
: the early hammers couldnt get past 1.6GHz
: yet their 1.6GHz hammers matched a 3GHz p4
: so AMD has it good if and if they ramp clock speeds quickly
: yep
: .09 microns is their only bet though
: with the onchip mem controllers, they should be getting some sweet bandwidth once the fsbs hit 200
: .13 is old now
: ..
: no its not
: not for the clockspeeds they are aiming for
: would they get any respectable yields
: also they get damn hot
: unless amd can get em to run on like 1.2 volts
: naah they will take decent cooling
: and at 1.8, their yeilds are pretty shitty I would bet
: that would be my primary guess as to why they arent doing 2+
: as they perfect the process and the core, it'll get better, and they will get faster though
: they havent much time left
: already people are speculating via will buy out amd or amd will merge with IBM
: pff
: people speculate
: maybe amd does need to merge
: amd arent going anywhere for awhile
: then they will become powerful
: they have a really strong line of cheap procs
: amd needs high end too
: and a oncoming line of expensive strong procs
: they are high end..
: now they do but what when Intel releases their .09 prescott
: the average user is what makes or breaks amd/intel
: not the high end
: people are saying the presotts will kick butt so bad
: the high end ends up meaning zip
: so amd could just give up high end
: the average user wants a 1700+ MAX
: and make good midrange
: ..no
: amd needs to compete for the high end
: high end is wasting amd's money
: but they turn out very good, strong, cheap low end/mid range procs too
: why high end is such a small part
my god dude...I think that's why it's not allowed to post convos in these forums...
And where did Colossus say that your friend was an idiot? He didn't...and he didn't spend $500 on a 2.4c, only the 3.0c's are around $500
why am I even responding to this...waste of time.
the ram, cpu and mobo combo for $500, not just the cpu, it was a part of the "upgrade" and I didnt say colossus called him an idiot, but some of you implied it