Anyone else notice RIMM4200 take a drop?

**elimc** · 08-07-2002, 01:08 AM

CrawlingEye, do you have any proof that RIMM4200s don't OC well? This is contrary to what I would believe from my perspective which is based on physics.

**elimc** · 08-07-2002, 01:10 AM

BTW, has anyone heard how RIMM4200s are selling? Is there a big demand for this product?

**Thermo** · 08-07-2002, 01:56 AM

With only one aftermarket Mobo for it, the sales to enthusiasts have to be rather small. If Dell and Intel pick up on it, then it will be selling quite fast, I would think. There were a few rumors that some OEM’s were stocking up, but I haven’t heard anything about that lately. And with Rimm 4200 requiring a completely new design on the Mobo, it would be a while before OEM’s could tool up for a change over to it.

**XeeN** · 08-07-2002, 02:11 AM

If ya read on Newegg under the Rimm4200 sales, you can see that they say it only worked on the Asus P4T533, which is a good board, too, but I think it's funny.

It seems to roxor tho, the examples of guys I've seen have had their memory bandwidth up around 4000 (which the number 4200 is derived from, right?) so in itself it's great.

I've seen 1 example (haven't looked around for many examples) of a guy who got his 2.26 up to 3.011 with the Rim4200, and his ram was at 4x, I don't know RDRAM terms very well... what's that mean?

**elimc** · 08-07-2002, 02:24 AM

I've seen 1 example (haven't looked around for many examples) of a guy who got his 2.26 up to 3.011 with the Rim4200, and his ram was at 4x, I don't know RDRAM terms very well... what's that mean?

The 4x is the multiplyer. Check it out in your bios. By adjusting the multiplyer, you can increase or decrease your clock and mem speed no matter what type of RAM you have. Basically, all RAM runs off of a multiplyer.

,BTW, the oc you're mentioning is very good for RDRAM.

**CrawlingEye** · 08-07-2002, 03:18 AM

*eats crow*

**FaTs** · 08-07-2002, 03:24 AM

Originally posted by deeznuts

yes it is. but thats a workstation board. only dc ddr 200.

c'mon crawlingeye, you are the biggest dc ddr chearleader, and you haven't heard this yet?

oh, and rimm 4200 has been oc'ing like a champ. but the asus boards are very quirky, working sporadically on certain fsb. like not working from 133-150 fsb, but then working fine at 165. highest i have seen i think was around 4x165 or so. that is a very good oc crawlingeye.

Wasn't that nforce jobbie a DC setup ?

**CrawlingEye** · 08-07-2002, 03:47 AM

Originally posted by FaTs

Wasn't that nforce jobbie a DC setup ?

Yeah, but we're talking about P4 actual boards, not AXP integrated boards.

nHorse is just a half-assed attempt at DC DDR, which fell short.
Not to mention that the AXP's aren't as bandwidth hungry as the p4's.

**jamesavery22** · 08-07-2002, 09:56 AM

Originally posted by elimc
CrawlingEye, do you have any proof that RIMM4200s don't OC well? This is contrary to what I would believe from my perspective which is based on physics.

Physics? You measuring the speed of electrons or something?

Originally posted by CrawlingEye
Elaborate on "The E7500"?

Yeah its a workstation only board but its still out there =) well that might be a lie, I cant find any actual reviews. Well I might have but they are all in Japanese and I have no idea what benchmarking program they are using nor do I understand the characters that indicate whatever they are benchmarking

**elimc** · 08-08-2002, 12:01 AM

Physics? You measuring the speed of electrons or something?

RIMM 4200s get rid of some problems that DC solutions have. When you stick channels in parallel, you can end up having some major capacitative problems. This can dramatically increase latency on occasion.

It is also easier to impedance match RIMM4200s compared to PC1066, from what I understand.

Overall, RIMM4200s should oc higher. This goes in agreement to what I've heard that they oc quite easily to RIMM4800 which is a 600MHz FSB.

Here's info on the E7500:

http://www.intel.com/design/chipsets/e7500/

It's a huge board!

**Thermo** · 08-08-2002, 01:43 AM

The reason for the E7500 was ram quantities, not ram quality. When this chip was developed, Ddr was a lot less expensive than Rdram. This was a major concern because these systems deploy with several gigs of ram. Also, network servers don’t need extreme performance from the ram, but they do need a lot of it. A network server often has large amounts of data stored in cache, which requires large banks of ram. The intended market for this chip is network servers, not research computers.

Thread: Anyone else notice RIMM4200 take a drop?

Thread Tools

Display

Posting Permissions