AMD -> Intel Opinions

Thanks for the reply. I was just reading a couple of threads about 800 vs 667. Thanks again.
 
What makes the chances of breaking the 400fsb limit slim?

That board clocks up to about 430fsb as the newer BIOS added the 1333 strap...
 
Looks like a nice setup.

Are you looking to overclock?

You may have already read it but VR-ZONE has a good review of the AW9D-Max and an E6700, so you should have a good idea of what to expect.
 
Chances are you probably won't reach 9x400 = 3.6Ghz
but what if you could and you wouldn't know b/c your ram is holding you back.

You could also probably easily reach 8x400++ so why not go with ddr2 800 (more future proof ram too)
 
allendale3304ip4.png


I've had great success with 2x512MB Micron DDR2-667 CL5 memory.
Part No: MT16HTF6464AY-667

Not sure how the 1GB modules work but here's the part number if you're interested.
Part No: MT16HTF12864AY-667

By bumping the voltage from 1.8 to 2.1 this stuff suddenly thinks its high dollar memory and I can drop the timings down to CL4-4-4 and crank it up to DDR2-944 speeds. With a little more voltage it might even go higher yet but I'm satisfied with the results so far and don't really need anything faster than this. The Gigabyte DS3 seems to like this stuff.

High speed performance DDR2 memory needs 2.1 volts - 2.3 volts. I've seen a couple of different reports of so called value ram hitting over DDR2-800 speeds with the appropriate timings and voltage so don't be afraid to see what she'll do!

My first C2D build and I've seen the light. AMD has nothing to compare to this beast at any price.
 
When you say performance ram needs high voltages, what about when its only 1.8 stock? Isnt that kind of a big increase?? Also, dumb question, but is Kingston HyperX "high performance"? Or just mediocre?

As for your rig set up there, I think you're gonna be really happy with it when its all said and done, the C2D just does wonders :)

-Ashley
 
JackAshley said:
When you say performance ram needs high voltages, what about when its only 1.8 stock? Isnt that kind of a big increase?? Also, dumb question, but is Kingston HyperX "high performance"? Or just mediocre?
Click to expand...
Here's a good DDR2-800 review.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/memory/display/ddr2-800.html

There appears to be better memory out there than Kingston HyperX. Don't let the Kingston ads on the Asus website fool you into believing that HyperX is special memory.

I don't know of any performance DDR2 ram on the market right now that can run fast with tight timings at 1.8 volts.

Micron DDR2 memory chips are all designed the same and come down the same assembly line. They are then speed binned so the good chips can be hidden under a fancy heat spreader and sold as high performance ram while the rest of the chips are sold as slow DDR2-667 with loose CL5 timings.

What I have found with Micron is that it doesn't matter which version you choose. They are both designed to be able to run at 2.1 volts and even a bit higher if you're case has proper airflow. The performance is identical between the two when run at the same voltage.

Compare the DDR2-944 speed that my generic DDR2-667 Micron memory ran at with CL4-4-4-12 timings to what the memory in XBits test ran. It's all the same stuff so why pay more for a colorful heat spreader?
 
That's an eye-opener...actually only reason I got the HyperX was cause it was the cheapest pc5400 i could find in 1 gig stick ($105)...but you're saying I shouldnt be afraid of the 2.0 volt mark? I dared go as high as 1.95...but thats it

-Ashley
 
2.0v is fine.

I've been telling people this for a while about the speed binning process for ram. It would be as if computer makers started selling you "high speed" Core 2 processors at higher voltages:

stock
3.0GHz @ 1.325v (stock e6850)
"high speed"
3.0Ghz @ 1.4v
3.2Ghz @ 1.425v
3.4Ghz @ 1.50v
3.6Ghz @ 1.60v

I'd rather the 3Ghz with stock voltage or whatever did the highest speed at the lowest voltage. Thats why I picked the G.Skill 6400 that I did b/c it was rated at 4-4-4-12 at 1.9-2.0v. vs. some ddr2 800 that says 2.1v+

All the ram mfg'r are doing is pre-testing overclocked ram for you at higher voltages.
 
Check out the CPU chart at Anandtech:
http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2822&p=4

Intel and AMD have been speed binning their CPUs for years. The chips that run the fastest with the least amount of voltage get stamped with a bigger number on the outside but these chips are all coming down the same assembly line.

Anandtech has shown that whether you get an E6300, E6400, E6600 or an E6700 really doesn't matter because they're all capable of running at about 3.6 GHz with air cooling as long as you have a decent board and memory.

Intel would be very happy if everyone was willing to pay top dollar for their processors but not everyone can afford a $500 E6700. Processors are mass produced and the easiest / cheapest way for them to create more models is to change a single byte of information, the CPU multi. There's not a lot of difference between processors within the same family and with modern manufacturing techniques the differences seem to be getting even smaller.

Speed binning is a fact of computer life. In the early days dishonest retailers would build computers with cheap processors, overclock them, and sell them for full price. That's why Intel began locking their multipliers so at least consumers would be able to tell if they'd been ripped off or not.
 
unclewebb said:
Check out the CPU chart at Anandtech:
http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2822&p=4

Intel and AMD have been speed binning their CPUs for years. The chips that run the fastest with the least amount of voltage get stamped with a bigger number on the outside but these chips are all coming down the same assembly line.

Anandtech has shown that whether you get an E6300, E6400, E6600 or an E6700 really doesn't matter because they're all capable of running at about 3.6 GHz with air cooling as long as you have a decent board and memory.

Intel would be very happy if everyone was willing to pay top dollar for their processors but not everyone can afford a $500 E6700. Processors are mass produced and the easiest / cheapest way for them to create more models is to change a single byte of information, the CPU multi. There's not a lot of difference between processors within the same family and with modern manufacturing techniques the differences seem to be getting even smaller.

Speed binning is a fact of computer life. In the early days dishonest retailers would build computers with cheap processors, overclock them, and sell them for full price. That's why Intel began locking their multipliers so at least consumers would be able to tell if they'd been ripped off or not.
Click to expand...

QFT!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top