• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Difference between Venice (E3) and San Diego (E4) Other than cache...

robberbaron said:
Because they were just released monday.

Venice: successor to Winchester
San Diego: 90nm successor to Clawhammer
Click to expand...


okay, but what about them? I only just bought my friggin' winchester 3500, what are these, the dual-core chips, or what?
 
Wally said:
okay, but what about them? I only just bought my friggin' winchester 3500, what are these, the dual-core chips, or what?
Click to expand...
no. theyre just a new revision of the winchester that is overclocking higher and has a better memory controller.
 
true, but the 3500+ winchesters get the best dies, thus they oc pretty well, even in comparison to the venice samples we've been seeing.
 
USMC2Hard4U said:
For me its what I want. When I build systems, I go all out. I already have ran 1 GB of Ram in my Box for 2 years. 2 years ago it was concered overkill but look now, its optimal to run 1GB. I future proof my stuff as soon as I get it. my next box I again am going all out, I will get a dual Core hopefully Athlon 2.4Ghz, Vapochill it to 3Ghz, and I want 2 GB of DDR Ram @ 500Mhz cas 2-2-2-6 (OCZ VX) but I want it to run at 1T. If I cant, I might just go intel so I dont have these memory problems. I hope they can fix that issue, i really do.
I just want max performance. And sure 1GB of ram is more than enough now, however in 1 year from now, we are all going to concider it the High end, with 2GB being Supreme. I wont have to buy anything, for I will have already had it :)
Click to expand...

I am sorry... maybe I missed a bunch of the conversation somewhere...

You would change out the AMD for an INTEL chip simply because it is best to use 2T rather than 1T when you are running 2gb of RAM?

Isn't that a bit... over the top?

If you go with the INTEL cpu, my thoughts are that you will get a CPU that (currently for gaming, anyways) is not top-of-the-line with poorer memory performance, and yet you will be able to set 1T.

I don't see the logic.

-Skystalker
 
Skystalker said:
I am sorry... maybe I missed a bunch of the conversation somewhere...

You would change out the AMD for an INTEL chip simply because it is best to use 2T rather than 1T when you are running 2gb of RAM?

Isn't that a bit... over the top?

If you go with the INTEL cpu, my thoughts are that you will get a CPU that (currently for gaming, anyways) is not top-of-the-line with poorer memory performance, and yet you will be able to set 1T.

I don't see the logic.

-Skystalker
Click to expand...
Well I want the best performance and what not.

I only play 3 games anyway... HL2 and all its offspring (DOD, CS, Source) and Warcraft III /Starcraft

So, Its not like I need the best for gaming, I am going for all around performance.

so yes, If I cant do 2GB of Ram at 1T, then I want none of it. 10% performance is alot to lose.
 
USMC2Hard4U said:
Well I want the best performance and what not.

I only play 3 games anyway... HL2 and all its offspring (DOD, CS, Source) and Warcraft III /Starcraft

So, Its not like I need the best for gaming, I am going for all around performance.

so yes, If I cant do 2GB of Ram at 1T, then I want none of it. 10% performance is alot to lose.
Click to expand...

I share similar sentiments with you. I won't get 939 over my system because I just don't see the improvements being made to the memory controller that should have been fixed by at least the CG revision. Oh, they gave it dual channel, yay. I care more about latency, which is really what matters from what I've experimented with on A64's.
 
robberbaron said:
I share similar sentiments with you. I won't get 939 over my system because I just don't see the improvements being made to the memory controller that should have been fixed by at least the CG revision. Oh, they gave it dual channel, yay. I care more about latency, which is really what matters from what I've experimented with on A64's.
Click to expand...

Sooo... what you are telling me is that you will get a 10% increase in memory performance by using single channel ram at 1T vs dual channel at 2T?

I find that a bit hard to swallow?
 
Skystalker said:
Sooo... what you are telling me is that you will get a 10% increase in memory performance by using single channel ram at 1T vs dual channel at 2T?

I find that a bit hard to swallow?
Click to expand...

he didn't say that. You are taking what robberbaron and USMC2Hard4U said and putting them together
 
Skystalker said:
Sooo... what you are telling me is that you will get a 10% increase in memory performance by using single channel ram at 1T vs dual channel at 2T?

I find that a bit hard to swallow?
Click to expand...


No, what I mean is that I can't justify an upgrade to 939 from what I have since the memory performance won't be that big of an increase to justify an $800 investment in new parts to match and beat what I currently have.
 
A64s need low latency....period. The memory controller being integrated means 3-4-4-8 isn't really that great even when you're at say, 300+MHz, reguardless of what people say. I like my TCCD basically because I can hit 2-2-2-5 @ DDR400 with like 2.6v. I just use a memory divider to set my HTT to 240MHz and set my vcore to 1.65v for 3700+ performance with 2-2-2-5....since I don't have VX and can't 1:1 that. And I used to believe that anything other than 1:1 was killer, but it really doesn't make a big difference...I was able to hit 70k on AM3 with my settings how they are now without changing my drivers out to better ones, plus i was still 100MHz short on my CPU speed....so it's either about the same performance or actually a bit faster than 1:1 with looser timings.

Either way, I see where you're coming from with future proofing. I plan on my next build going with some VX and a DFI board that let's me give it proper voltage without modding it. I love tight timings :D
 
I've been saying it a lot lately, but you can save a lot of money by getting the TwinMOS SP for $55 a stick from newegg and save about $50-150 over VX and get the same performance.
 
or crucial ballistix for 2.5-2-2 timings past 250mhz without insane voltage :D
(cas latency has a pretty small efffect on latency and bandwidth.. for me at least)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top