![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
-
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.
Why do most Pentium D boards require DDR2?
- Thread starter Glow
- Start date
All Pentium D motherboards require DDR2 because the 945 and 955 chipsets do.
http://www.intel.com/products/chipsets/945p/index.htm
http://www.intel.com/products/chipsets/945g/index.htm
http://www.intel.com/products/chipsets/955x/index.htm
How many 925X and 925XE boards with DDR1 slots did you see (and those *did* support DDR1)?
http://www.intel.com/products/chipsets/945p/index.htm
http://www.intel.com/products/chipsets/945g/index.htm
http://www.intel.com/products/chipsets/955x/index.htm
How many 925X and 925XE boards with DDR1 slots did you see (and those *did* support DDR1)?
robberbaron
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2004
- Messages
- 6,101
The 875P also has a DDR1 memory controller.
robberbaron
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2004
- Messages
- 6,101
pxc said:
The 875P was once used with dual xeon boards. It has the core logic for multiple processors.
So? What does that have to do with this thread or the original question?robberbaron said:
"Pentium D" is the name of an actual series of processors (8x0 models). The only 2 chipsets that currently support it are the 945 and 955, which are DDR2 chipsets.
robberbaron
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2004
- Messages
- 6,101
pxc said:So? What does that have to do with this thread or the original question?
"Pentium D" is the name of an actual series of processors (8x0 models). The only 2 chipsets that currently support it are the 945 and 955, which are DDR2 chipsets.
I guess DFI lies then.
http://www.dfi.com.tw/Support/Downl...D=3245&CATEGORY_TYPE=MB&STATUS_FLAG=A&SITE=US
edit; interesting, they removed dual core support from the list. However they might have problems with it since it was a march revision.
(cf)Eclipse
Freelance Overclocker
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2003
- Messages
- 30,027
i think he's trying to imply that not all pD capable boards require DDR2pxc said:
edit: i should have been 2 seconds faster
robberbaron
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2004
- Messages
- 6,101
http://www.dfi-street.com/forum/showthread.php?t=13918
Apparently there may have been voltage issues with the boards supporting dual cores. So while the chipset can theoretically support them, there are other things getting in the way haha.
Apparently there may have been voltage issues with the boards supporting dual cores. So while the chipset can theoretically support them, there are other things getting in the way haha.
Hmmm, so now you're (and DFI is) saying it doesn't support it? That changes everything.robberbaron said:
http://www.intel.com/products/processor/pentium_d/
robberbaron
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2004
- Messages
- 6,101
Intel doesn't say that it WON'T work on those. I'd email them but I know that they wouldn't want to support an old chipset.pxc said:Hmmm, so now you're (and DFI is) saying it doesn't support it? That changes everything.
http://www.intel.com/products/processor/pentium_d/
The 865/875 can run them at least. But they look to have a similar problem as the nForce4. Getting the 820 to work. But, the CPU does run, albeit with one core.
http://www.dfi-street.com/forum/showthread.php?t=14559
I really think that the way the dual core works isn't too different from Intel's dual cpu, since core 1 has to go through the chipset to talk to core 2. That's probably why, then, they were able to get a dual core cpu out so soon in response to the X2. They had the technology already.. .kind of.
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2005
- Messages
- 31,347
Scali said:
Bah!...we all know Rambus is the wave of the future.
JetUsafMech
Gawd
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2001
- Messages
- 724
kirbyrj said:
You say that jokingly, but Rambus has made some great strides in XDR.
pxc said:Give it up already. Dual core Pentium D CPUs only currently work on 945 and 955 chipsets.
A few boards may see one core, but that's useless. That means it's not a Pentium D motherboard.
Very sadly, you're right. I got a call from someone who tested it and it didn't work.
The only i875 would work, had a Xeon Sc-603
It has core logic built into the Northie to support Dual Processor and maybe Dual Cores. This is either not persent or turned off on the other i875s. Now, will Asus, Abit and MSI (or maybe DFI) has the balls to order a bunch of the i875(E I think they're called) and instead of mounting 604/603, mount Sc-775 instead, remains to be seen. I doubt it. Why? 8xx is a low RAMP (by Intel standards) transistional product to the 9xx and not seen as important enough to spend the R&D on. I'd call 8xx a "Seed Processor". It is planted in the market to grow multi-core processors of the tomorrow. It's not more than an investment.
In fact, it's nothing more than what a Crack dealer would do when he or she is trying to hook new customers LOL!
Donnie27
liquidtrance123
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2000
- Messages
- 2,395
I agree, now only if they can stay out of the lawsuits, they might actually become an "OK" company.JetUsafMech said:
liquidtrance123 said:
RAMBUS has sued fewer folks than Infineon, Micron and Samsung. Search the the IT site called "The Tech Web". Highly respected and presents only the news for IT folks. RAMBUS has also WON most if its cases BTW. Hell, Micron has sued Infineon alone twice as much as RAMBUS, but hey, what's facts got to do with it?
Good Company, where? There's enough sleaze between Intel, AMD, nVidia and ATI to make any other sector look like Church folk. Motorolla Sued and won against AMD for AMD stealing their Current CEO H. Ruiz from Motorolla after signing a deal saying they wouldn't. Intergraph sues Intel and AMD for Clipper tech and wins money from both. AMD sues Intel over clones of X86 and wins, AMD signs deal with RAMBUS. Micron get smaller companies to sign up, then kills them. Samsung is being backed by the Korean Government, so is Infineon, oh brother, add AMD as well by the Germans and the EU. That's just the tip of the ICEBerge, ATI got sued for lying, good company? I've only been buying computer parts since 1994. If I bought parts based on honesty, I'd not have a computer, hell I'd not have anything hehehehe!
Donnie27
chrisf6969
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2003
- Messages
- 9,011
I remember when the Pentium D's were first launched some mobo manufacturers were saying they were experimenting with Pentium D's in 875 mobos. And possibly BIOS updates to support it.
Its probably possibly, possibly not optimal, but I bet someone will probably do it.
Just like Asus made a Pentium M adapter, there's been Powerleap adapters for virtually every combination CPU / mobo ever. (slot1 to 370, tualatin 370, 423 to 478, Etc... .etc..)
Abit built an 815e board with a slot 1 after Intel said 815 was a socket 370 board only.
Its probably possibly, possibly not optimal, but I bet someone will probably do it.
Just like Asus made a Pentium M adapter, there's been Powerleap adapters for virtually every combination CPU / mobo ever. (slot1 to 370, tualatin 370, 423 to 478, Etc... .etc..)
Abit built an 815e board with a slot 1 after Intel said 815 was a socket 370 board only.
Donnie27 said:
This happens all the time. Whenever a huge company is about to add 1000s of new jobs to a country/state's economy they often get kickbacks/investments from the government. This kind of thing happens all over the world all the time. I don't think this makes AMD evil at all.
Now, I'm not saying AMD is perfect. They have done a couple of shady things in the past, but taking money from a country that is willing to pay you to set up shop there isn't one of them.
"Don't bite the hand that feeds you".
I wonder if Intel put a clause in the x86-license that says you can't sue them. That's going to be fun. Then AMD will no longer have a processor line
This action of AMD makes me want to get rid of my AMD processors as soon as possible.
I wonder if Intel put a clause in the x86-license that says you can't sue them. That's going to be fun. Then AMD will no longer have a processor line
This action of AMD makes me want to get rid of my AMD processors as soon as possible.
robberbaron
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2004
- Messages
- 6,101
Scali said:"Don't bite the hand that feeds you".
I wonder if Intel put a clause in the x86-license that says you can't sue them. That's going to be fun. Then AMD will no longer have a processor line
This action of AMD makes me want to get rid of my AMD processors as soon as possible.
Actually, AMD suing Intel is against the agreement if it pertains to things like patents. This is just a stupid petty anti-trust BS lawsuit.
Antitrust laws are pretty much idiotic at this point, and if AMD wins the case, it will further show how much bullshit is being spewed out of our courts.
Hector Ruiz said:
Right, Intel is a monopoly. That's why Transmeta, AMD, IBM, Toshiba, and Motorola exist. Because Intel is the only microprocessor manufacturer. Riiiiight. Damn Intel and their voluntary contracts!
It's a sad act by AMD to do this, but it certainly doesn't make me feel bad about my X2 purchase.
I think this is the same problem as with Microsoft... The anti-trust laws were mostly about 'natural' monopolies, like railways, power companies, phone companies etc.
They have their own network, which they built themselves, and have all the rights to. Since there is only one network, their customers depend on them to deliver the service, and cannot have any alternatives.
However, with both Microsoft and Intel, there ARE alternatives. With Intel it's even more ridiculous than with Microsoft, because AMD processors actually run the exact same OS and software, and can use most of the same hardware as Intel systems do. So they're a drop-in replacement. At least with Microsoft you could argue that different OSes aren't 100% compatible, and some applications or file formats cannot be used (then again, isn't it up to the competition to fix that problem? For me the reason I use Microsoft software, and not that of the competition, is that the Microsoft stuff just works better).
The REAL problem is that AMD cannot deliver CPUs in the volume and at the low prices required by large companies such as Apple or Dell (partly because they don't own all the rights to their products). That's why they don't get big contracts, that's why they can't build a serious, professional reputation. AMD is just a gaming CPU for spotty kids on internet forums.
They have their own network, which they built themselves, and have all the rights to. Since there is only one network, their customers depend on them to deliver the service, and cannot have any alternatives.
However, with both Microsoft and Intel, there ARE alternatives. With Intel it's even more ridiculous than with Microsoft, because AMD processors actually run the exact same OS and software, and can use most of the same hardware as Intel systems do. So they're a drop-in replacement. At least with Microsoft you could argue that different OSes aren't 100% compatible, and some applications or file formats cannot be used (then again, isn't it up to the competition to fix that problem? For me the reason I use Microsoft software, and not that of the competition, is that the Microsoft stuff just works better).
The REAL problem is that AMD cannot deliver CPUs in the volume and at the low prices required by large companies such as Apple or Dell (partly because they don't own all the rights to their products). That's why they don't get big contracts, that's why they can't build a serious, professional reputation. AMD is just a gaming CPU for spotty kids on internet forums.
robberbaron
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2004
- Messages
- 6,101
Scali said:
It's also a high end multitasking CPU that outdoes Intel for the price, but yeah.
Though you can argue that Intel made the smithfield as a shitty stepping stone to their 9xx series. Kind of like how willamette was a shitty stepping stone for the awesome Northwood.
Any libertarian/conservative or person that has any free-market ideals at all can see this lawsuit for what it is: a temper tantrum asking for more government aid and sympathy.
AMD is in a pretty bad position. They put themselves in it, but it's doubtful they could ever get away from x86 and maintain sovereignty and marketshare.
robberbaron said:It's also a high end multitasking CPU that outdoes Intel for the price, but yeah.
You mean in games?
Anyway, that's another discussion... I was just talking about AMD's lack of brand image, and lack of effort on changing that. Intel is a very, very strong brand.
JetUsafMech
Gawd
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2001
- Messages
- 724
robberbaron said:It's also a high end multitasking CPU that outdoes Intel for the price, but yeah.
Though you can argue that Intel made the smithfield as a shitty stepping stone to their 9xx series. Kind of like how willamette was a shitty stepping stone for the awesome Northwood.
Any libertarian/conservative or person that has any free-market ideals at all can see this lawsuit for what it is: a temper tantrum asking for more government aid and sympathy.
AMD is in a pretty bad position. They put themselves in it, but it's doubtful they could ever get away from x86 and maintain sovereignty and marketshare.
I think more than one person agrees with you, considering AMD lost 33cents a share today.
robberbaron
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2004
- Messages
- 6,101
JetUsafMech said:
Good. Nobody should flood our judicial system with crap like this. Our courts are for JUSTICE, not WHINING.
Scali said:You mean in games?
Anyway, that's another discussion... I was just talking about AMD's lack of brand image, and lack of effort on changing that. Intel is a very, very strong brand.
Not just in games. The X2 seems to have unlocked something missing in AMD's as far as other applications go, like encoding. I'll share my thoughts with you via PM's.
robberbaron said:
Some apps like Short pipes and high IPC, games for example. Some apps like more MHz and stages/pipes *Otimized with SIMDs streaming apps like Premiere Pro 7. So when AMD added a second core, it can act as one 24 stage/pipe line processor and this increases streaming performance like the long pipelined P4's.
Now what would be really cool is that ifs if the could cound the Pipe Lines like EIST or Power Now and the these Open and Close to fit the app. This would help Intel more than AMD. Of course the Pipe Lenght would need to be changed. Or maybe I don't know what the hell I'm talking about and just imgined this, hehehehe!
I also wonder what all AMD did to Venice? I know the added latency to the Memory controller to make it more compatible. I wonder if they all modded the Pipelines in the core to try to get more MHz?
Donnie27
Scali said:I think you just did
Well afaik there are no copyrights on things that you post on a public forum... and even if there were, I don't mind. I just post to share my thoughts with others.
Yes but only because it's worth repeating.Donnie27
Donnie27 said:
Perhaps, but the issue was that RAMBUS intentionally caused the patent infringements as a memeber of JEDEC: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rambus
"In the early 1990s, Rambus was invited to join the Joint Electron Device Engineering Council in return for releasing a number of technologies into the public domain, on the condition that they sign Non-disclosure agreements with the other JEDEC members and disclose any patents they had relating to DRAM technology. They did so, and participated in the JEDEC until 1995, when they withdrew after the JEDEC refused to accept RDRAM as an official standard. After leaving the JEDEC, Rambus amended a number of open patent applications to include technologies relating to SDRAM and DDR that had been discussed in the JEDEC while Rambus was a member. Rambus claimed to be the originator of these technologies."
It's a particularly bad form to do such a thing.
==>Lazn
Wait, so if AMD wins any of the lawsuits, what will you think?robberbaron said:
AMD is suing for alleged anti-competitive practices on the part of Intel. If you disagree with these premises, and they are found to be true, then how can you be in favor of a free-market economy? Anti-competitive practices are fundamentally damaging to a free-market economy.
Granted, it sure looks like AMD is whining, but if you read their statements, they are based on alleged observations and possible facts, some, all, or none of which may be confirmed in a court of law. It's not just a whole bunch of whining when you get down to the nitty gritty.
Then again, what you posted was a second-hand interpretation of the findings. Official court statements are in my mind the only way to truly interpret the actions of Rambus in those lawsuits. I find it hard to take the word of a single source's interpretation as gospel, even Wikipedia's, and so should you.Lazn_Work said:
robberbaron
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2004
- Messages
- 6,101
xonik said:
If voluntary contracts between OEM's and Intel are so damaging to a free market, then how is the government breaking up these voluntary contracts any better in preserving a free market?
Lazn_Work said:
Only one tiny problem there, the word "claimed". As in "Rambus claimed to be the originator of these technologies.". If what I saw was correct, RAMBUS had the patent for what they were fighting about. They had the patents before, not afterwards as some claimed. They didn't want to build RAMBUS so they left RAMBUS on their own. I can't say that I blame RAMBUS. Micron was running the show and didn't want to build RAMBUS being a business, they went back and then said "If you're NOT using our RAM, (as your link shows) then pay us for our IP, which they did own BTW. That's why the corts ruled in their favor.
Sure RAMBUS aren't nice and good people, good and nice people go out of business. Infineon and Micro have plead guilty to Price fixing during the 1999 to 2002 RAM price run up that saw price go from $109 to $339 in 6 months. Blamed were Y2K (price started skyrocketing in july 1999 and a small Earthquake in Taiwan 11% of RAM production(prices were already up 100% before that happened LOL!). Both events had nothing to with prices.
So, is AMD going to sue Intel for investing 450 million in Micron? How about 200 million in Samsung and another in Hynix?
The biggest joke in all of this is AMD/Mr. Ruiz, saying; "Intel's software even runs slower on our hardware". He's knows that's BS! Ace's, ARS, the TechZone, Tech-Report, MaxPC and others have shown AMD's getting a bigger boost from Intel's compilers and SIMDs than Micrososft's in more cases than not. Meanwhile, 3DNow (not the version made from SSE2/3) Provides nothing as far as increased performance goes and in some cases even slowed the P3 and P4 down. Just what Mr. Ruiz says Intel is doing to them.
Last but not least, all companies practice Exclusive Deal when they have the chance. AMD is doing more to keep prices high, that's NOT good for you, me or even the Hardcorest AMD !!!!!! Zealot! Intel is not the Reason AMD is selling as they themselve say "We sell our processors according to performance". That's like saying, we sell our cars for 50K instead of 20K because unlike the 20K, our cars can do 150mph they can only do 100mhp. So what if the speed limit is 65mph.
Donnie27
robberbaron said:
Why not?
AMD already has the Germans and the EU giving any EU member a hard time when they use Intel products. Maybe they want to speed up their ROI? (Return On Investment) . Maybe it's Intel who has the case, hehehehehe! Intel vs. the Germans and the EU doesn't seem fair either.AMD can't force Dell to buy AMD processors. If Dell does buy AMD processors, the laws can't stop Intel from raising their prices to Dell. Or anyone else.
Intel has the right to Exclusive deals, many industries do it everyday. What next, Chevy Dealers selling New Fords? Fast food chains sell Coke or etc.. exclusively. Sure Intel could loose a case like this. Minkey D's lost the coffee case LOL! If AMD won, it would be similar to that. Sorry, I don't think the Courts should pay AMD Fanbuddy.
Keep in mind that Intel won against VIA when VIA warezed/reverse engineered Intel's chipsets. By the time Intel won the case though, they didn't any money, the first time. The Judge said, yes, Intel proved that AMD stole their product, BUT had canged its enough in its current form to not have to pay Intel any damages. Awe but Intel got the last laugh, VIA had to end up paying Intel back fees to get their current Cross license agreements.
Since Intel has these agreements with everyone, that makes the Monoply Claim hold as much water as a fishnet.
AMD's stock was still down last time I checked. The rest of the market *must
think this is BS as well. Lately both AMD and Intel have been their own worse enemy. Intel and Hotscotts plus AMD and low yield high priced Hammers.Donnie27