Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Hardware and Software => Topic started by: StarOfAfrica2 on February 21, 2005, 12:51:50 AM
-
This is a sweet rig, but how does it qualify as "barebones"? The only thing missing is software, is that all it takes?
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/searchtools/item-Details.asp?EdpNo=1229408&sku=A455-2112%20B&CMP=EMC-TIGEREMAIL&SRCCODE=WEM839C
-
its a sweet system , cas latency 3 ram though? hmmm.. needs a monitor as well ...
-
Why the hell would they use CAS 3 mem?
Always thought Tiger Direct were clueless, they have just confirmed it.
ALL socket 939's/742's should be run on CAS 2 memory, the CPU gets its speed from the lowest CAS memory because the memory controller is onboard the CPU not a seperate chip.
Lol they even have the gall to call it "Ultra" memory.
Still think you could source the parts seperately and come up slightly cheaper even with good memory.
-
Except for the crummy memory it looks like a really fast system.
See if they'll let you substitute some better ram, or get it, sell the ram to some sucker, and buy some better stuff.
-
Memory latency is not an issue with Athlon64 systems. Several tests concluded the difference was meaningless.
-
Originally posted by Siaf__csf
Memory latency is not an issue with Athlon64 systems. Several tests concluded the difference was meaningless.
Like to see one, everything I've read says that AMD64s are very sensitive to memory latency.
-
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,1637765,00.asp
1% difference doesn't justify paying a lot more for high-end ram. Most likely you'll run into instability problems or even a dead system while playing with memory settings on a64's. At least the older ones..
I really have no experience on the new models except the 3700+ on my laptop. I tried to tweak it for giggles but it hung on me :) Laptops rarely like overclocking.
On the other hand I could be wrong.. I'm too busy to follow the business these days.
-
The cas level matters for athlon64s, as does the command rate (1t vs. 2t). The other memory settings are not as important as the FSB, which is what I think those memory latency articles were trying to say. If your memory won't run fast latencies at stock FSB, they won't run at all at higher FSB.
I've done some testing on my own a64 rig and there are definate benefits to running cas 2 or 2.5 vs. cas 3. The really hot rigs are running TCCD chip based memory and they're getting cas2 or 2.5 well up past 250mhz fsb if you set the voltage up high enough. Some companies are even selling voltage boosters that plug into an empty ram slot and boost the memory voltage waaay up. That's far too much effort for me, but I'm convinced that there are benefits to getting quality memory instead of the cheap stuff, both in performance and reliability. And if you're going to overclock, you just can't be putting crap into the mix or you'll get crap for results right back out.
Decent cas2 (or 2.5) PC3200 or cas 2.5/(or 3) PC4000 is what you really want. No-name cas3 PC3200 is probably rebadged pc2100. You should be able to get that stuff without spending much. Crucial sells 512 meg sticks of cas 2.5 pc3200 for about $89, not much more than the crappy 2700 and slow 3200 stuff you get in the bargain bin. And crucial will cross-ship you a replacement stick if it ever goes bad. You won't get that from no-name retailers. Want proof? Go to Fry's and get a handful of their sale memory, any speed you like. Put it in your computer, let it autodetect at it's "correct" speed, and run memcheck86 on it for a few hours. I've done just that in the past, and I went through 6 sticks before I found one that was good. I needed two, so I returned them all and had crucial send me some overnight. Both the crucial sticks are still running faster than spec 4 years later, without errors.
That's what you get with quality memory, same as any other quality parts. Speed and reliability.
-
I am with eagl on this. Quality memory is a must for high end systems.
I like Crucial as they are one of a handful of companies in the world which make thier ram from the ground up. This lends itself to being a better product. They design and build every part of thier rams.
As a side note, it is funny how marketing helps a company. Kingston was known as the Walmart of computer parts suppliers for years. Now look at them. Same garbage, but nice marketing and packaging and all of a sudden, people swear by them.
Cheap ram is just not worth the headaches to me.
-
Can't beat the quality manufacturers for their lifetime guarentee and cross shipment policies.
Also as an FX53 (in the proposed system) is unlocked, pointless getting crappy CAS 3 memory.
Looking at the resultant thread from the article a few things come to mind -
1) He didn't test dual channel.
2) Wasn't on XP64
3) Therefore was a 32 bit testing prog, not 64 bit.
All of which 'could' make a difference.
Try getting a lot of 'cheap' CAS 3 stuff to even run dual channel.
Also getting the RAM to run at 1T does make a BIG difference.
-
quality ram is a must imho, i see a difference between running CL2 and CL3 , for some off the higher overclocks ive had 230-235 fsb, my corsair ram craps out at a CL2 setting, at the higest clock 238 even 2.5 wont run , then its on to 3 . in my experience it better to run a lower fsb than run CL3, my system is a dog at 3, even with a 1T command rate FWIW <
> 38
-
IMO if someone buys a barebone system and plans to use it straight from the box, the latencies are the least of his worries.
The system will run just fine on that memory.
That system is obviously an expensive mainstream box. Any serious overclocker would not only compile the system by hand but include phase change cooling, SATA raid with raptors or even scsi, voltage mods etc.
That's why I really don't see the CL3 ram an issue.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
I am with eagl on this. Quality memory is a must for high end systems.
I like Crucial as they are one of a handful of companies in the world which make thier ram from the ground up. This lends itself to being a better product. They design and build every part of thier rams.
As a side note, it is funny how marketing helps a company. Kingston was known as the Walmart of computer parts suppliers for years. Now look at them. Same garbage, but nice marketing and packaging and all of a sudden, people swear by them.
Cheap ram is just not worth the headaches to me.
How can you tell what level of ram you've got. I've got mushkin in one and kingston in the other...anyway to "spec" out the ram?
-
CPU-Z
Although primarily for CPU stuff, ID's ram etc.
http://www.cpuid.com/cpuz.php
-
LOL AMD is finally catching up with Itell
BTW this is a 3 year old system and its still kickin butt
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/481_1106295832_cpuz001.jpg)
-
Umm.. AMD has been way past Intel for quite a long time.
Intel has been successful in fooling the consumers to believe more Mhz is better. In reality all the new Intel revisions have been slower in architecture than thier predecessors. Heck, sometimes even in direct comparison.
-
The Intel Prescott's are certainly terrible and slower than the previous Northwood's at the same clock rate.
However, it was not until AMD came out with the 64bit CPU's did they surpass the high end Northwood. The AMD 3200 is slower than a 3Ghz Northwood P4. Not by a huge margin, but Intel did win there.
Price/performance ratio has always been in favor of AMD, regardless of the speed of the CPU.
-
LOL try and get one of those 64bit cpu's for the price of an Intell 2.4 northwood.
Good luck.
-
That is not even a good comparison wombatt. The 64bit AMD CPU will eat that Northwood alive thus its price/performance ratio would be better than that Northwood.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
That is not even a good comparison wombatt. The 64bit AMD CPU will eat that Northwood alive thus its price/performance ratio would be better than that Northwood.
Wow I did not know you could get a AMD 64bit CPU for $130.00
-
Read it again. Price/Performance ratio. The 64bit CPU will cost more, but it also runs circles around a 2.4Ghz Northwood.
Again, it is a poor comparison. They are not in the same class. It's like comparing a Celeron (which is a lot cheaper than the Northwood) to a regular P4. Or to put it in your words....
Can you buy a Northwood 2.4Ghz chip for $71? That is about what a 2.4Ghz Celeron goes for.
That's the comparison you are making between a 2.4Ghz Northwood and an AMD 64bit CPU.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Read it again. Price/Performance ratio. The 64bit CPU will cost more, but it also runs circles around a 2.4Ghz Northwood.
Again, it is a poor comparison. They are not in the same class. It's like comparing a Celeron (which is a lot cheaper than the Northwood) to a regular P4. Or to put it in your words....
Can you buy a Northwood 2.4Ghz chip for $71? That is about what a 2.4Ghz Celeron goes for.
That's the comparison you are making between a 2.4Ghz Northwood and an AMD 64bit CPU.
RGR I understand now thx.
Let me ask you If I was going to build a new puter would you go with a AMD or Intell?
I have always had better luck with Intell but it looks like Amd is got there stuff together on the 64bit.
-
As long as I can get Northwood P4's in the 3+Ghz range, I will use Intel.
It will be, at least, 3 years before I need to build another computer. So I have the luxury of waiting to see what developes. I figure Intel is lost and they will not recover in that time frame.
In that time frame, other chipsets for AMD CPU's will become available and I will watch those closely, with my fingers crossed that some chipset maker gets its act together.
This is where Intel still reigns sumpreme. Damn I wish they would make a chipset for AMD CPU's. That would be a no-brainer then.
-
where is a good place to get a great deal on Northwood processors?
-
They are getting more difficult to find. Newegg and MWave seem to still have some though.