are there any mobos supporting DDR1 PC4200 DDR533 1066

  • Thread starter Thread starter bent
  • Start date Start date
B

bent

http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=2810
http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=2813
These ASRock are dirt cheap, dirt, and allow use of AGP vid cards and PC3200
kinda performance. I don't know, can't read it, me stoopid, no too much
Skule, and are a great cheap dual cpu solution, maybe E6300, for cheap.
While on the subject of getting a dual core cpu are there any mobos that can
handle good (best) DDR1 memory, that would allow me to get a (posibly even
cheap) dual core cpu, and for the cost of beer for a week, a mobo, and just
stick in the vid card I already have, for now?. And accordingto the above
articles, there ain't no diff b/t using new DDR2, and shit DDR ancient
memory. WHat if I have good DDR1 memory? Like that did better than 1066
years ago.

But, on another note, notin say notin bout 1066, or beyond if using these
new cpus. Its like a dream re-occuring. I can't find any articles about
not using 1066 for mobo/ram/6400,6600. Recently written articles. When
you buy a dual, to OC you haven't if your at 1066; pheew, got me a 1066.
Got notin. wasted all that money for nothing. money, money, got me some
money, get your money, give your money. get some money. money. money. money
here. money there. what you got?

btw, when I buy Asus mobos, they allow adjusting anything and everything by
the smallest possible amount, so 1066, 1082, 1121 is all the same, for those
curious.
 
bent said:
http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=2810
http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=2813
These ASRock are dirt cheap, dirt, and allow use of AGP vid cards and PC3200
kinda performance. I don't know, can't read it, me stoopid, no too much
Skule, and are a great cheap dual cpu solution, maybe E6300, for cheap.
While on the subject of getting a dual core cpu are there any mobos that can
handle good (best) DDR1 memory, that would allow me to get a (posibly even
cheap) dual core cpu, and for the cost of beer for a week, a mobo, and just
stick in the vid card I already have, for now?. And accordingto the above
articles, there ain't no diff b/t using new DDR2, and shit DDR ancient
memory. WHat if I have good DDR1 memory? Like that did better than 1066
years ago.

But, on another note, notin say notin bout 1066, or beyond if using these
new cpus. Its like a dream re-occuring. I can't find any articles about
not using 1066 for mobo/ram/6400,6600. Recently written articles. When
you buy a dual, to OC you haven't if your at 1066; pheew, got me a 1066.
Got notin. wasted all that money for nothing. money, money, got me some
money, get your money, give your money. get some money. money. money. money
here. money there. what you got?

btw, when I buy Asus mobos, they allow adjusting anything and everything by
the smallest possible amount, so 1066, 1082, 1121 is all the same, for those
curious.
Click to expand...

The E6300 and E6400 use FSB1066. That means the front side bus, which
connects to the Northbridge memory controller, operates at a higher speed.

The multiplier inside the CPU, is locked in these cheap CPUs. And that
means, if you were to reduce the speed of the FSB, to FSB800, then the
core of the processor slows down a corresponding amount. So you don't really
want to do that.

In terms of the chipsets used, there are two types. There are the current
generation of chipset which truly support FSB1066 (or even FSB1333 on some
of them). The older chipsets are really FSB800 chipsets, which have
been forced (via overclocking) to run at FSB1066. What that means is,
if you buy a cheap motherboard (where FSB800 chipset runs at FSB1066),
the motherboard will not have much room for overclocking. Your overclock
would suck.

If you want a good overclock, you'd need a P965 based motherboard. And
that would use a PCI Express video card. There are some Nvidia chipsets
and one ATI chipset, but the boards with those in them are not cheap.

So the choice you have to make, is start all over again (expensive), allowing
some fun overclocking to new heights with a P965 chipset and a PCI
Expres video card. Or buy a cheaper motherboard with AGP slot and
operate it at stock speed. Those are your choices.

Paul
 
a typical OC is 20-40% historically. I cannot group these newer cpus but I
think they are preety good OCers.

1066 x1.2=1279
1066x1.3=1386
1066x1.4=1492

So as far I can assume, if it ain't a mimum of 1279, and you just bought
it, then its a waste. Farhter I can assume you could buy a FSB1492 right
now But this was not my original question.

You say there is one that is FSB1333. Which is is that. Is that the std.
designation, or an overclocked 1066? Do you know what the OC is if its a
std, non-OC'd?

This is all FSB1066 based, so still at "1:1" , and depending on the mobo,
can be adjusted 1:1 either incrememtally, or by jumps.. I read a little
about the 6800 extrmeme cpu being the only exception, in that it is
unlocked, or overclockable, but I am confused by the term overclockable b/c
the only additional feature is that it allows a different ratio, such that
the ram can be run OCd seperately (if cpu =40%, ram better than 40%,) which
may be good b/c there are a lot of memory makers, but only two cpu makers,
but I also though 1:1 was advantageous inherently
 
Are you saying thst even if I could find a mobo with dual core 775 cpu slot
that had both 184-pin DDR1 slots and 2XX-pin DDR2 slots, that even if my
DDR1 ram can do 1066 and more, or money back, at any Voltage, with low
latency, that the cpu would run at 200 anyway, not 266?
 
Are you saying thst even if I could find a mobo with dual core 775 cpu
slot
that had both 184-pin DDR1 slots and 2XX-pin DDR2 slots, that even if my
DDR1 ram can do 1066 and more, or money back, at any Voltage, with low
latency, that the cpu would run at 200 anyway, not 266?
Click to expand...
.....
and therefor less than it was designed for, and as advertised. I am aware I
may not have much, if any OC, but slower!!???
 
bent said:
Are you saying thst even if I could find a mobo with dual core 775 cpu slot
that had both 184-pin DDR1 slots and 2XX-pin DDR2 slots, that even if my
DDR1 ram can do 1066 and more, or money back, at any Voltage, with low
latency, that the cpu would run at 200 anyway, not 266?
Click to expand...

Maybe if I work through a concrete example...

An E6300 has a locked multiplier. This is Intel's info offered. Bus core
ratio is 7. The core speed is 1.86GHz. 1.86GHz divided by 7 is 266Mhz.

http://processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx?sSpec=SL9SA

Well, your first question would be, what does 266Mhz mean ?

That is the basic clock going to the processor.
The processor transfers data four times per clock cycle. And that
is where the "FSB1066" comes from. The bus interface is "quad pumped",
and for every clock cycle, there are four data transfers on the
processor's data bus.

(View diagram in Courier font)
266 million _____________ _
times per second _| |_____________| Bus clock.
______ ______ ______ ______
FSB data transfer | data | data | data | data | FSB1066 million
_ _ _ _ _ _ _
Multiplier locked _| |_| |_| |_| |_| |_| |_| |_| Core clock at 7X

If you set the BIOS to 200Mhz, the Core becomes 1400MHz.
The FSB in that case is 800MHz.

If you set the BIOS to 266MHz, the Core becomes 1862MHz.
The FSB in that case is 1066MHz.

The purpose of increasing the input clock, is to make the
core go faster.

Now, if the motherboard is already "flat out" at FSB1066,
then the processor cannot go faster than 1862MHz.

The reference I made to FSB1333, is for future processors.
Or, to making even higher overclocks.

To overclock a FSB1066 processor, means running the FSB faster
than FSB1066. If I wanted a 20% overclock, I'd need the FSB
to go to 1.2 x 1066 = FSB1279. If I use a cheap motherboard,
it won't go quite that high. If the motherboard uses a P965,
I can go a lot higher.

The X6800 has an unlocked multiplier. For one of those, you
can keep a constant bus clock, and just program the multiplier
value in the BIOS. But the X6800 is expensive.

Paul
 
oh, so its the multipier. My 2.6GHzC is 200MHz x13, 800FSB, but its at
240MHz x13 now which is 3.12GHz cpu, 960MHz FSB. The timings table is
263MHz 2.5-6-6-10. So a dual core cpu/mobo combo would use the multiplier
from the cpu, which in the case of the of 1.86GHz you described is 7. So 7x
is a lot less than 13x. Strictly mathematically 7/13=.538 So the
multiplication factor travels along with the cpu through to the ram. My ram
would have no problem doing the 266 used in your example, but almost
exactly, so I guess I'd have to say it (the cpu) would work at 1.86x..538,
or basically 54% of its potential. Either that or its one hell of an OCing
ram. I know its apples and oranges, the C vs. the dual core, but 54% of c2d
Dc vs. c2d


What is the % OC of any of the new cpus on the best mobo. Though I a gonna
assume there are plenty that can accomodate it, it is directly directly
proportional to the quality of the ram.

If I were to buy a mobo now I'd prpbly buy a Asus for around $250, b/c I
want the LAn even though I have a few LAN cards, I want the RAID b/c I have
2 10K 8MB Raptors, but its not absolute. But I don't need wireless. I
would certainly go other than asus, if for no more reason than to save a few
bucks. In this case the ram would be the only thing stopping the cpu from
reachng its full potential, besides cooling. I always want the best out of
a cpu, SO I need to know what ram can do it. I read one forum thread where
one guy said he wanted Corsair XMS PC8500DDR2, I saw at ~$350, and I've seen
Corsair mwntioned more than once
 
I just had a look at asus and corsair websites.

The asus mobos list 1066/800/533 FSB but only 667/533 DDR2 & only sometimes
800/667/533 DDR2. I haven't noted if the later is listed onyu with the
mobos that say quad-core ready, such as the P5WDH Deluxe. Why are there two
listings?

The corsair memory page
http://www.corsair.com/corsair/products/guides/JAN07_Buyersguide_Intel.pdf
lists few options other than 800 & 1066. notably 111, 1142, & 1250. Thats
barely over stock. Thats barely better than out of the box. Is that the
state of the current memory capability to date?
 
this 1066 is really expensive, like $600 Cdn for 2x1GB. I had trouble
finding it, then when I did I saw the price. This must be new! So theres
no info on whos blowing away the 1066 with extreme OC's.
 
when I bought my mem it was the fastest on the planet. Ocz is at it again.
They got a PC2-9200 with built in water cooling jacks
 
bent said:
and, and, and, the 1142, and 1250 is only for an NVIDIA 680i SLI chipset.
Whats up with that?
Click to expand...

There are various options for memory in the BIOS. The memory does not have
to run at the speed of the FSB. You can use FSB1066 and DDR2-800. When
you overclock, you'd need faster memory if you kept using the highest
memory setting.

At the extremely high settings you mention above, not all chipsets will
go that high. Some chipsets are good up to about DDR2-1000 or maybe
1066 or so. You can look on Anandtech, at some of the memory or
motherboard articles, to see what motherboards they use, and how high
they go. And Xtremesystems.org/forums has a lot more info. I don't
keep reading all that stuff, because it takes hours of work to see
what the current highest records are.

If you want to be an overclocker, you have to do some work yourself.

Paul
 
I may have learned something I didn't really before . If you maintain the
strict 7:1 or 13:1 or watever multiplier when either at "stock"or OC'ing
thats "1:1", but if you introduce another factor thats "asyncronous"? or not
1:1? I'm seeing a prism, is this why its best to run "syncronously", I'm
getting a headache.
 
in The World Record Database
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=59753

the E6400 and E660 gives a data sheet and cpu-z snapshot. Then I did my own
cpu-z. There are four important boxes in the cpu-z, under Clocks , on the
left. In all 3 cases, the "Bus Speed" box is the basis for both the "Rated
FSB" and "Core Speed". The "Core Speed" also uses the Multiplier" box. In
mine the Bus Speed is 240. The Rated FSB is 4x that, naturally, due to the
number of physical sticks and twice the data per cycle.. My Multiplier is
13 so the Core Speed is 3120. In the WR new cpus the Bus Speed is
approximately twice what mine would be if I had used a 2.4C (~280). i.e 567
and 528, just meaning a graet OC ram. Then, with that established, agian,
uits the basis, and the other two are (i) x the multiplier, and (ii) is 4x
that, naturally, due to the number of physical sticks and twice the data per
cycle.

The only differnece is that the original Bus Speed, the basis for both the
cpu GHz, and overalll Memory speed, is twice in the newer vs. my (single
cpu). Since they are dual cpus I can live with that explanation.

But I am trying to figure out whos using what ram, everyone wants to run
there new cpu at its highest speed w/o breaking it. Is this ram 1:1 or
asysnconous (not 1:1)? In both of the two new cpu examples (E6600 and
E6400) the data sheet says the Ram Ratio is 1:1, DDR2-SDRAM Dual Channel,
1GB in each of slots 1&3, Ram Freq 567 MHz, and 528. This is after the
overclock, which can stop at any whole number. This doesn't help. 4-4-4-4.
But there ain't enough info on the ram to determine what it is. It calls it
PC4300, no name. Its not written in DDR2-PC8500 type language. If I could
install my ram, multiply by 2, I'd already have ram! WR ram. And they name
it the same thing (almost). What the hell do I do with this information?
The 2 highest FSBs are 2112/2268, and divided by 2 are 1056/1134, but these
numbers don't jive with ram at ocz, or corsair data, nor the datasheet info.

I was tyring to investigate asyncronous ram by looking at the numbers and
see whos using what ram, since 1:1 ain't important, which are they
using:800/667/or 533?

QQQQQQQuestion
Maybe i'm confused? I'm assuming this WR ram is syncronous ram, 1066 ram
(lets call it 533 ram). Or is it the better 667 or 800 ram? or is it 1066
ram?
QQQQQQQuestion


Both use Asus P5B-Deluxe mobos.
 
As I have already mentioned only the best asus mobos allow the 800 of the
800/667/533 ram types. Is 5233 better than the other two? And then which
of those two are better tan the other one?
 
Back
Top