Yousuf said:
In the SDRAM days, they came up with the term low-density vs.
high-density to describe the difference between DIMMs with memory
modules on only one side of the module vs. those that have them on both
sides of the module. Now, you could have 256MB of RAM entirely on one
side of the module, or 256MB split half between the front and back of
the module.
The single-sided was considered "low-density", despite the fact that it
has packed 256MB into half the number of chips as the dual-sided module.
Most of us would normally call a chip with a higher number of circuits
to be higher-density, but in this case they aren't referring to the
internal electronic density, but the just the density of the number of
chips. The reason this is important at all is because those
"high-density" modules, having more chips on them, drew a lot more
power, many motherboards couldn't supply the required amount of power to
those types of modules. Or if they could, they could only supply them to
one module, but not more modules.
I'm sorry but that is not right.
Chips on one vs two sides was called single and double sided, which is also
confusing because, while it was physically true for the early chips (and
'common'), it really refers to having two 'groups' of chips with each
'group' being 64 bit wide. I.E. a double 'sided' module could still have
all chips on one physical side of the module. What made it 'double' was
having two 64 bit wide 'groups', as in 2 groups of, say, 8 meg x 64, which
would give 128 Mbytes total. The two groups are addressed as if they are
two (single sided) sticks even though in the one socket, which is why the
board must support double sided sticks. The actual physical layout is
irrelevant, other than the practicality of assembly, since the electronics
has no way of even knowing where they're located, much less care.
The term 'density', as it is used in this context, relates to the chip
organization.
As noted above, the data bus is 64 bits wide. If the chips are organized
8x8 (64 Mbit) then 8 of them make up what I called a 'group' (I'm avoiding
"bank" because that's used internally for a completely different thing).
I.E. 8x8 chips, times 8 of them, is 8x64 for 64 Mbytes. Put two groups on
the stick and you get 128 Mbytes, as in the above example for "double sided."
Now, one way to think of 'high density' (and the one they mean) is to be
able to get more Mbytes per 64 bit wide 'group'. And one way to do that is
to organize the chip as 16x4 instead of 8x8. Same number of bits in the
chip (64 M, so *IT* is the same 'density') but it now takes 16 to fill the
64 bit wide 'group', because they are each only 4 bits wide, for 128 Mbyte
on the 'single side' (twice as much. e.g. 'high density'). Note again that
physical location is irrelevant and if you can figure out how to get 32 on
the stick you could have a 256 Mbyte 'double sided' module.
The problem is it takes an additional address line to address a x4 chip vs
the same size x8 so if the motherboard expects 8x8 chips, and has only that
many address lines, then it will only see half of a 16x4 chip. It needs the
'low density' 8x8.
Now, the thing we all are familiar with because it's 'in the spec' for the
motherboard is a statement like "supports 256 Meg RAM modules" or "supports
768 Meg (total)". That presumes the chip organization that was 'standard'
at the time since that would be all they knew about. So putting a 512 meg
module in a 256 meg socket won't work because it can't address a module
that large and putting in a 256 Meg 'high density' module will result in
only half being seen, or not work, for a similar reason: it can't fully
address the x4 chips being used. (there can be other differences, such as
chip banking and refresh rate, but this is enough for the gist of it)
I'll echo what others have told you about going to Crucial.com, but also
add you might want to check out Kingston.com, they both have online
forms which allow you to choose precisely what type of modules are
certified for their particular motherboards.
I imagine it'll be fine for his board but I've noted they're not always
right. I have an original issue BH6 rev 1.0, BX440 chipset, and most
'selection guides' claim it supports 256 Meg per socket and 768 meg total,
but it doesn't. It only supports 128 meg per socket, 384 total. It's the
BH6 rev 1.1 that supports 256 meg sticks, but they don't distinguish
between them.