heavy question for knowledgable; difference between M470L6524CU0-CB3& M470L6524BT0-CB3

  • Thread starter Thread starter CliscoCliso
  • Start date Start date
C

CliscoCliso

both are phisically the same as technically:

512MB DDR PC2700 CL2.5 but the difference is in the chips which are
planted on the PCB;

M470L6524CU0-CB3
Chip: K4H511638C-UCB3

M470L6524BT0-CB3
Chip: K4H511638B-TCB3

What does it means from the manufacturing side and what does it means
for the end line - the user ?

I suppose the only usage isn't just for notebooks but for various kind
of devices ... what kind of devices are also using DDR Sodimm this
specifications ?
 
both are phisically the same as technically:

512MB DDR PC2700 CL2.5 but the difference is in the chips which are
planted on the PCB;

M470L6524CU0-CB3
Chip: K4H511638C-UCB3

M470L6524BT0-CB3
Chip: K4H511638B-TCB3

What does it means from the manufacturing side and what does it means
for the end line - the user ?

I suppose the only usage isn't just for notebooks but for various kind
of devices ... what kind of devices are also using DDR Sodimm this
specifications ?
Click to expand...

The chips are from different manufacturing runs but are almost certainly
identical. The different numbers at the end of both the chips and the
modules are there to allow the manufacturer to identify which run it was.
This way, should a problem with a particular batch appear, they can trace
them back to particular manufacturing processes such as machines, operators
and software used on the date they were made.
It is irrelevent to the end-user, but if you bought a pair of 'matched'
memory modules, you would expect the numbers to be the same.
I've seen SODIMMs used in printers and routers as well as laptops/notebooks/netbooks.

HTH
 
The chips are from different manufacturing runs but are almost certainly
identical.  The different numbers at the end of both the chips and the
modules are there to allow the manufacturer to identify which run it was.
This way, should a problem with a particular batch appear, they can trace
them back to particular manufacturing processes such as machines, operators
and software used on the date they were made.
It is irrelevent to the end-user, but if you bought a pair of 'matched'
memory modules, you would expect the numbers to be the same.
I've seen SODIMMs used in printers and routers as well as laptops/notebooks/netbooks.

HTH
Click to expand...

I have a pair from the first match and from the later next match.

it's about quality, does the quality differs ?

I will surely test them on one machine but i doubt really that a
single machine could be a prove of something.
The both speciements serve to same purpose, i also doubt they were
made specifically for some devices, it would be a short run, which is
not a large production goal.

Seems that quality is to differ by means which you have mentioned:
machines, time of production(literally who was in charge in
manufacturing process at that day..);)

about the material used etc.

The the ...638C-UCB3 have a newer sticker, maybe that could Pass as a
newer production, longer chip.life, but i hope the tests will prove
something less-more significant.

ciaos,
till the testing get finished.
 
I have a pair from the first match and from the later next match.

it's about quality, does the quality differs ?

I will surely test them on one machine but i doubt really that a
single machine could be a prove of something.
The both speciements serve to same purpose, i also doubt they were
made specifically for some devices, it would be a short run, which is
not a large production goal.

Seems that quality is to differ by means which you have mentioned:
machines, time of production(literally who was in charge in
manufacturing process at that day..);)

about the material used etc.

The the ...638C-UCB3 have a newer sticker, maybe that could Pass as a
newer production, longer chip.life, but i hope the tests will prove
something less-more significant.

ciaos,
till the testing get finished.- Sakrij citirani tekst -

- Prikaži citirani tekst -
Click to expand...


The test conclusion but rather to note that this was kind of a
primitive-amateur-simple test without using supreme test tools or
manufacturer's tools to test them.

both pairs are showing the smilar test results in a way that they are
so close to each other test results in a manner so that there are no
even slight differrences....

+/- and You have identical modules with identical specifications
with different model numbering, and different chipings used in
manufacture process.

The test which i haven't done are that maybe crucially important which
would give more to the sensitivity of manufacture process. Overclock
test, if possible, with gaining up the true power and juice out of
module the most which is possible to be done. Then the stability of
chips, and elasticity i.e. quality of chips and the products in whole.

The one thing especially which i haven't managed to find was the specs
of the K4H511638B-TCB3(but i found primary specs just now,here:
http://www.samsung.com/global/business/semiconductor/productInfo.do?fmly_id=718&partnum=M470L6524BT0)
which i just couldn't find, i couldn't find the sheet specs which i
have found for K4H511638C-UCB3 which shows that the manufacturing
arhitecture(component composition) of this kind of module is 32M x 16
which shows something important and is the same for both pairs, so as
CL.2.5.

The problem is to determine the differences between this two sort of
models-mudules. Seems that notebook est haven't showed the deep
difference which would make a difference, + adding that of "hmm" to
notebook clean environment when making such a test.

These the later modules -UCB3 have the samsung "e" on their sticker
which is what is meaning "ecology"(samsung green serie memory
modules).

I really doubt somthing big would change in producing this modules,
the PCB is phisically looking the same. Only the chips are different
and this small mark: GSEP M02 94V-0 and on -UCB3 AST-104 94V-0 (which
i don't have a darn clue what could mean!).

That's all folks, i have to get to some new age eqiupment to make
further testings etc. and to payroll for a engineer to conduct such
detailed test-results which i'm not capable on my own.


Thanks for any informations which you replay for uncloacking this
miserly doubt.
 
The test conclusion but rather to note that this was kind of a
primitive-amateur-simple test without using supreme test tools or
manufacturer's tools to test them.

both pairs are showing the smilar test results in a way that they are
so close to each other test results in a manner so that there are no
even slight differrences....

+/-   and You have identical modules with identical specifications
with different model numbering, and different chipings used in
manufacture process.

The test which i haven't done are that maybe crucially important which
would give more to the sensitivity of manufacture process. Overclock
test, if possible, with gaining up the true power and juice out of
module the most which is possible to be done. Then the stability of
chips, and elasticity i.e. quality of chips and the products in whole.

The one thing especially which i haven't managed to find was the specs
of the K4H511638B-TCB3(but i found primary specs just now,here:http://www..samsung.com/global/business/semiconductor/productInfo.do?f...)
which i just couldn't find, i couldn't find the sheet specs which i
have found for K4H511638C-UCB3  which shows that the manufacturing
arhitecture(component composition) of this kind of module is 32M x 16
which shows something important and is the same for both pairs, so as
CL.2.5.

The problem is to determine the differences between this two sort of
models-mudules. Seems  that notebook est haven't showed the deep
difference which would make a difference, + adding that of "hmm" to
notebook clean environment when making such a test.

These the later modules -UCB3 have the samsung "e" on their sticker
which is what is meaning "ecology"(samsung green serie memory
modules).

I really doubt somthing big would change in producing this modules,
the PCB is phisically looking the same. Only the chips are different
and this small mark: GSEP M02 94V-0 and on -UCB3 AST-104 94V-0 (which
i don't have a darn clue what could mean!).

That's all folks, i have to get to some new age eqiupment to make
further testings etc. and to payroll for a engineer to conduct such
detailed test-results which i'm not capable on my own.

Thanks for any informations which you replay for uncloacking this
miserly doubt.- Sakrij citirani tekst -

- Prikaži citirani tekst -
Click to expand...

Aha! and both pairs are of the same densities which i have stated 32M
x 16.
 
Back
Top