On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 15:34:59 +0200, Miguel A. Muņoz wrote:
> However, Dual DDR doesn't work more efficiently in athlon's
> motherboards. If you want to use efficiently the dual channel, you must
> have a pentium motherboard with i875 or i865 chipsets and a
> microprocessor with 800 mhz of FSB.
First things first. No Intel cpu has a FSB over 200MHz (unless you
overclock it). The data rate is however twice that of a similarly clocked
fsb on the Athlon. The FSB width is the same for both the Athlon and P4
afaik. Neither CPU's benefit much from a dual channel ddr unless you have
something using the extra data of the memory bus. In the Athlon MB with on
board video, that would be the case. In the P4, assuming the chipset can
handle it, one could see the benefit to the cpu since the cpu's FSB is
quad pumped (QDR). Now dual DDR ram would equal QDR thus allowing the full
bandwidth of the fsb. Even with this, the benefit isn't as much as you
would think since many data accesses never actually go to the DDR ram for
their data, but get it from one of the cpu caches. This leaves all that
bandwidth only useful in certain applications.
So bandwidth benchmarks don't really mean squat in real world
applications. Probably why the single channel nf2 400 chipset outperforms
the nf2 ultra 400 dual channel chipset in most applications benchmarks.
IOW's don't be concerned with dual channel with AMD unless you have on
board video. There, it does make a difference, giving the video faster
access to the ram.
--
Abit KT7-Raid (KT133) Tbred B core CPU @2400MHz (24x100FSB)
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://mysite.verizon.net/res0exft/cpu.html" target="_blank">http://mysite.verizon.net/res0exft/cpu.html</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
>> Stay informed about: What is the difference of DDR and DUAL DDR Memory