If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 15:43:26 -0400, JK wrote:
I am very interested in that computer. It must be a very new model, as the Athlon 64 3200+ at a 2 ghz clock speed is a chip made on the new 90 nm process, and uses two on chip memory controllers, and the newer socket 939 motherboard. Naaah.. Nothing that exciting. Check the tech specs: http://h20195.www2.hp.com/search/pdf...ad81ca315d.pdf It's just a plain, old 130nm, 2.0GHz/1MB L2 cache, socket 754 Athlon64. This website indicates an October release for the chip. Is that system in stores already (if so what country?), The system seems to only be sold in Britain, though I'm sure that HP has similar systems available in other countries. or is it a built to order system to be shipped in a week or two? I couldn't find information on the net under that model number. http://www.c627627.com/AMD/Athlon64/ You'll notice on that chart that there are three different Athlon64 3200+ chips. The one used in this system is the first, a "Clawhammer" running at 2.0GHz with 1MB of L2 cache and socket 754. The "Newcastle" running at 2.2GHz and with 512KB of L2 cache and socket 754 is also available now (though the chart has a typo on the date, it came out in April of 2004, not April of 2003). The chip you're thinking of, a socket 939 "Winchester" running at 2.0GHz and 512KB of L2 cache won't be out for a little bit. ------------- Tony Hill hilla underscore 20 at yahoo dot ca |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
JK wrote:
I am very interested in that computer. It must be a very new model, as the Athlon 64 3200+ at a 2 ghz clock speed is a chip made on the new 90 nm process, and uses two on chip memory controllers, and the newer socket 939 motherboard. JK, Why would dual channel imply two memory controllers? -- Regards, Grumble |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 12:09:43 +0200, Grumble wrote:
JK wrote: I am very interested in that computer. It must be a very new model, as the Athlon 64 3200+ at a 2 ghz clock speed is a chip made on the new 90 nm process, and uses two on chip memory controllers, and the newer socket 939 motherboard. JK, Why would dual channel imply two memory controllers? Imply? Dual channel == two memory controllers. -- Keith |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 20:08:23 +0100, GSV Three Minds in a Can wrote:
Bitstring , from the wonderful person JK said snip It was only when I got home, I learnt that 3200+ doesn't mean 3.2ghz and that this processor is actually 2.0ghz. The clock speed doesn't matter. What matters is how fast it runs programs. http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...spx?i=2065&p=6 Think of the clock speed of a processor as being like how many steps per minute an animal makes. I prefer 'the rev counter in your car'. Yeah, it measures something, but nothing you really care about comparing between different brands. Exactly. If you're spinning your wheels, all you're doing is wasting energy. ;-) Roadspeed and gas consumption are much more interesting. ....not to mention negotiating curves. -- Keith |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
keith wrote:
Grumble wrote: Why would dual channel imply two memory controllers? Imply? Dual channel == two memory controllers. Can't a dual-channel memory controller be implemented as one circuit with twice as many wires as a single-channel memory controller? -- Regards, Grumble |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 14:30:11 +0200, Grumble wrote:
keith wrote: Grumble wrote: Why would dual channel imply two memory controllers? Imply? Dual channel == two memory controllers. Can't a dual-channel memory controller be implemented as one circuit with twice as many wires as a single-channel memory controller? An unqualified *no*. It would be more difficult, slower, and add nothing to the mix. One of the reasons to go with multiple channels is to simplify timing across many wires. Note the high-speeed interfaces have narrower "channels" so the timing is simpler (or possible). Indeed, the ApplePI/EI bus has timing adjustments on a per-pin basis. Making channels wider makes no sense. -- Keith |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 16 Sep 2004 22:40:36 -0400, keith wrote:
On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 14:30:11 +0200, Grumble wrote: keith wrote: Grumble wrote: Why would dual channel imply two memory controllers? Imply? Dual channel == two memory controllers. Can't a dual-channel memory controller be implemented as one circuit with twice as many wires as a single-channel memory controller? An unqualified *no*. It would be more difficult, slower, and add nothing to the mix. One of the reasons to go with multiple channels is to simplify timing across many wires. Note the high-speeed interfaces have narrower "channels" so the timing is simpler (or possible). Indeed, the ApplePI/EI bus has timing adjustments on a per-pin basis. Making channels wider makes no sense. .... Fwiw, the two memory "channels" (DDR2/266-400) on the Lindenhurst family of MCH chips (P4 and P4 Xeon) are closer to a single, double-wide bus than not. The same could be said for the various flavors of Serverworks' CMIC chip (DDR266-400). The same address appears on both channels simultaneously, and the data from both "channels" is aggregated and delivered to the FSB as a cache line with both channels contributing equally. And clocks for all dimms on both "channels" originate from the same source... /daytripper () |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Athlon 64 vs Pentium 4 | man | General Hardware | 3 | August 11th 04 08:55 AM |
Athlon 64 vs Pentium 4 | Pandora Xero | General Hardware | 0 | August 11th 04 06:21 AM |
Slowest Athlon 64 humbles fastest P4 in gaming | Tone-EQ | Overclocking AMD Processors | 1 | December 15th 03 04:09 PM |
Athlon 64's vs. Athlon XP vs. Pentium 4 | MarkW | General Hardware | 6 | December 14th 03 03:32 AM |
Which is better: AMD Athlon XP 1800+ or Intel Pentium 2 GHz? | JK | Homebuilt PC's | 1 | July 6th 03 08:47 PM |