Well, I really hope that "real" dual-DDR is better than Nfarce, which *loses* benchmarks to single-channel KT266A boards. Nvidia seems to have focused on providing a separate channel to the onboard grahics chip, just in case the main memory bus is saturated by CPU and i/o. Funny thing is, if you disable the onboard graphics, performance doesn't change one wit. The other troubling thing about the Nfarce is that if you install more than 2 DIMMs, it will disable all that dual-channel goodness, and knock the memory bus down to 100MHz with slow timing. Yep, that's a real threat :-)
When/if you finally see *real* dual-channel DDR chipset from VIA, SIS, Intel, do you think they will be able to use more than 2 DIMMs? Will they be able to use more than 2 DIMMs and run at any speed faster than PC2100 with CL2 settings?
I see most of this as being mooted by the launch early next year of Hammer. For Intel, I think that dual-DDR makes more sense, but why not just jump straight to DDR-2? I mean the spec is all done and everything right? BTW, which spec do you think they'll use-- JEDECs, or AMI2? That is to say, Micron's, or Samsung's? And will that be DDR-II, or DDR-IIa?
eetimes.com
ebnews.com |
