• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

dual ddr please explain

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

spazzkid

Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2001
Location
Philippines
so wut does dual ddr mean? is it like memory running on raid-0 or something to that extent? how does it fare in overclocking? im looking at the epox 8rda nforce2 board (which i know kud utilize dual ddr). :D
 
basically it's dual channel DDR, in theory it is suppose to double your bandwith, however the chipsets for it are limited and don't utlize it to it's fullest potential yet(like the nForce 2 boards). In time it should be a big boost, like DDR was...

In a dual-channel DDR system, you have two DDR sticks providing memory at the same time rather than just one.
 
thanks ronin. so how does it fare in overclocking? does it give higher yields than single channel ddr?
 
actually funny thing is it's still governed by the same rules for FSB, so you don't get any improvements running it unless the rest of the system can keep up.

it's still to new yet...
 
as ronin says it allows you to pair up 2 64bit sticks up and use them as a 128bit throughput...I should imagine for overclocking your just as limited by what speed they are and the fact your using more than one stick etc.
 
Has anyone tried underclocking their memory yet to achieve maximum CPU speed?

Because of the increased bandwidth allowed from the 128bit wide bus shouldn't one be able to run a 333FSB Proc on a 266mhz memory bus with minimal penalty...thereby taking memory Ocing out of the equasion and allowing for more aggressive timings?

The 266mhz of Dual Channel DDR can provide 4200mb/s of bandwidth (theoretical of course)...more than enough for the 2700mb/s that the CPU is running at. OCing to a 200mhz FSB while keeping the memory at DDR266 (or even 333) should be much easier than trying to run the memory at DDR400 and over...running DDR over 400 with stability and aggressive timings can be tricky and expensive.

If anything I'd say it should open up the OCing potential for your CPU a bit more, you remove the memory from being topped out as it's not difficult at all to run DDR266 or DDR333.

I haven't really looked too closely at the NForce2 boards...do they have similar CPU:Mem ratio settings like on P4s?
 
the trick with the new Dual Channel DDR is balance, have it match the FSB equally, overclocking the memory create a bootleneck and underclocking means wasted resources. Personnally I don't think any of AMD products out there utilize it to maximum yet. I won't mention Intel, but when it comes to Double DDR they seem to be ahead of the game. Hopefully AMD willl have some new stuff out real soon and I won't have to hang my head in shame anymore.
 
ronin1967 said:
basically it's dual channel DDR, in theory it is suppose to double your bandwith, however the chipsets for it are limited and don't utlize it to it's fullest potential yet(like the nForce 2 boards). In time it should be a big boost, like DDR was...

In a dual-channel DDR system, you have two DDR sticks providing memory at the same time rather than just one.

yea i've seen some benches that really havnt changed my mind about sticking with a "regular" board...it's quicker but not much...yet
 
spazzkid said:
thanks ronin. so how does it fare in overclocking? does it give higher yields than single channel ddr?

most using are getting higher fsb than say the best via boards out. 200 fsb seems to be getting hit by quite a few. But as Ronin said it is dependent on alot of others components. But most reviews show in all tests the nforce is faster how much varies but in time it will become a bigger margin I think.

I am also considering a Nforce2 board as friend wants to buy my 8K3A board and 1600 so the upgrade will cost me nothing as I have a 1700 on way.

I am considering the Chaintech APOGEE 7NJL1 because of its bundle, and it also offers lan , but Cmedia instead of nvidia onboard sound (I do not care about that anywyas as I willl use a sound card)

Cisco KId
 
i hear that the intel based dual channel boards are getting better results with the dual channel ddr. do too using the 533mhz fsb. since the highest rated ddr out now is what 433? the duall ddr can utilize the extra bandwith and deliver it to the intel running 533mhz fsb.

since the athlon chips are still only utilizeing 333mhz fsb and some like mine ocklocked to 400mhz <(the chip that is) the duall ddr seems to give little or no performance gain.
 
Last edited:
walldow said:
i hear that the intel based dual channel boards are getting better results with the dual channel ddr. do too using the 533mhz fsb. since the highest rated ddr out now is what 433? the duall ddr can utilize the extra bandwith and deliver it to the intel running 533mhz fsb.

The Intel Granite bay is a 533fsb CPU coupled to a 266mhz Dual DDR. DDR433 is pointless until you get over 200FSB on your CPU.

For the last couple of years despite the bandwidth advantage that 800mhz Rambus had over DDR, AMD's still outperformed P4s. Right now Single Channel DDR 400 P4s come pretty close to 1066RDRAM P4 performance. The difference in memory speeds is not reflected in the level of overall performance.

It seems memory performance does indeed play a big part in the performance of a system, but it appears we have achieved a level that requires twice the amount of power for that one more notch up the performance ladder...well maybe that's a bit dramatic...but do you get what I'm trying to get at?

Why is everyone so 'memory' crazy now? We're all victims of a marketing machine gone crazy.
 
Back