View Full Version : pc4000 support for every mobo?
does every reasonably new mobo support PC4000?
im planning on gettin a abit IC7-G and it says in the manual that it supports up to DDR400, which is PC3200, is it still possible for me to use the PC4000 in this mobo, at DDR500?
No motherboard officially supports more than PC3200 ram, as this is the newest officical DDR specification as defined by JEDEC. Most boards on the market are capable of running the ram at 500MHz via overclocking.
You are putting way too much emphasis on numbers here. Sure 500MHz is a larger figure than 400MHz, but there are a lot of other factors that are more important. Currently available SDRAM isn't really ready for 500MHz operation yet, and as such considerable latencies must be introduced to allow them to operate that fast. This allows well optimized systems running the ram in the more realistic 400-440MHz range with superior latency characteristics to equal the performance of current PC4000 types for far less money.
ok... so can i use pc4000 on my mobo, and OC my cpu as close to 250 as possible for 1:1 or should i go for pc3200 or something
?
In most cases for running 250fsb on a 865/875 chipset running the 5:4 mode (yielding 400MHz on the memory) and the tight timings that this allows will match or exceed the performance yielded by running the 1:1 mode (yielding 500MHz) and the loose timings required to allow the ram to operate this fast. And the cost is much less to use good Winbond BH5 memory that caters to the first option. The Kingston HyperX 3000, Buffalo 3700, and even the Mushkin LVL2 stuff is not nearly so pricey as the PC4000 types.
It's important to understand that this is strictly a function of ram quality. 1:1 operation is faster on these chipsets, and is a worthwhile goal. But it is thwarted from paying off by the fact that available ram really isn't ready to run at 500MHz at this juncture. As ram quality improves better latency timings will be possible at 500MHz, and the inherent superiority of the 1:1 mode and the memory clock speed will again become the dominant factors.
Also understand that these are very small differences that we are talking about. That's the biggest reason that it is hard for me to recommend a person pay the king's ransom that PC4000 memory commands in today's market. And it is important to understand that many evaluate the performance of the two with Sandra's memory bandwidth test, and this is like using a flashlight to illuminate a football field. It just doesn't see enough of the picture to tell you anything.
ok..... so id better get PC3200 and when i OC use the ratios to keep it as close to stable as possible? this is better than pc400 3-4-4 i think then...
sorry if i dont seem clear, but you are going a bit to far with that :) cant understand 100% yet..
larva said:
This allows well optimized systems running the ram in the more realistic 400-440MHz range with superior latency characteristics to equal the performance of current PC4000 types for far less money.
In my opinion, well tuned 400-440 MHz RAM (with excellent latency timings) performs far better than 500 MHz RAM with loose latency settings.
Originally posted by Jognt
ok..... so id better get PC3200 and when i OC use the ratios to keep it as close to stable as possible? this is better than pc400 3-4-4 i think then...
sorry if i dont seem clear, but you are going a bit to far with that :) cant understand 100% yet..
Again, your are depending on numbers far too much here. You are currently better off getting some quality ram bearing Winbond BH5 chips, whatever the maker chooses to call them. BH5's are found on some PC2700, 3000, 3200, 3500, and 3700 labled products. With ram of this type you use the 5:4 ratio and tight timings. This setup will at least equal the results obtained from the current high latency PC4000 types at 1:1.
What CPU are you thinking of getting? That makes a difference on which RAM to pick. If you're getting the 2.4C, then you'd need to use 312 FSB at the 5:4 ratio to make DDR500. That's not likely. If your goal is 3.2 gig with a 2.4C, then good PC3500 will probably be ok. If you're hoping for a little more than that, then PC3700 is what you want. Perhaps if you were buying the 2.8C and shooting for 3.5 gig (250 FSB) and wanted to use the 1:1 ratio, then PC4000 might be justified. If you are on a tight budget, but still wanted good memory bandwidth, then consider the 2.6C teamed up with a good pair of PC3200 RAM. At 3.25 gig (250 FSB) using the 5:4 ratio, this will give you DDR400.
woohoo, thanks, i am getting a 2.6C (see sig, rig to come)
so some great PC3200 would be good enough? with 5:4 ratio, and 250fsb... with this i can get a good performance...
whokay.. Larva, i rely on numbers because i know nothing about ram yet exept for wot DDR means and wot PC4000 etc means...
i think ill go with PC3200 then... my goal is 250mhz though i dunno if ill make it....
Originally posted by Jognt
Larva, i rely on numbers because i know nothing about ram yet exept for wot DDR means and wot PC4000 etc means...
I understand this, and I am doing my best to help you learn enough about the situation to where you can put the numbers in proper perspective. True understanding is rarely an intsantaneous process, but taking it as the goal is always the first step.
Originally posted by Jognt
i think ill go with PC3200 then... my goal is 250mhz though i dunno if ill make it....
I think that is a reasonable decision. Just be sure to get some really good PC3200 (Winbond BH5 chips). And to be honest your safest bet currently available is the Kingston HyperX 3000 newegg has (too bad your out of newegg range). Although called PC3000 it is one of the best BH5 varieties currently available and has proven very well suited to the rather picky nature of the Abit boards. There is a lot of stuff called PC3200 out there that would not work nearly as well. I haven't heard of any HyperX 3000 that is not BH5 though, so hopefully it is still the safest bet even if you don't have access to newegg.
thank you, i think that with time i will learn all those numbers and be all-supreme :)
hmm, since i am limited with memory where i live ill just tell which choices i can have.... (btw: i read kingston hyperX had a LOT of problems... this true or wrong :s)
1: Corsair
2: Kingston
3: Geil
4: Major 3rd
i WAS going with 2x corsair PC3200 2.5cas (2x 256mb)
but i dont know now..
this is with kingston i think could be something:
2x kingston hyperx PC3200 cas2 (2x 256mb)
they also have PC3500 of both corsair and kingston, kingston haveing better latencies (and lower prices...)
EDIT: how do u know wot chipset or summat it has? (BH5 or summat)
The reason you hear about issues with hyperX is some people are going by the numbers and ignoring which chips they carry. There are two hyperX 3200s, one with CH5 chips (which tend to be problematic) and one with BH5s. I believe the one without the "A" on the end is the BH5 version, but don't go by this alone. You need to verify that before spending money on hyperX 3200
I think all the Corsair 3200 is CH5 at this point, and therefore less than ideal for your use.
If you can get the hyperX 3000 I think that is probably your safest bet. As far as I know it is all BH5, but as time goes on I'm sure CH5 variaties will appear, if they haven't already.
aha, thanks im starting to understand more and more now :D
lessee....
it says "KVR266X64C2/512" on one of the sticks... im gonna check em all :)
oh nm... i gotta check with the store itself.. will do so asap..
your pretty sure that the module i need has an "A" at the end of its code?
so HyperX BH5 module PC3200 if i can find it?
KVR266... is Kingston Value Ram 266 MHz. Value ram is total crap-shoot as it can have about any chips on it.
I think it is the KHX3200 without the "A" that is BH5. But I can't be completely positive on this point.
yes, all the kingston ram with my vendor is valueram... this a bad thing?
btw: the above code came from a PC3200 stick!
Ahh, it was the vastly more expensive HyperX series that we have been discussing all along.
It is a bad thing if they claim that is PC3200. KVR266 is PC2100 memory.
There are two KVR400 (Value Ram PC3200) variants, one rated at CL (CAS Latency) 3 and one rated at CL2.5. The CL2.5 variant often has BH5 chips and works great. Since value ram does not have heat spreaders on it simply look at the chips and see what they are.
ConquereR
09-27-03, 03:37 PM
This is HyperX BH-5 PC3200 -> KHX3200K2
I just bought mine HERE (http://www.newegg.com/app/viewproduct.asp?DEPA=1&submit=Go&description=KHX3200K2%2F1G) a few days ago. The BH-5 DOESNT havbe a "A" in the code and has (2-2-2-6-1T) timings.
woohoo, thanks ppl!
this will! come in handy, the PC3200 kingston hyperx valueram had a cas latency of 2..... are these fake modules????
if they do not have BH5 modules anymore, i think ill go with corsair memory modules...
still one thing im wondering though (sorry Larva, im a slow learner :D)
since the 2.4C im getting has a fsb of 200, PC3200 would be ideal for 1:1 but im going to OC it in the future, so maybe i should go with PC3500 to know for sure the module can handle some more?
ConquereR
09-27-03, 05:11 PM
Originally posted by Jognt
woohoo, thanks ppl!
this will! come in handy, the PC3200 kingston hyperx valueram had a cas latency of 2..... are these fake modules????
if they do not have BH5 modules anymore, i think ill go with corsair memory modules...
still one thing im wondering though (sorry Larva, im a slow learner :D)
since the 2.4C im getting has a fsb of 200, PC3200 would be ideal for 1:1 but im going to OC it in the future, so maybe i should go with PC3500 to know for sure the module can handle some more?
I dont know if the BH-5 chip apply the same way to ValueRam as they do to the HyperX...as in the 2-2-2, "no A code".
Originally posted by Jognt
woohoo, thanks ppl!
this will! come in handy, the PC3200 kingston hyperx valueram had a cas latency of 2..... are these fake modules????
HyperX and Value Ram are two different product lines. There is no "PC3200 hyperx valueram". They are different things. PC3200 Value Ram comes in CL2.5 and 3, with the CL2.5 version often carrying BH5 chips. Since Value Ram does not have heatspreaders covering the chips you can look at the chips and identify them by the markings on them.
Originally posted by Jognt
if they do not have BH5 modules anymore, i think ill go with corsair memory modules...
I would not do this, as it will almost surely get you CH5 chips. It's been a while since Corsair has sold anything with BH5s.
Originally posted by Jognt
since the 2.4C im getting has a fsb of 200, PC3200 would be ideal for 1:1 but im going to OC it in the future, so maybe i should go with PC3500 to know for sure the module can handle some more?
I thought you were going to get the 2.6c, not the 2.4c. With any of the c series chips the default fsb is 200, so you will be using the 5:4 ratio if you overclock them much. Again, PC3500 means nothing, and it will likely have the same BH5 chips (at best) that the better grades of PC3200 have, or CH5s more commonly nowdays.
It doesn't really matter what they call it, it's the chips the module carry that is the important thing to quantify. Most PC3200 and 3500 these days is CH5, and isn't as suited for dual channel Intel rigs. That is the reason to find some Kingston HyperX 3000, HyperX 3200 (non-A), or inspect the PC3200 Value Ram in the hopes of finding something that uses BH5s.
What about A-Data RAM, isn't that readily available in Europe? A-Data is good RAM.
wth, i am getting a 2.6C mustve been a typo...
ok, so the BH5 is better used ofr dual ddr intel rigs..
i slept on it for a night, and indeed found out id use the dividers for that... ok...
so 2x256mb Kingston BH5 HyperX or if they havent got it, ValueRam...
:) ANYTHING that has BH5 :)
------------------------------------EDIT------------------------------------
woohoo, found a module that actually reads "KHX" on it!
KHX 3000/256
(5638944445-483).A30
1122185 - 2.3V
the things between brackets () are numbers i could not read, but they were numbers...
this would mean --> Kingston HyperX pc3000/256mb
and the A would suggest this was a CH5 module?
btw: they say this module has a cas latency of 2.2 .............. this is NOT possible...
Yeah, that looks promising. The A and non-a were the HyperX 3200, I think there is only one KHX3000. I think that is a safe bet to be BH5s.
woohoo, though 2 things are bothering me
1: the cas latency they say it has, im starting to lose trust...
2: pc3000 = ddr375, since im going to OC a lot, will this be enough with the 2.6c havin a standard fsb of 200, or does the mobo have a good enough multi for it so the ram can handle the speeds? (im rather safe than sorry...)
On the first point it's cas2, you are interpreting the labling wrong.
On the second, I just can't make this any clearer. The numbers DO NOT MATTER. The fact that these modules are BH5 chips is the important thing, not the number attached to them. Because of the superiority of the BH5 chips for this application they will allow more clock speed than the CH5 bearing HyperX3500, even though they have a smaller number attached. HyperX 3000 is reaching well over 400MHz at tight timings on Abit boards, making it the ram of choice.
aha, ok, number 2 now completly solved :)
i did not interpret the lablin wrong...
they ADVERTISE it under cas latency 2.2... maybe this is a typo... but still........ ah well, ill probably then go for that indeed!
so 2x Kingston HyperX pc3000 256mb it will be :)
i can just run that memory 1:1 with fsb when its still at stock 200fsb?
Should be able to. I know it's not rated for DDR400, but if it's good quality RAM, then it'll overclock a bit. For the most part, PC2700, PC3000, and PC3200 is the same. The higher you overclock it, the more vmem voltage you might have to give it and you might have to relax the timings a little.
Originally posted by Jognt
so 2x Kingston HyperX pc3000 256mb it will be :)
i can just run that memory 1:1 with fsb when its still at stock 200fsb?
This memory has achieved as much as 460MHz for some users at 1:1 on Abit dual channel boards. 400MHz is a walk in the park, and it will likely allow higher fsb's at 1:1 than any other low latency ram you can buy. This was rather the whole point of the recommendation.
The only types that are doing 1:1 at higher fsb than the HyperX3000 are the most expensive PC3700 and PC4000 types. And they must use slower timings to do so, meaning the realized performance is no greater.
If your cpu is a good one you will be able to advance the fsb far in excess of 200, and at some pont will have to switch to the 5:4 ratio. But you should be able to run the 1:1 ratio all the way up to the 225-230MHz fsb range with this ram. With the 5:4 ratio fsb's in the 290MHz range are possible.
whokay, then i now officially know wot ram to use :) lets edit my sig :p
JohnnyCNote
09-28-03, 10:06 AM
Originally posted by ConquereR
This is HyperX BH-5 PC3200 -> KHX3200K2
I just bought mine HERE (http://www.newegg.com/app/viewproduct.asp?DEPA=1&submit=Go&description=KHX3200K2%2F1G) a few days ago. The BH-5 DOESNT havbe a "A" in the code and has (2-2-2-6-1T) timings.
How can you determine that they have the BH-5 modules? I checked the website and couldn't find any reference to it. Also, how can you determine if any other brand uses BH-5 or whatever? Just when I thought I knew what RAM to get, I find out I had it all wrong.
Thanks.....
Originally posted by ConquereR
The BH-5 DOESNT havbe a "A" in the code and has (2-2-2-6-1T) timings.
Originally posted by larva
The A and non-a were the HyperX 3200, I think there is only one KHX3000. I think that is a safe bet to be BH5s.
:)
edit:
does increasing the multi increase or decrease performance?
cuz if i let the ram run at 200mhz, i can use the 5:4 multi to keep it at 200, and when i reach 300fsb (if i can:p) then i can use the 3:2 multi.... to get it at 200mhz again, is this better for performance or am i better of running the ram even faster... ie: 300 mhz with 5:4 divider = ram running @ 240mhz
System design is the art of compromise. It would be preferable to run 1:1 with the memory at 500-600MHz, but ram just can't run this fast without severe compromises in the latency settings at this point. Because of this fact it is perferable to use the 5:4 or 3:2 ratios to slow the ram speed down to a level that it tolerates well, so we can run faster latency timings and produce equivalent performance for a lot less money.
So if you could run the 5:4 ratio instead of the 3:2, you would probably want to. But in your example this would push the memory to 480MHz, and again, it might actually work better to run 3:2 and tighter timings. Each case is an individual, and these are sweeping generalizations we are making, but until ram quality improves using the ratios other than 1:1 to slow the ram to acceptable levels with the advantage of tighter timings is a valid approach.
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.