Well Intel screwed us! I850E chipset no 1066 RDRAM support

i just ofund this out today.. i think that you guys probably already know this but eh i'll spew anyway.

Intel has released their design specs... and guess what guys? The I850E chipset that we all have been desperately waiting for for so long! Yea it doesn't officially support the 1066 RDRAM!!! Intel went as far as to announce it publically! I understand if it is like written in a small print in a corner somewhere.. but they literally went out and told the motherboard manufacturers! Check it out here http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/02q2/020506/p4b-01.html

It also doesn't support the ICH4 southbridge which allows for USB 2.0 what the hell i guess sis645dx is the way to go.. as soon with the release of DDR400 it will become king! I mean come on intel must know this.

man that sucks... I was thinking about getting a P4T533.... hmmm
damn intel

I would take it easy. Remember, the i850 did not support 533MHz FSB either, and yet look at all the people that are running that speed on their P4T-E or TH7 II. Heck, my Sis645 (non-DX) doesn't 'officially' do the 533MHz either, but it seems OK to me.

Intel has to remain precisely correct, but the board vendors are often able to come up with a few tricks to push the chipset. Also, AFAIK there is no RDRAM 1066 available right now. If you are dead-set on a RAMBUS solution, wait until the reviews for the 850E boards and see what they contain.

As a side note, not a real review of the board, but THG did run PC1066 in one of the current 850 boards for theirP4 533FSB article. So its not like it isn't possible.

EDIT: All you have to do to get RDRAM at 1066 is:
1) Set FSB to 133 MHz.
2) Set RDRAM multiplier to 4x.
3) pray that your RDRAM can run at PC1066 speeds.

ASUS will launch P4T533-E when PC1066 will be available.
This model will support for the new PC1066.
We had better wait more ...

well actually i don't mind that the 850E doesn't support pc1066 but i really think that intel is really " IDIOT" and is trying to kill themself but not using ICH4 for the southbridge. i guess they don't care about 850E. maybe they have designed the 850E earlier and well they figure they have designed it so might as well throw it out. crippled or not. but i think really for me it's stupid to buy the 850E , it's the same as 850, just that maybe it's a tad bit faster optimized rambus ram timing i'd guess. plus if the mother board maker did included usb 2.0 and extra stuffs onto 850E mobo's it'll be too darn expensive. i'd buy and 850 mobo and add a pci usb 2.0 card and it'll be still cheaper and more stable

but then the question still remains... why would someone buy anything with the intel 850 chipset since in a month ddr 400 will be released.. those that have overclocked their mobo's to have ddr 400 are whooping 850 @$$ in everything! Also, i think a while back xbit lab was able to sneak in some ddr 400 from samsung, they popped it into an Asus P4s533 (sis 645dx chipset) and it literally had better performance than the 850 boards! dare i say a new leader in p4 chipset making?

well. i like the 645 dx. no offence but i dun see how the 645 dx can outperform a 850 running on pc 1066 0r pc 1200 rambus ram speed. conventional pc 800 then maybe. most 850 mobo's have runned at those speeds with the newer rambus rams. plus the newer ddr400 are only at cas 3 for now maybe when they reach ddr400 at cas 2.5 or cas 2 then it'll surely surpass the 850. no offence though i like the 645dx it's a good design and with lots of features and enhancement SIS have surely outdo themself. i'm sure they will release a newer chipset soon. which will kick the 850E *** really badly. and yeah and maybe even 845E

ivanjong... i was referring to the original 850s with pc800 rambus support... not the ones with 1066 support... when compared for use... the 2.2 A's on both the 645dx (with ddr400 yes that is out now by companies like ocz) and the 850 (standard kingston ram). The ddr platform then outperformed the rambus platform in every benchmark including memory! see for yourself...
http://www.neoseeker.com/resourcelink.html?rlid=49170

ivanjong... i was referring to the original 850s with pc800 rambus support... not the ones with 1066 support... when compared for use... the 2.2 A's on both the 645dx (with ddr400 yes that is out now by companies like ocz) and the 850 (standard kingston ram). The ddr platform then outperformed the rambus platform in every benchmark including memory! see for yourself...
http://www.neoseeker.com/resourcelink.html?rlid=49170

i hope i am not being offensive . but i dun trust ocz . i think everyone knows about this company's bad reputation. and just to prove my point ask mr N about OCZ . i think he has some pics to show you. anyways. i think for now even reputable companies like samsung doesn't market cl2 ddr400 yet. they may have samples but not yet production yet. well i would think that everyone in this forum who buys a mobo doesn't run it without overclocking it. you could get better performance by overclocking a 850 mobo even with normal pc800 rambus rams to pc 1066 level. a lot of overclockers have done this with great success. and i think most mobos out there with 850 will be able to support pc1066 rambus modules easy.

eh you got a point.. but as of now only the asus p47E and abit th7II can overclock to 1066... and besides one can easily overclock pc2700 (samsung) to ddr400

Don't get all hung up on this. Remember the BX chipset? Heck 133FSB wasn't supported officially but because it did so well, mobo makers put correct PCI divisers and even 150FSB support in later revisions. I remember my 1st BX didn't go above 112FSB. Later 133FSB then finally 150FSB(I used the P2B-DS line).

Who cares for official support if it works. None of us run your systems stock anyways. What's the big worry.

What you should be worried about is PC1066/1200 support, or rather 16-bit versions of it. Then 32-bit PC1066/1200. Currently the RDRAM mem controller supports both. It's up to the mobo makers to implement it.

Who cares anyway, first of all let the 1066 ram be released then we'll talk

Darryl_D said:

but then the question still remains... why would someone buy anything with the intel 850 chipset since in a month ddr 400 will be released.. those that have overclocked their mobo's to have ddr 400 are whooping 850 @$$ in everything! Also, i think a while back xbit lab was able to sneak in some ddr 400 from samsung, they popped it into an Asus P4s533 (sis 645dx chipset) and it literally had better performance than the 850 boards! dare i say a new leader in p4 chipset making?

Click to expand...

I have to laugh dude. No offense but a DDR chipset cannot keep up with a RDRAM chipset OC'd. I have never seen where they do.

that sucks man.

ol' man said:

I have to laugh dude. No offense but a DDR chipset cannot keep up with a RDRAM chipset OC'd. I have never seen where they do.

Click to expand...

ol' man: Do you mean in the Sandra Mem benchmark only? If that is the case, yes, but it had been shown time and again that benchmark does not factor in latency. It is also purely theoretical and does not always correspond to performance differences cross-platform. But, if you get off on Sandra benches like a lot of people do, more power to you.

133FSB DDR has higher latency and less bandwidth than 133FSB RD. Yes, at 100FSB RD's latency is pretty crap, but saying all RDRAM is crap based on how overclocked DDR does in comparison is hardly fair.

Sure, 166FSB DDR best's 133FSB RD latency but even then you don't come near the needed bandwidth to feed a P4. Remember, Rambus doesn't suck because of the technology. They sucked because they *used* to be expensive and because the Rambus wanted to other companies to pay them for technology that was not theirs.

oh well i have ddr and i can oc well with it.

cool down guys. lets not debate on this RDRAM Vs DDR again. lets talk things logically ok ? the first thing i'll point out is yes benchmarks aren't 100% accurate, it doesn't show how well it'll do on games or programs that you'll use in daily basis. admit it we can't really use all the bandwith that we have on a RDRAM now. so we can't tell how good it is in real applications. but guys you all do have to admit that the P4 is designed based on RDRAM as the performance platform. P4 is a bandwith hog. the more the better. next DDR design has matured enough to get more and more bandwith. RDram designer has said that DDR rams will have latency problems once they higher the bus speed , that remains to be seen. latency is a problem with RDram true. it's a different technology. it counters it by high clock rate. whatever it is. DDR or RDram both have a potential to succeed so lets just look and see which will succeed. i have a RDRAM system but i hate the company , only like the technology. anyways cool down everyone we just hang on to our systems and see k ? hey it's good that rams have competitions , it lowers the price , see how RDRAM prices crash from sky high ? thats ultimately good for US the consumers. anyways hope i dun offence anyone by saying this. just my opinion

i gotta agree on RDRAM bandwidth.. but i got to disagree on the whole RDRAM= too expensive which is why it was rejected.... The reason i dislike RDRAM is the whole please insert in pairs deal.... honestly.... one can do without all of that! Besides RDRAM struck a deal with sis... expect rdram boards with sis chipsets by this june... Toms Hardware gots the article if any of you guys are interested... on a side note it would be really cool to see video cards with RDRAM memory!!! THAT WOULD ROCK!