Granite Bay

[nealh]

when are the Dual Channel mobos be available????

 

[senior guy]

I will be very surprised if Intel doesn't officially announce GB at Comdex next week!

 

[DynaOne]

Benchmark links over in the General Hardware forum - looks like a winner. No answer to my question - where can you get 1Gig memory sticks for granite bay an d how much?

 

[jaybee]

Originally posted by: nealh
when are the Dual Channel mobos be available????

End of the month.

 

[nealh]

I really want to move on to a P4 with dual channel ddr....do you think they will be out and in the consumer channels in the next several weeeks?

 

[dajo]

ocworkbench review of ASUS P4G8X Dual DDR board is up.

What happened to the 4500+ SoftSandra mem scores that GB was supposed to bring?

 

[THUGSROOK]

Originally posted by: dajo
What happened to the 4500+ SoftSandra mem scores that GB was supposed to bring?

that was posted @ HOCP ~ probably faked

 

[degeester]

Well, nealh, dual ddr mobos are now available, that is if you want a Nvidia chipset or SIS chipset. I am waiting for Intel "Granite Bay" mobos to become available.

 

[nealh]

I prefer to wait for an "intel" solution..more reliable IMHO

 

[dajo]

I don't know... I'll have to see more reviews. They didn't do any overclocking did they? (can't really read it thoroughly now - too much going on here with kids, dogs, TV, etc.!).

I was hoping for a bit more of a bang. I have a 256MB stick of Corsair 3200C2 RAM - killer stuff, but I'm already over 2900 in SoftSandra so I can't see running out and spending another $112 for RAM and $150-$170 for the board just to get 300 more in SoftSandra.

This RAM pairing issue might be somewhat limiting economically except for the devout enthusiast (who isn't unemployed and has kids to feed like me!). If you don't happen to have the RAM already you're going to have to shell out some semi-serious bucks to upgrade.

I wonder if my TwinMos PC2700 and Corsair XMS 3200C2 would run together? Then I could just get the board.

Think I wait a while to see what the other DDR P4 boards have to offer.

 

[TheCoz]

Originally posted by: dajo
ocworkbench review of ASUS P4G8X Dual DDR board is up.

What happened to the 4500+ SoftSandra mem scores that GB was supposed to bring?

OCWB only overclocked with stock vcore and a 2.4B. They probably hit the limitation of that CPU at that particular vcore, not the limit of the GB MCH.

Abbas at TBreak hit 190MHz FSB on his Asus GB board and got 4560MB/s in the Sandra test.
Kyle at HardOCP hit 188MHz FSB on his Asus GB board and got 4600MB/s in the Sandra test.

I assume the lower score for Abbas at a higher FSB is due to something like RAM timings, diff GB stepping or drivers?

I just hope that when the flood of reviews are out tomorrow that most reviewers use unlocked (or low-multiplier) P4s to get the highest FSB speed they can out of their GB boards. From what I've seen so far the GB looks like a very capable overclocker. With some crazy C1 parts we may see a few GB boards running at 200MHz FSB and scoring 4800MB/s+ scores!!:Q

 

[THUGSROOK]

Originally posted by: dajo
I don't know... I'll have to see more reviews. They didn't do any overclocking did they? (can't really read it thoroughly now - too much going on here with kids, dogs, TV, etc.!).

I was hoping for a bit more of a bang. I have a 256MB stick of Corsair 3200C2 RAM - killer stuff, but I'm already over 2900 in SoftSandra so I can't see running out and spending another $112 for RAM and $150-$170 for the board just to get 300 more in SoftSandra.

This RAM pairing issue might be somewhat limiting economically except for the devout enthusiast (who isn't unemployed and has kids to feed like me!). If you don't happen to have the RAM already you're going to have to shell out some semi-serious bucks to upgrade.

I wonder if my TwinMos PC2700 and Corsair XMS 3200C2 would run together? Then I could just get the board.

Think I wait a while to see what the other DDR P4 boards have to offer.

granite bay will make your P4S533 look like a complete POS!
BTW: only 2900? boy youre slow

 

[Toymaker]

Dajo. The Granite Bay board results in Sandra (around 3200) are of two sticks of PC2100 (DDR 266)running at stock settings, unoverclocked and with memory running 1:1 synchronously. The results of your P4S533 (2900) are on a max overclocked system(around DDR 375 or so) running memory at 4:5 (150 MHZ FSB divided by 4 = 37.5, multiplied by 5 = 187.5 X 2 DDR = 375). On a Granite Bay board that overclocks well you would get much more than 3200. DC DDR for the desktop is in it's infancy. Consider what kind of performance you would get with PC2700, 3000, 3200, and 3500 speeds in DC DDR configuration plus aggressive CAS settings. And with GB, even on an unoverclocked system, the more aggressive CAS settings will boost performance even more.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: Toymaker
Dajo. The Granite Bay board results in Sandra (around 3200) are of two sticks of PC2100 (DDR 266)running at stock settings, unoverclocked and with memory running 1:1 synchronously. The results of your P4S533 (2900) are on a max overclocked system(around DDR 375 or so) running memory at 4:5 (150 MHZ FSB divided by 4 = 37.5, multiplied by 5 = 187.5 X 2 DDR = 375). On a Granite Bay board that overclocks well you would get much more than 3200. DC DDR for the desktop is in it's infancy. Consider what kind of performance you would get with PC2700, 3000, 3200, and 3500 speeds in DC DDR configuration plus aggressive CAS settings. And with GB, even on an unoverclocked system, the more aggressive CAS settings will boost performance even more.

the point is not the unoverclocked results, but it's the fact that it's NOT as fast as everyone said it was/would be. They all said it would be faster than a RAMBUS system and it isn't. Close, but not there yet. Sure my system is overclocked and I get a score of 3120/3129 in sandra, but why shell out the $200+ for the new mobo and another stick of memory just to get another 100 points? Not to mention that the memory is locked at 1:1 ratio which limits myoverclocking even further. My CPU can only go so far. Remember...not many CPUs can go to 170Mhz FSb and run stable without unlocking the multiplyer and the P4 is locked so you're stuck with what you get.

 

[TheCoz]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
Sure my system is overclocked and I get a score of 3120/3129 in sandra, but why shell out the $200+ for the new mobo and another stick of memory just to get another 100 points? Not to mention that the memory is locked at 1:1 ratio which limits myoverclocking even further. My CPU can only go so far. Remember...not many CPUs can go to 170Mhz FSb and run stable without unlocking the multiplyer and the P4 is locked so you're stuck with what you get.

An extra 100MB/s? Why would you buy a GB board and run it at stock speeds? With your 2.26 you could probably hit 170MHz FSB and that would give you 4100MB/s in Sandra. Even with your current 157MHz FSB you'd get 3800MB/s.

The whole point to GB is overclocking as far as I'm concerned. If you don't want to overclock then buy an i845PE or i850E rig. Another reason to go for a RDRAM rig is if (as you pointed out) you have a high-multiplier CPU (20x or more) or one that doesn't overclock very well. But with C1 P4 parts becoming more common then we'll see a lot more chips that can hit high FSB speeds. A GB board with a C1 1.8A, 2.26B or 2.4B could provide a high FSB overclock and a ton of memory bandwidth. GB boards will be great for overclocking but non-overclockers should probably pass and go for something cheaper.

The 1:1 memory ratio you get with GB isn't a limitation because it provides as much memory bandwidth as the FSB can handle. If fact 1:1 provides MORE memory bandwidth than the FSB can cope with - that's why you see 76% 'efficiency' scores in Sandra memory tests with DCDDR 1:1 or RDRAM 4x. Intel didn't put 4:5 or 3:4 memory ratios in GB because there's no point in doing so - the FSB isn't big enough for more memory bandwidth than you get with 1:1. Plus, 1:1 runs the memory and FSB clocks in sync and that means lower latencies, your latencies would be higher with 4:5 or 3:4.

 

[ErikaeanLogic]

Originally posted by: THUGSROOK

Originally posted by: dajo
What happened to the 4500+ SoftSandra mem scores that GB was supposed to bring?

that was posted @ HOCP ~ probably faked

lol@THUGS[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-tongue.gif[/img]

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: TheCoz

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
Sure my system is overclocked and I get a score of 3120/3129 in sandra, but why shell out the $200+ for the new mobo and another stick of memory just to get another 100 points? Not to mention that the memory is locked at 1:1 ratio which limits myoverclocking even further. My CPU can only go so far. Remember...not many CPUs can go to 170Mhz FSb and run stable without unlocking the multiplyer and the P4 is locked so you're stuck with what you get.

An extra 100MB/s? Why would you buy a GB board and run it at stock speeds? With your 2.26 you could probably hit 170MHz FSB and that would give you 4100MB/s in Sandra. Even with your current 157MHz FSB you'd get 3800MB/s.

The whole point to GB is overclocking as far as I'm concerned. If you don't want to overclock then buy an i845PE or i850E rig. Another reason to go for a RDRAM rig is if (as you pointed out) you have a high-multiplier CPU (20x or more) or one that doesn't overclock very well. But with C1 P4 parts becoming more common then we'll see a lot more chips that can hit high FSB speeds. A GB board with a C1 1.8A, 2.26B or 2.4B could provide a high FSB overclock and a ton of memory bandwidth. GB boards will be great for overclocking but non-overclockers should probably pass and go for something cheaper.

The 1:1 memory ratio you get with GB isn't a limitation because it provides as much memory bandwidth as the FSB can handle. If fact 1:1 provides MORE memory bandwidth than the FSB can cope with - that's why you see 76% 'efficiency' scores in Sandra memory tests with DCDDR 1:1 or RDRAM 4x. Intel didn't put 4:5 or 3:4 memory ratios in GB because there's no point in doing so - the FSB isn't big enough for more memory bandwidth than you get with 1:1. Plus, 1:1 runs the memory and FSB clocks in sync and that means lower latencies, your latencies would be higher with 4:5 or 3:4.

but there is no point to spending the money unless you benchmark your system all day. It's faster yes, but by how much? a few seconds here in this app, or a few FPS in this benchmark etc

get my point? for me and many like me with systems running overclocked DDR333 systems with High performance ram it isn't worth the money spent. Not to mention not every stick of DDR works in the system. I'm sure you can find a working one, but what about that Corsair you got? What if it doesn't work in this board?

 

[TheCoz]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
but there is no point to spending the money unless you benchmark your system all day. It's faster yes, but by how much? a few seconds here in this app, or a few FPS in this benchmark etc

get my point? for me and many like me with systems running overclocked DDR333 systems with High performance ram it isn't worth the money spent. Not to mention not every stick of DDR works in the system. I'm sure you can find a working one, but what about that Corsair you got? What if it doesn't work in this board?

Oh I agree - if you already have a top-notch DDR rig then you may not get enough of a performance boost to justify the cash. However, some people will spend a ton of cash just to get a 5% boost! If you've got an old system and you're in the market for a new rig then it'd probably be worth the extra money for a GB board too.

I don't have any Corsair DDR, I have Kingmax and the very same stuff I have was used in the OCWB review so I'll be fine thanks! Asus R&D tested a whole bunch of DDR modules....

Dual channel:
OK:
SAMSUNG DDR266 CL2.5 128MB (single-side)
SAMSUNG DDR266 CL2.5 256MB (single-side)
SAMSUNG DDR266 CL2.5 256MB (double-side)
SAMSUNG DDR266 CL2.5 512MB (double-side)
Micron DDR266 CL2.5 128MB (single-side)
Micron DDR266 CL2.5 256MB (double-side)
KINGMAX DDR266 128MB (single-side)
HYNIX DDR266 CL2 256MB (double-side)
HYNIX DDR333 CL2.5 256MB (double-side)
NANYA DDR333 CL2.5 256MB (double-side) with the date code after 0151 (2001, 51st week).
NANYA DDR333 CL2.5 256MB (single-side)
Infineon DDR333 CL2.5 256MB (single-side)
Micron DDR333 CL2.5 128MB (single-side)
Micron DDR333 CL2.5 256MB (double-side)
SAMSUNG DDR333 CL2.5 256MB (single-side)

FAIL:
HYNIX DDR266 CL2.5 256MB (double-side), must set tRCD to 3T
HYUNDAI DDR266 CL2.5 128MB (single-side), must set tRCD to 3T
NANYA DDR266 CL2 256MB (double-side), must set tRAS to 6T
NANYA DDR266 CL2 128MB (single-side), must set tRAS to 6T


It looks like even the old DIMMs that failed initially worked ok with adjusted timings. It's not something to worry about really.

 

[cmdrdredd]

but they don't test corsair! damn them

I have no idea what chips my stick of corsair uses because if I remove the heatspreader I void my warranty on it.

 

[ErikaeanLogic]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
but they don't test corsair! damn them

I have no idea what chips my stick of corsair uses because if I remove the heatspreader I void my warranty on it.

The newest revisions of Corsair XMS2700 and XMS3200 use Winbond 6ns chips, older rev.s use Samsung 6ns; XMS3500 uses Winbond 5ns. Hope that helps.

 

[Toymaker]

cmdrdredd
I agree also. It's not worth your time and money considering the performance of your current system. And I second what the Coz has said too. The theoretical predictions that Granite Bay boards with two sticks of PC2100 would reach 4200 speeds unoverclocked was very optimistic. Most experienced people knew that this wouldn't happen at least with the initial releases. And overclocking would be necessary to achieve anywhere near that performance. The latest release of Sandra also gave an idea as to the true performance of the initial boards. We still have other DC DDR platforms to review from SiS and Via too. And GB is a long way from being a finished product.

 

[cmdrdredd]

i wonder what revision my corsair is...says v2.0

 

[cmdrdredd]

i'm really waiting until DDR-II before I buy again.

 

[Duvie]

Look at the word Rimm4200 for rdram...do you see it delivering 4200mb/s??? NO...If you actually even read some of the post the last 3-4 weeks here about GB you would have seen me state it was long known the dual pc2100 would deliver around 3200-3300...Early reviews some time ago showed that...However I thougt updates since then would have yielded at least 3400 range. So there I am a bit disappointed....People who thought you could just add 2100 twice are laughable and they should keep just benchmarking their system with sissoft and pcmark!!!!

However I will be running at 171fsb with my chip and you can run your rdram...OK!!!! I can only run my memory at 342mhz ddr on my board cause the fsb is too high to work with my 3:4 ratio. So I get 2600 in sandra now but should expect 4000+ with dual 342mhz ddr....That is a 53% increase in score which should break down to a healthy 5-20percent app depending...Right now rdram pc1066 can offer 8-10% increase versus pc800/ddr 333 in some apps so I would imagine dual 342mhz and the same spread vesus the pc1066 as the pc1066 has with pc800 should possibly double that performance....

 

[oldfart]

The GB dual channel DDR makes it so much easier. With SC DDR or RDRAM, there is always a fine line balancing CPU/FSB speed and mem speed. With both (more so on RDRAM), you can hit a mem speed ceiling because of ram limitations. Duvie is a prime example. His CPU can go to 171 FSB, but to run a 3:4 ratio would require ram that can handle DDR456. Not gonna happen. With an RDRAM setup to use the 4x multiplier, you would need RDRAM that can handle PC1370, which is also not likely. You would have to drop to a 3x multiplier which would still require PC1066 RDRAM. In both cases you are limited by available ram quality. With GB, you are running a 342 DDR speed which is easily obtained with PC2700 - PC 3000 DDR ram.

The GB setups allow all the FSB overclocking you want without ever having to sacrifice mem BW.