AMD64 MOBOS and RAM

[nickle]

14 AMD 64 MOBOS and 13 PC3200 RAM tested here:

http://www.tomshardware.com/motherboard ... index.html

The street buzz is that MSI makes premium quality MOBO's.  And the test winner is Asus? By far.

Interesting disclosure of which company makes the best RAM and the worst.

[congo]

I just so happens that MSI make the cheapest 64bit platform available to me here in Australia. That's good news Nickle.

Yesterday I priced a "core components upgrade" comprising MSI Mainboard, Athlon XP3000 64bit CPU, 1024mb PC3200 RAM, and 120gig (3yr warranty) hard disk.

It came to $1050 AU

which is $720 US or 320 British pounds.

and thats a real overnight mail order for me.  

It could be nearly time to exchange my ancient (over a year old!) AMD rig for the new gear.  :)

[Delta_]

My confidence that Crucial make excellent RAM and if not the best RAM available today grows.

BTW i use Crucial RAM.

[Iroquois]

As you know Congo, I was looking for an Athlon64 rig as well but it got too expensive. Price skyrocketed over night. Unusual for computer parts.

For RAM, I have one K-Byte PC-333 512mb stick on my current setup. Got it on sale at BestBuy. Not sure how good it is but I haven't had any problems with it yet.

[congo]

The AMD 64 bit specification doesn't officially support double sided RAM modules, it never pretended too.

The bonus of it actually working with double sided modules is not to be underestimated, it is a serious compatiblity issue.

The upshot is of the matter is, that a couple mainboard manufacturers have done very well in providing this compatibility with existing RAM modules, no doubt others will follow.

The point is somewhat mute however, if you take Iroquois' case as an example.......

If Iroquois  goes out and gets a 64bit rig and finds his Odd-brand ram module miraculously works in the new system, he still has a problem.

Firstly, he robbed the original PC of it's useful RAM and rendered the old system inept, decreasing any potential resale value.

Secondly, he's running a sub-speed stick (PC2700 instead of PC3200 as required) in his flash new rig, effectively crippling it as well.

Thirdly, any "real" RAM fix for the fancy new 64bit machine is going to involve the purchase of a matching pair of quality ram modules to run the PC in dual channel ram mode as designed.

This last point is easily overcome from the very start of the purchase process, making sure the supplier is aware of compatiblity issues involving double sided ram modules and 64bit hardware, and to make sure he supplies a compatible set of hardware components.

If the guy gives you any "guff" over it, he hasn't done his homework, and it's best to find a new supplier.

[nickle]

Here's some excerpts The 64 Bit Question, Simson Garfunkel (MIT), WSJ, 4 June 2004:

"All of this history is suddenly relevant once again as we consider the next big jump in PC architecture -- the shift from 32-bit to 64-bit computing. But while the payoff moving from a 16-bit address space to 32 bits was huge, the move from 32 bits to 64 bits will barely be noticed by most computer users. The reason is that 32 bits is actually large enough to solve the vast majority of computing tasks -- not just today's, but also tomorrow's.

The move from 32 bits to 64 is unlikely to bring the same sort of quantum jump in speed or capabilities that we got moving from 16 bits to 32. Yes, 64 bits of address is truly humungous, but 32 bits is nothing to sneeze at."

"Yes, AMD and IBM could have put that same technology into a new 32-bit design. But these days, designing a new chip costs billions of dollars. A 64-bit processor can command a higher price than a 32-bit CPU, so it is in the best interest of these companies to put their latest-and-greatest technology into their 64-bit products."

"But remember, there's always room at the bottom. And since 32-bit machines are likely to be useful for at least a decade to come, if not longer, I would be surprised to see Dell cede this market to another company. Just look at Apple: while all of the PowerMac desktop machines that Apples sells come with G5 processors, the company is still using G4s in its iMac, eMac, and PowerBook computers.

Personally, I think that 32-bit systems will be with us for a long time to come."

[congo]

Yeah, I'm sure Dell will see to that.  

But, seriously, the jump up to 1600mhz Front side Bus speed in the AMD 64 bit machines has kept them in contention with the P4 offerings, they really had to pull a rabbit out of the hat quickly.

That of course was just a side benefit of the 64 bit technology, but it may prove one of the most useful, at least in the short term.

[nickle]

If AMD/Intel issues a new 32 bit chip, then 64 bit will be delayed.  My opinion is that 64 bit is not selling well and that AMD is surviving on Barton 32 bit.  Must have new product to survive.  My view is that the current 32 bit processors are quite adequate and well priced for most consumers.

[congo]

[quote]