Nick Hill wrote:
>
> DDR FSB? are u sure u dont have u're acronyms mixed up a bit?
DDR => Double Data Rate.
DDRSDRAM => Double Data Rate Synchronous Dynamic Access Memory
The Athlon uses a 200 MHz FSB. The FSB is DDR in that it uses the same
concepts that are there in DDRSDRAM, i.e. putting signals on the bus on
*both* the rising and falling edges of the clock.
So, the bus is *actually* clocked at 100 MHz, but can transfer twice the
data. It uses the EV6 bus signalling protocol, that has been licensed by
AMD from Compaq (Digital).
Making the bus itself run at 200 MHz is slightly tough considering the
Electro Magnetic Compatibility and other design issues, but we will get
there soon ...
> On Wed, Jun 28, 2000 at 08:55:15PM +0530, Sachin Garg wrote:
> >
> > I thought u meant DDR FSB. Also, Celeron has been *artificially* clocked
> > down by Intel. It seems the chip has an amazing overclocking potential,
>
> the only reason why it can be overclocked, is cuz of its 66 MHZ FSB... there's a lot
>of heat that
> it can take, especially the 300A, which i've seen running at 450 too.
>
> > but so does the Duron/T-Bird.
>
> AMD chips generally are _very_ poer overclockers. let see if duron changes the
>trend...
The Duron has not been articficially been made a poor version of the
T-Bird, in the sense the Celeron is (part of the cache disabled and a
slower FSB). The Duron *has* lesser cache on it (the die itself is
smaller). Hence, AMD will not have to artificially hike the T-Bird price
so as to make Duron competitive. The Duron *itself* is cheap. Plus,
according to Tom's Hardware (a link I sent earlier), Duron/T-Bird get
their clock multiplier from the motherboard settings and can be easily
overclocked. Benchmarks with overclocked Duron and T-Bird are given
there.
Also, in your earlier mail u wrote:
> u're too way off in the past. Intel's compermine definitely beats
> athlon anyday... look at some latest benchmarks...
I would suggest u look at benchmarks comparing the T-Bird with
Coppermine. Of course, coppermine would perform better than the classic
Athlon (which has much slower L2 cache), but now that the Athlon's cache
runs at full speed ...
Though, the Intel cache does have better latency specs ...
> anyway, kill this thread, it doesn't belong here.
It ought to be in Linux-India-General ...
sachin
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the 'What to do before posting to the list' site
for a list of things to try before posting. The site is
at http://botsie.tripod.com/beforeposting/
