im i the rare one left

[jswjimmy]

am i the only one still overclocking with pc133. i still get 900mb/s. and one more thing is ddr is at 400 mgz why is sdram only at 133 it should be at 200 but no the lazy people gave up on sd

 

[cow123]

well as far as i'm aware, no sdram board can support fsb of 166 or higher so it would be pointless. u can get pc150 from somewhere

 

[jswjimmy]

ya ive seen the pc150 by kingston, i was thinking over overclocking my fsb to 300

 

[WobbleWobble]

I'm still running PC133. My FSB can't go much higher than 133MHz (generic RAM), but I have before (before trying to quiet my system as much as possible) ran my Thunderbird 1.2GHz at 1.33GHz using multipliers. Great overclock eh?

But I don't understand your mentality on SDRAM. Why would you keep on trying to improve an old techonology when a newer technology simply outperforms it at a similar price range?

 

[jswjimmy]

ive gotten my pc133 to 140 cold

"But I don't understand your mentality on SDRAM. Why would you keep on trying to improve an old techonology when a newer technology simply outperforms it at a similar price range? " because it can be done did you give up on sdram when pc800 came out.i think pc200 or 233 would be cheap maby the same price as ddr266 but on cheaper mobos.

 

[jswjimmy]

oops hit enter 2 times

 

[jswjimmy]

"SDRAM? Yes, there are still people who use it. Most factory-built computers are running on SDR anyway. So although it may seem somewhat outdated, SDRAM is still invaluable to quite a number of users. I myself use "regular" memory on my test system (the Abit KT7 is alive as ever). While DDR does offer some obvious advantages and the chipsets have matured to the point where the gap widens." http://mikhailtech.com i think this sums it up

 

[jswjimmy]

dam ocz makes pc166 i could run my mobo at 334 fsb

 

[WobbleWobble]

Originally posted by: jswjimmy
ive gotten my pc133 to 140 cold

"But I don't understand your mentality on SDRAM. Why would you keep on trying to improve an old techonology when a newer technology simply outperforms it at a similar price range? " because it can be done did you give up on sdram when pc800 came out.i think pc200 or 233 would be cheap maby the same price as ddr266 but on cheaper mobos.

That's because:
A) PC800 is Rambus and there is no Rambus platform for Athlon based systems,
B) PC800 was much more expensive than SDRAM was,
C) Even though PC800 had higher bandwidth, SDRAM has lower latency

 

[WobbleWobble]

Originally posted by: jswjimmy
"SDRAM? Yes, there are still people who use it. Most factory-built computers are running on SDR anyway. So although it may seem somewhat outdated, SDRAM is still invaluable to quite a number of users. I myself use "regular" memory on my test system (the Abit KT7 is alive as ever). While DDR does offer some obvious advantages and the chipsets have matured to the point where the gap widens." http://mikhailtech.com i think this sums it up

"Most factory-built computers are funning on SDR anyways?"
When was this article written? (Link to the direct page too please). How many new SDRAM based computers are there available right now?

"SDRAM is still invaluable to quite a number of users."
That's because at the time they probably had a plentiful amount of SDRAM and didn't want to replace it with DDR. I don't see any other reason why SDRAM is still invaluable.

And of course people still use SDRAM. I still use SDRAM. That's because people still have machines that are 2+ years old like me. But if you want performance, DDR is definately faster, providing more bandwidth at are just being slightly more expensive.

 

[jswjimmy]

i give up. ill never win. i jest think sdram could have gone faster.

 

[MDE]

It is pointless to try to squeeze every last bit out of an old technology when you can put resources into the newer technology that will be MUCH better in the long run. Also, DDR uses less voltage than SDRAM if I'm not mistaken, making it a very attractive technology in laptops.

 

[cow123]

Originally posted by: jswjimmy
dam ocz makes pc166 i could run my mobo at 334 fsb

u really dont understand how fsb works do u lol

 

[cow123]

also... pc200/233 for same price as 266mhz ddr? are u crazy ? that would cost around the same as ddr pc3200/3700 (to make anyway).

plus you seem to have missed an earlier reply of mine, saying every sdram mobo as far as im aware, cant exceed 150mhz fsb anyway, because of the pci/agp running too far out of spec

 

[jswjimmy]

i have my mobo runing at 143 its not to fare off

 

[AkumaX]

well i had used my spare k7s5a pro to take a 2100+ -> 2800+ using 166/166 w/ some pc133 infineon. eksellent o/c

 

[jswjimmy]

sweet 2 or 3 cas

 

[AkumaX]

oh yeah, my old tusl2-c helped me take a 1.0a -> 1.6ghz

 

[AkumaX]

cas 3 on both

 

[jswjimmy]

ill have to try it whin i get better cooling

 

[mindwreck]

Originally posted by: jswjimmy
am i the only one still overclocking with pc133. i still get 900mb/s. and one more thing is ddr is at 400 mgz why is sdram only at 133 it should be at 200 but no the lazy people gave up on sd

no your not the only one. Im still using my Tbird and 3 sticks of 256mb pc133 crucial ram. Its going at 144 with 6 -2-2-2 timings. My mobo supports pc166 but my tbird is already toasty at 144mhz fsb so i don't wanna push it.

 

[Icewind]

Sounds like someone needs to upgrade or go back to consoles....

 

[jswjimmy]

Originally posted by: Icewind
Sounds like someone needs to upgrade or go back to consoles....

hay i can run ps2 games on my computer. lol