Reprise du message précédent :

ben un modele superieur risque de te couter le prix de 4 barettes de MDT

Pour 10/15€ de plus (par barette de 512Mo), ya de la Samsung Original ou de la TwinMOS. Ca peut etre que mieux (enfin chez moi)

twinmos hein
oublie, un vraie cata sur nf7
à part la samsung originale...et oublie les timings serrés dans ce cas là

si tu veux je testes tes MDT , pas de prob

 
mister t'explique comment que marc ne trouve aucune diff entre les 939 0.9 et 0.13 ?

ben si, legere...en faveur du 0.09

Sur les TwinMOS, ya 3 types de chip : Mtech (de vraies daubes parait-il), CH-5 (passe en 2-3-2) et TwinMOS (celle qu'ils ont).
Avec une Samsung originale, pas moyen de baisser les timing?

 
c'est clair que c'est pas super cpc off ça te donnera une idée

 
ouais mais si tu regardes le tableau final y en a pas @@

 
ouai c ske jvien de voir ,la mobo à du mal au dessu de 3.7v de vdimm ,la je suis à 4.1v de +3.3,et à 3.66v ds le bios de vdimm ,ce qui dois correspondre à 3.75v en éel ,la mobo à une diff de 0.1v j'ai l'impression ,enfin bref ,voila ce que donnent mes OCZ de merde :
 

la mtech mauvaise ok
la twinmos, nulle (meme pas les timings spd à 200MHz dans memtest)
la ch5 à la limite marche "pas mal"
je la testerai en single sur le 3200+
pour la samsung originale, ça depend de la ref sur les chips...mais tccd ou tcc4, les timings sont assez relachés 2.5-3-3-X jusquà 230-240 avec max 2.85V me semble
edit:

Je recherche plutot timing serrés à 215/220MHz en fait.
Je me prendrai plutôt de la Samsung que de la TwinMOS (avec chip TwinMOS) alors.
Si j'avais su, j'aurais pris de la Crucial (le CAS3 me faisait peur).

j explique pas , moi j avais des gains non negligeables comme lui.

c un peu du delire cette mobo quand meme
pk je suis le seul avec qui les cpu chauffent comme des barges

 
tkt ,moi aussi il chauffe grave le 3400+ ,par conte mon 3000+ ne chauffait pas d'un poil ,sa fait cheir ,le seul truc pour le faire monter ce pu**** de 3400+ c'est le froid ,il aime pas les V celui la ,lotre il adorait sa  

45 en idle a 1.6v a 2500
58 en full

 
Moi mes MDT sont sur nf2 aussi...
C'est de la double face comme celles de Mister et elles tiennent 216 Mhz de FSB sans broncher en 2.5 3 2 11   (elles aiment pas le cas 2 par contre)
Mais chez moi c la mobo qui bloque, elle prend pas plus de  216 de FSB stable (testé avec de la Mushkin pc 3500 lvl II, meme avec timing pourris ca prend pas 217Mhz stable). Oui je ne vousle fait pas dire, les A7N8X en o/c ca suxxxxxxxx

 
tu peux tester un super 3000+  

Concernant les timing, pareil : 2.5-3-2-11 au mieux, mais ça me m'y attendais.
Par contre je m'attendais à bien mieux niveau fréquence. Un max screen à 210MHz c'est vraiment nul. Je dois etre stable à 205MHz maximum  
Et c'est de la simple face (je pensais que c'était mieux).

la MDT que l'on a c'est de la double face
 
ca tient entre 235/250 en 2.5-3-2-11 a 2.75v
sur S939
 
par essayé sur nforce2
 
 
 
Tu es ou dans le sud de paris ?

Je sais que vous aviez de la double face.
J'habite à Antony (RER-B). On pourrait les tester chez toi?

je suis au Kremlin bicêtre
 
je peux les mettre sur la gigabyte 939 voir si elles tournent bien, mais pas sur nforce2
 
 
Vaudrait mieux que tu trouves quelqu'un qui ait une nf7 qui tourne bien pour voir comment elles montent, ca sera plus révélateur

Justement, j'aimerais bien tester sur une plateforme différente pour voir si c'est le nForce2 qui n'aime pas la MDT ou si c'est la RAM qui peut pas monter en fréquence.

j'ai peur du resultat moi ce soir avec ma noname tcc4

deja eu 2

 
   
n'oublie pas  
je cherche tjr une souris de compet' (razor diamachin) un tapis et des patins en teflons
comme je sais que tu t'ennuies    donne moi des lien de site VPC ou des @dresses    
 
 
   
++

oui on m'a montré la tete de la razer elle a pas l'air mal
mx310 powa et les patins en teflon t'en trouve partout

les 939 0,09 devraient beneficier du Strained silicon a partir de la semaine 0445

MP Mister

AMD's 90 nm Strained Products
 
AMD let leak some months ago that they were going to use some strained silicon features in upcoming products.  The first announced product that does feature this technology is the Athlon FX-55, which is their recently released 2.6 GHz Athlon 64 processor made on the 130 nm SOI process.  There are several ways to strain silicon, and it appears that AMD is currently only using the "stretched" feature.  Compression is not yet used (something that Intel has had very good success with), but it is something that AMD will eventually integrate into their design.  What many were wondering is if strained features were integrated into AMD's latest 90 nm cores?
 
While the 130 nm line was the first to receive the strained treatment, I have just received word that pretty much all Athlon 64 starts now feature strained silicon.  This includes both the 130 nm and 90 nm lines.  While the initial 90 nm Athlon 64's did not have strained silicon, it wouldn't make much sense for AMD to integrate strained in only certain wafer starts and not in others.  The fab business just doesn't like to work that way.  It can be assumed that all Athlon 64 processors by Q4 will have strained features, and these include both 130 nm and 90 nm product lines.  Eventually more strained features will be added to the design mix, as both stretching and compressing silicon leads to better performing and lower power parts.
 
AMD takes advancements like these one step at a time.  Unlike Intel, which utilized a series of strained design features in the Prescott processor on the 90 nm node, AMD has integrated a single strained feature in its current lineup.  Now that AMD apparently has this wrinkle down, we can expect to see more strained features to be integrated in the future.  Most likely the 2.6 GHz and 2.8 GHz 90 nm parts expected in January will only feature stretched silicon, but products after that point will probably utilize more strained features.  From all indications, AMD's 90 nm SOI process is holding up very well, and the overall design of the Athlon 64 has contributed to the success of their 90 nm process (AMD didn't have to push transistor speed to such a degree as Intel did with the Prescott to achieve good performance).
 
AMD definitely has a smoother road ahead of them as compared to Intel.  With the Prescott Intel threw a whole slew of technologies into the design and manufacturing of that product, and they essentially ran out of tricks to get it to go faster and consume less power.  Intel has obviously seen this dead end, and have cancelled the 4 GHz Pentium 4.  It is also very uncertain if Intel will release a 3.8 GHz Pentium 4.  The new strategy for Intel apparently relies on other architectural enhancements such as 2 MB of L2 cache, higher FSB speeds, and eventual dual core processors.  AMD has been able to match Intel's parts until this point with 130 nm products, and only now have they started to release 90 nm parts that reach 2.4 GHz.  AMD is still ramping up performance on their 90 nm line, and they have yet to integrate many of the performance features that Intel's 90 nm process currently possesses.  Compressed strained silicon is the next step, and there are many features left to integrate.  The first 90 nm products off of AMD's line were focused on good yields and low power consumption.  This allowed AMD to have good initial yields and to sell these products for revenue (as compared to trying to achieve high speed at the expense of poor yields).  This gave AMD engineers a chance to work the kinks out of their 90 nm process without the added worry of squeezing every ounce of performance from the new process.
 
We can perhaps get a good feeling where AMD is heading in terms of clock speeds for the Athlon 64 on 90 nm.  If we look at the current range of 130 nm products, we see the initial speed of 2.0 GHz with the 3200+ released one year ago.  The current speed champ for the 130 nm process runs at 2.6 GHz (the FX-55).  We can safely assume that AMD will eventually reach 3 GHz with 90 nm products, and by that time we will also see the introduction of the desktop dual core processor.  With their current roadmap, AMD is not relying on brute clockspeed to achieve their performance goals.  While manufacturing is always a primary concern in processor design, AMD has done its best to limit the negative effects that a poorly performing process might entail.  Luckily for AMD their 90 nm process appears robust, and they can continue to tweak Intel's nose with faster and more competent products.
 
AMD is in an envious situation at the moment.  Not only do they have one of the fastest desktop processors in the world, but they are steadily increasing their 90 nm output.  This gives AMD the ability to produce more chips than they have previously, and also allows them to address a larger percentage of the market.  With the original 130 nm Athlon 64 design, AMD could only theoretically supply around 20% of the market with all of their manufacturing lines maxed out.  With 90 nm and the latest designs, AMD is in a position where they could theoretically address up to 28% of the market.  If AMD continues to keep one step ahead of Intel, then by Q2 of 2005 they could acquire around 23% of the market (I believe their current marketshare is around 18%).  From the roadmaps I have seen of Intel and AMD, AMD should continue to stay one small step ahead of Intel.  From a desktop application and gaming perspective, AMD certainly holds the performance crown.  Intel still holds the performance lead in many audio and video encoding applications.  Now that AMD will have PCI-E based motherboards on the market shortly, the feature race will tighten even more.  As AMD scales the Athlon 64 in clockspeed, then the encoding advantage that Intel holds will start to diminish.  Once both companies have their dual core products on the market, then things will probably get mixed up again and we will see a huge shift in relative performance between the two.
 

tain, j'ai pris mon 3200+ trop tot
et j'suis pas pret de le changer
edit: ya eu du delete là

 
 
je l'attend  

me tarde ce soir une fois remonté mon paicai avec ce ptit 3200+  
par contre, je sais tjs pas si le virement chez cheeep est pris en compte ou pas
et si oui, quand je recevrai ma ram...parceque j'suis habitué au Go moi

512 c'est dur
 
         mais pour win et des jeux comme UT ça passe  
 
puis 1Go qui rox je connais pas en s754  

pour 1 semaine, ça devrait suffir 512Mo
vu que totu ce que je vais faire, c'est bench

bah pk 1go si tu bench uniquement ?  
 
non mais    
 
   bah en finalité je prefere mes 512 qui rox que mes 1 go qui merdent.
 
même le nf2 me gratte en BP avec 1Go    
 

zavez une idee de pourquoi avec ma samsung TCCC censer etre original je narrive pas a monter a plus de 215MHz ?

bah elle est pas cencer monter

bah mets 2.9v et 3-3-3-x et ca devrait aller
 
sinon, bah c'est que t'es pas sur une bonne série

c'est quoi cette vieille photo O_o
 
pas de touche imprim ecran sur son clavier ?