Home
| Calendar
| Mail Lists
| List Archives
| Desktop SIG
| Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Blog | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU |
Christoph Doerbeck a242369 wrote: > One of my biggest complaints of AMD based motherboards of late is the > lack of support for ECC memory. If I'm putting >2GB in a box, I'd prefer > to spend a little overhead for a big peace of mind. > > Which AMD64 are you considering? If I understand it, the high end version > (opteron?) has the integrated memory controller, where as the lower end > consumer version does not? All AMD64 series processors have the memory controller on-chip. The difference is that the Opteron has a 128-bit-wide interface (2 DIMMs simultaneously), but the Athlon 64 only has a 64-bit-wide interface. The Opteron requires registered DDR SDRAM (more expensive and higher latency, but it allows higher capacity); the Athlon 64 can use unbuffered DDR SDRAM. Both memory controllers support ECC. It's a mystery to me why there are Athlon motherboards without ECC support, since you get it for free with the AMD64 architecture. By the way, the Opteron also has ECC for its on-chip cache memory. But as things stand, you pretty much have to go with an Opteron rather than an Athlon 64 to get a system with ECC support; for whatever reason, the readily available Athlon 64 mobos don't seem to include it. The catches: more expensive CPU and motherboard, more expensive registered RAM, higher memory latency can hurt gaming performance. The good stuff: multiprocessor support is available (the multiprocessor-capable Opteron CPUs cost more than the ones without MP support, though the 2xx series for dual-processor systems isn't too bad), higher total memory bandwidth (if you install DIMMs in pairs) means higher performance in server applications.
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups | |
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities. |