POST A COMMENT

14 Comments

Back to Article

  • bldkc - Friday, March 12, 2004 - link

    By the way could you guys please start highlighting the item being tested in the graphs with a different colored bar or even different color text for the name (or both)? It makes it very difficult to find the product you are testing if I have to read every name on the graph just to find one of them. Reply
  • bldkc - Friday, March 12, 2004 - link

    Wow, don't buy the DDR466! On page 6 it took 1114 seconds to complete! Okay, it's a typo, but still.
    #10-If you wear a thinner coat outside you won't stay as warm as if you wear a thick one. The same thing with chips.
    Reply
  • Wesley Fink - Thursday, March 11, 2004 - link

    #11 - Corrected.

    #10 - BGA chips are both much smaller and thinner than TSOP chips. The electrical connections are also much shorter, generating less heat to start with than TSOP chips. I have seen data supporting 80 to 85% heat dissipation with BGA chips.
    Reply
  • Shalmanese - Thursday, March 11, 2004 - link

    I sure hope Kingmax didn't provide you with 512K chips of RAM ;). (top of pg3) Reply
  • ViRGE - Wednesday, March 10, 2004 - link

    What is it exactly about BGA chips that make them run cooler than TSOP chips? There's the size difference of course, but that doesn't account for the temp difference, does it? Reply
  • Jeff7181 - Wednesday, March 10, 2004 - link

    It's good to see this from Kingmax... I've been wondering for quite some time now why video cards have had DDR500 memory for a few years, and it hasn't made it's way into system RAM. Now we have RAM on video cards capable of DDR1000... why can't we get similar results with system RAM? Reply
  • Inferno - Wednesday, March 10, 2004 - link

    Something everyone may want to note, if you decrease voltage on the Kingmax sometimes that yeilds better O/Cs then raising it. I have owned alot of Kingmax TinyBGA and it usually responds negativly to more voltage. They also do benifit from heat spreaders when pushed hard and kept at default voltage. Reply
  • Pumpkinierre - Wednesday, March 10, 2004 - link

    Good article but still more of the same. It seems like 18month old Winbond BH5 and now these BGA chips are the fastest at DDR400-433. However, are there any hints of a DDR466-500 at low latencies (CAS2) out there? I mean graphics cards have got 256Mb of <3ns DDR (dont know the latencies) so why arent the memory manufacturers using that?

    Xtreme DDR have got some PC3700+ at 2-3-3-6 using picked 5ns Samsung chips (http://www.xtremeddr.com/products/x_pc3700+.shtml)... They quote 2T command rate and some i875 mobo compatibility, which is counter to the Mushkin website advice that intel dual bank chipsets force 1T timings, and memory rated above 1T could be unstable. Perhaps you might get a coupla sticks of that and put them through your test procedure?
    Reply
  • KristopherKubicki - Wednesday, March 10, 2004 - link

    Evan,

    We have achieved ludicris speed, overshot the winnebago, and gone to plaid.

    Kristopher
    Reply
  • KristopherKubicki - Wednesday, March 10, 2004 - link

    BGA is the new standard on DDR2. I welcome the change.

    Kristopher
    Reply
  • Souka - Wednesday, March 10, 2004 - link

    BGA modules have been on Laptop Memory modules for sometime.

    I will say that the BGA's run cooler, which means better battery life. How much? Maybe 10seconds, maybe 10minutes (based on a 4hr battery in my IBM T41)....I just don't have the time to do a fair test.

    My $.02
    Reply
  • Evan Lieb - Wednesday, March 10, 2004 - link

    We're going at ludicrous speed. ;) Reply
  • PorBleemo - Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - link

    I agree AgaBooga, the AT staff has shifted into 6th gear. :) Reply
  • AgaBooga - Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - link

    Good article, glad to see how fast you guys are crankin out articles :D Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now