InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 4
Posts 3435
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 03/05/2003

Re: None

Saturday, 04/19/2003 1:54:37 PM

Saturday, April 19, 2003 1:54:37 PM

Post# of 97573
A couple of comments about the A64 preview.

1) VIA's first chipset implementations always stink. The "A" versions usually address this.

2) AGP is still handled by the "chipset".

3) Boot screen and BIOS state Mem clock as 200MHz. If you look at the Sandra screen on page 6, something doesn't seem to jibe. If it were DDR400(200MHz clock), shouldn't the throughput be @ 3200MB/s, especially since they mention the incredible efficiency? 1600MB/s sounds like PC1600, which is DDR200(100MHz clock). Something ain't right here.

4) I wouldn't expect it to do so well on benchmarks that fit in all the processors L1/L2 caches. After all, there clock rate would be a huge factor, just like the higher clocked Tbreds beating the lower clocked Bartons with the same PR.

I believe I'll reserve judgement until the real reviews come out.
I am encouraged that they claimed that DDR266/333/400 were supported, but there are too many inconsistencies in this preview for my taste.
Paul



Volume:
Day Range:
Bid:
Ask:
Last Trade Time:
Total Trades:
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 5Y
Recent AMD News