[PC_Inquisitor]

Hey guys, I'm going to build my new rig, and well, I want a Nvidia based one.

Intel Q9450
GTX 260 SLI

and well, the problem is the mobo... I don't know... 780i or 790i? The main difference is de ram support, 790i has DDR3 and 780i DDR2... I will use it for gaming, movies, etc.

What do you think?

Vote and discuss?

[Syndicate2083]

My friend, and I went with the xfx 780i motherboard. Solid motherboard, DDR3 is pretty expensive, and unless your doing some heavy duty OC and stuff, at this point its not really worth it. If you plan to keep the board for a long time, it might be for you to get it. There has been some people complaining about issues with the 790i chipset in its earliest revs but i personally havent seen any with my friends setup.

In the end its really about what you want to do, and how much money you have to spend. If you can take the hit for ddr3, go for it.

[kris23]

intel X48 and a 4870 man......

much better stability than any nvidia chip and the 4870 is more powerful than the 260

[Lowfat]

The 780i and 790i are both good chipsets. Yes the 780i is pretty much a refresh of 680i, but it more stable, and the boards have a shitload less problems. If you can afford to go with the more expensive 790i and DDR3 then by all means due to. It is a better chipset with native PCIe 2.0 support. Although the 780i isn't a bad. It does still use the 570 southbridge so the RAID is still weak though.

[Vehicon]

I love my 790i, and so does my Q9450.

[Lowfat]

If I could of afforded a 790i, I would of definitely purchased one over my eVGA 780i.

[Syndicate2083]

yeah i didnt have the reserves to go for the 790i so i got the xfx 780i

[PC_Inquisitor]

Well guys, I think I'll go for the 790i... Maybe DDR3 is expensive and pretty useless now, but it is now...

Thanks to all...

To Kris23, I don't like ATI... I agree the 4870 rocks, but the CF mode sucks!! I thought about the 4870 X2, but its a quite expensive for me... and well, I prefer Nvidia...

Thanks for your point of view, really the X48 chipset is amazing... can' wait to see hoy the X58 performs...

[Vehicon]

Ive got tonz of DDR3 ram, and i think allot of higher end DDR2 RAM could beat it out. BUT, i don't regret buying it at all. Stuff works great.

[CDsDontBurn]

i have a question when it comes to overclocking for the 780i vs. 790i boards.

you can run 1:1 ratios and very tight timings with the DDR2 based 780i board, vs. much looser timings and weird ratios. what would be the better overclock? i have always been a firm believer of 1:1 ratios, so on a personal standpoint, i'd go with the 780i. but, it's been a long time since my overclocking days, so i don't know, lol.

[Lowfat]

1:1 has never been beneficial since LGA775 and DDR2. You always get more bandwidth and more performance with a high out-of-sync memory clock.

[CDsDontBurn]

so then, a DDR2 board with a CPU @ 1600Mhz FSB OC on a CPU and 800Mhz effective RAM (400Mhz actual) at say 3-3-3-9 1T wouldn't be as beneficial as a DDR3 board with a CPU @ 1600Mhz FSB OC with 1600Mhz effective (800Mhz actual) at say 9-9-9-21 2T?

[Lowfat]

in theory. However there comes a point of diminishing returns. CPUs are just not bandwidth starved enough these days to get a real benefit from DDR3 just yet.

[PangingJr]

DDR3: Overclocker Functionality

So let's pause for a moment to recap what we've covered: DDR3 RAM modules can conserve up to 32% of the energy used on system memory, while at the same time saving money on maintenance costs for enterprise HVAC systems. The data prefetch buffer has doubled from only 4 bits per cycle to a full 8 bits with each pass. Finally, the Fly-by topology removes the mechanical limitations of physical line balancing by replacing it with an automatically controlled and calibrated signal time delay. Not just a speed improvement, like some would like you to think.

XMP

So then, when was the last time enthusiasts were actually encouraged to overclock their system memory by the manufacturer? Better yet, when was the last time Intel endorsed the practice? To be fair, Intel processors have been capable of overclocks for quite some time already, but not nearly to the level of convenience introduced in XMP technology.

XMP, or eXtreme Memory Profile is an automatic memory settings technology developed by Intel and Corsair to compete with Nvidia's SLI Memory and Enhanced Performance Profiles (EPP). It works very similar to EPP, with one major exception: XMP manages everything from the CPU multiplier, to voltage and front side bus frequencies. This makes overclocking one of the easiest thing possible, since it only requires an XMP compatible motherboard such as Intel's X48 series and an XMP enhanced set of system memory modules.

The XMP Specification was first officially introduced by Intel on March 23rd, 2007 to enable a enthusiast performance extension to the traditional JEDEC SPD specifications. It is very common for Intel Extreme Memory Profiles to offer two different performance profiles. Profile 1 is used for the hardware enthusiast or for certified settings and is the profile that is tested under the Intel Extreme Memory Certification program. Profile 2 is designed to host the Extreme or Fastest possible settings that have no guard band and may or may not work on every system. It should also be noted that XMP settings are not always defined as overclocked or over-volted components. In some less common cases, Extreme Memory Profiles can be used to define conservative power saving settings or reduced (faster) latencies timings.

CAS Latency Timing

CAS latency timing is not something new to DDR3, and it is one of the few items that remains unchanged in the new format. You may wonder why I used the term "unchanged", when every enthusiast in every web forum world-wide has jumped on their soapbox and chastised anyone considering DDR3 because of the higher latencies. The simple fact is that you cannot extend base frequencies without also extending the CAS delay, and DDR3 is actually requires less latency in comparison.

As a quick refresher, you might recall that 1066MHz DDR2 began with CL5 and CL6 latencies, and eventually improved to CL4 in rare cases of special IC module binning. So it should be considered a vast improvement in comparison that 1333 MHz DDR3 can achieve CL5, and some 1800 MHz DDR3 modules such as Corsair's PC3-14400 kit which have received careful parts binning can operate on CL7 timings.

Putting this arguement into greater perspective, drift back to the first days of DDR2. I can still remember the complaints back then, although to a lesser extent, about the increased latency. Back in those days, 400 MHz DDR was often times seen with CL2 timings, so keep that in mind when you look at the 800 MHz DDR2 presently available at a 100% latency increase to CL4 timings. In comparison, the CL7 timings of 1600 MHz DDR3 are still ahead of the curve by 25%, or even up to 50% faster latencies with OCZ's CL6 DDR3.

The bottom line is that enthusiasts need to hone in on the truth behind the technology, and ignore the self-serving ignorance that often runs rampant in most technology forums. The same person who condescends the idea of using DDR3 is also the same person who doesn't know the reason for the difference in architecture. The reality of the matter is that DDR3 is actually a better memory in terms of latency timings, especially compared against DDR2. So now imagine how tight the timings will be once the now infantile manufacturing process evolves from 90 nm to 70 nm; these latency timings will only get better.

- DDR3 RAM: System Memory Technology Explained | DDR3,DDR3 Explained,DDR3 Technology,XMP,Fly-by,DDR3 RAM: System Memory Technology Explained | Benchmark Reviews Performance Tests

[CDsDontBurn]

but panging, that doesn't state anything about the ratios though.

how do the ratios impact performance of DDR3 compared to that of DDR2? Lowfat says that it's still much better than that of DDR2 regardless of the odd ratios.

[PangingJr]

what are you planning on overclocking your CPU's FSB? say 400 FSB, and you are using DDR2 and run 1:1, your memory will be running at DDR2-800, now try your best and get the lowest CAS latency timings, and then try checking the overall memory latency reading using program like everest.
in comparison to when you are using DDR3 with a much longer CAS latency timings and with an odd ratio (lol), you should see a much improve system memory latency.
i'll try to get you a pic or two and post, so you can see what i'm talking about.

[CDsDontBurn]

yea, if you could, that'd be awesome .

well, i'm asking these questions because i really wanna upgrade seeing that my current system is like 4yrs. old already, lol. i want to get back into the OCing scene and i'm not sure how DDR2 and DDR3 are different with them being so different.

i understand the article you provided, but with the DDR1 days, it was all about a 1:1 ratio. It doesn't seem to be like that anymore, so idk.

[PangingJr]

well if you want to make a decision on whether DDR2 or DDR3 based platform you should be investing on, i think you should do some more research on the internet, i think there used to be many DDR2 versus DDR3 articles and testing, try to check the most recent ones since DDR3 has been improving quite a bit the last many months.

anyway, i'll see if i can find one testing that are using the same CPU FSB on the net, but one with DDR2 1:1.

[PangingJr]

CDsDontBurn,
i found a few DDR3 system there were running CPU and RAM 1:2.0,
one was at 400 FSB the other at 450, DDR3-1600 and DDR3-1800, both were using CL7 timings.



as far as i know, DDR3 (which can be ran at a more higher speed than DDR2) allows these users to overclock their system and with the results of improving overall memory latency and bandwidth (more over than DDR2's). and this seems to be easy.