Quad Q6600

P

powerade

Gawd
Joined
Dec 13, 2004
Messages
914
Because the Q6600 is two dual cores, is the ram split between the two dies' ?

I was gonna get 4 gb ram, but 2GB per die isnt very appealing to me...
 
This isn't even how it works, cores don't get RAM, applications get RAM. Each executable should be able to use both cores (although, for now, many will only use one) regardless, RAM is something completely separate from cpu. Each process will use the RAM it needs, just like in single core applications.

Now, please tell me you're not one of those poor people that don't realize that XP can't handle 4GB of RAM.
 
Terc said:
This isn't even how it works, cores don't get RAM, applications get RAM. Each executable should be able to use both cores (although, for now, many will only use one) regardless, RAM is something completely separate from cpu. Each process will use the RAM it needs, just like in single core applications.

Now, please tell me you're not one of those poor people that don't realize that XP can't handle 4GB of RAM.
Click to expand...

ur thinking of 8 gb not 4
 
Are you talking about the cache?

The cache is arranged in a 2x4MB configuration because there are two dual core chips inside.

http://www.news.com/2300-1006_3-6142601-1.html

Which seems strange to some, as it is most definitely not a 4x2MB config (which would seem the logical in a Quad system)

However, the cache is shared (so that you can use all 8MB even when using a single core) but not unified (they are afterall seperated onto two physical chips). Thats why they can't advertise it as a native 8MB solution.

The upcoming chips will probably be unified onto a single piece of silicon. Which IMO, can be a good or bad thing (currently, there is a great deal of redundancy having identical chips on seperate silicon, its like having two halves of a brain.)

The main RAM is one large pool of memory, and is used up to the motherboard and OS limitations.
 
Gaiden133 said:
qft. Just in case that point needed more support.
Click to expand...

not even 4gb actually. 4gb of addressable memory, total, this includes memory-mapped registers and maybe even the swap file (not too sure on the latter).

generally you can utilize about 3.2-3.5gb
 
Yikes guys. Ok, when I said "XP can't handle 4GB of RAM" I meant, it cannot address a whole 4GB of RAM.

Also, I'm quite certain that "poweraid" was not referring to MB of cache per die considering he said he "was gonna get 4 gb ram, but 2GB per die isnt very appealing to me..." Perhaps he needs to just ask what to get and listen to our advice, or do a LOT more research before asking questions.
 
Terc said:
Yikes guys. Ok, when I said "XP can't handle 4GB of RAM" I meant, it cannot address a whole 4GB of RAM.

Also, I'm quite certain that "poweraid" was not referring to MB of cache per die considering he said he "was gonna get 4 gb ram, but 2GB per die isnt very appealing to me..." Perhaps he needs to just ask what to get and listen to our advice, or do a LOT more research before asking questions.
Click to expand...

i sometimes tell people to read more into their context before posting
 
:confused::confused: This thread is way over there, and we are all kinda here.

Get 4GB of RAM. 32bit OS won't use it all really, but will use most of it. Get a 64bit OS and see what the difference is. Multi-threaded applications usually use more RAM, so if you are planning on running multi-threaded applications, get the RAM and get a 64bit OS, even if most 32bit applications die at ~2gb of memory usage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top