Don't be fooled by the DDR2 hype. Yes, those numbers (533,667,800,1066) look impressive next to the 400 of DDR400. But - longer setup times, longer latencies. A fast DDR2 module has 4 cycles of CAS latency, while a fast DDR module has only 2 cycles. So a DDR2-800 module is exactly as fast when it comes to CAS as a classic DDR400 module. Its data transfer rate will be higher, though.

The advantage of the Intels when it comes to DDR2 lies in the separate cache/memory controller. The AMDs have the cache/memory controllers built right in to the CPU, and only a CPU running at a multiple of 400 MHz will be able to support the faster DDR2 types at their full speeds. So a 4400 (2x 2200MHz) might even be slower than a 4000 (2x2000 Mhz).

AMD is working on it, but this is the exact problem of the AM2 series right now.

Then why does Dell use the AM2 CPUs? I guess that the customers demand DDR2, without knowing the ins and outs.

DDR2 DOES make a difference - but not DDR2-533. You'll need at least DDR2-667, preferably DDR2-800 or 1066. And an Intel Core Duo CPU.

XP Pro 64bit: good support by nVidia. Lousy support by other device manufacturers. At least, that was the case a year back when I tried it.

The pen is mightier than the sword. But if you literally want to have some impact, use a typewriter

My gallery   My freestuff