On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 14:06:32 -0700,
"jameshanley39@yahoo.co.uk" <jameshanley39@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:


>> Actually it was never in DDR notation, DDR was to denote the
>> FSB speed and the memory was assumed to be at the same clock
>> rate, but was always correctly called PC(nnnn).
>
>i'm not sure what you mean by memory (bus) assumed to be at the same
>clock rate as the FSB. I guess know what you mean.. That somehow when
>selling the RAM they sassume the user will run the FSB at the speed of
>the memory bus. Or, he'll run the memory bus at the speed of the FSB,
>and buy RAM for that speed for his memory bus.

yes


>
>I still don't see the significance. I guess marketting the RAM ,
>you're saying they say the RAM is for a certain speed FSB. Amd they
>mean memory bus. Or they say it's for a certain speed memory bus, and
>some users wouldn't know that they could run that RAM even though
>their FSB is set higher or lower than that speed.

The significance is merely that this is how they spec it,
and it avoids any confusion by not using the term that
denotes a DDR FSB speed since some FSB are not DDR even if
the memory bus is.



>
>If they need to sell the RAM based on the FSB speed, then they'd use
>some way of telling the user what FSB speed to use/have. Or what
>memory bus speed to have/use. So if they didn't use DDR notattion,
>what notation did they use? no notation at all?

I'm not saying some "didn't" use it, but the proper
convention was the PC(nnnn) which did still correspond to a
max memory bus speed capability.