Problems? See this thread at archive.org.
Not much more to say other than due to the built in antenna leads, it will only support the Intel® WiFi Link 5100 instead of the Intel® WiFi Link 5300 WiFi card.
The only difference is the speed. The Intel® WiFi Link 5100 transfers at up to 300MB/s while the Intel® WiFi Link 5300 transfers at up to 450MB/s. Here are more details.
For Internet access it will make no difference because they are both still more than 10x faster than any Internet download speed, but for data transfer you will see a difference in speed.
Expect to see some reviews shortly
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
The statement is technically incorrect, and to avoid confusion (in case you are building a system yourself because the chassis is available as a barebone system) I will clarify.
The Intel 5300 card range and speed is only effected by the third antenna when the third antenna is actually needed. The wireless card can be thought of much like your FM radio. Your radio can pick up radio stations that are local without the antenna up without a problem. They do not come in any better while within range if the antenna is up. An FM radio receives only in the case of the wireless card, it can also transmit signals.
The poster asked the questionThe answer given did not answer the questionTo answer your question, yes, the RAM is stated in fsb speeds. I believe these are the two RAM modules in DDR3 you are questioning:
DDR3-1066 Memory clock: 133 MHz Cycle time: 7.5 ns I/O Bus clock: 533 MHz Data transfers per second: 1066 Million Module name: PC3-8500 Peak transfer rate: 8533 MB/s
DDR3-1333 Memory clock: 166 MHz Cycle time: 6 ns I/O Bus clock: 667 MHz Data transfers per second: 1333 Million Module name: PC3-10600 Peak transfer rate: 10667 MB/s
The answer given is also technically incorrect if you are talking about overall speed increases of RAM. CAS latency is not the issue it was back in the DDR memory days.
CAS latency is the number of clock cycles (time) that elapses between the memory controller telling the memory module to access a particular column in the current row, and the data from that column being read from the module's output pins. But CAS latency only specifies the delay between the request and the first bit. The clock speed specifies the latency between bits. Thus, when reading bursts of data, a higher clock speed can be faster in practice, even with a worse CAS latency.
The time is also measured in nanoseconds. A nanosecond is one billionth second. So if Bill Gates comes along and has a 1 billion dollar limit on his debit card, he is not going to think about spending a dollar fifty on an ice cream cone, or worry about stopping to pick up a gooey ice cream covered dollar off the street. It is absolutely insignificant. Think of the billion dollars sitting in his bank account earning interest. Even though he has spent the 1.50 (CAS latency), he has earned significantly more than that in interest on the money he has in his account (greater clock speed). The ice cream cone (CAS Latency) net cost him nothing.
Of course higher bandwidth 1333 RAM has numerically higher CAS latencies, but that is the result of the clock cycles by which they are measured are shorter; the actual time interval is generally equal to or shorter.
This may help conceptualization:Below you will see two different types of RAM: 400 Mhz CL3 and 800 Mhz CL5. The lines represent the actual time it takes to do the "Time to first bit" and "Time to 5 bits" (shorter is better), you will see that the time to address the data that is more than 1 bit (like real-word applications) is contrary to what is being represented.
![[IMG]](images/storyImages/sine_waves.jpg)
![[IMG]](images/storyImages/cas_latency.png)
-
^--^
What are you referring to?
It makes more sense if you quote the post that you are referring to. -
good to hear i love hearing about laptops that i have ordered
-
The PowerPro P 12:15 (Compal JHL90) will begin shipping Thursday July 31st!
Discussion in 'Other Manufacturers' started by Donald@Paladin44, Jul 31, 2008.
