backtop

Hardware AMD Announces G3MX Technology
Anh Tuan Huynh (Blog) - July 26, 2007 8:00 AM
Print E-mail del.icio.us 11 comment(s) - last by wetwareinterfa.. on Jul 26 at 12:28 PM
AMD announces its own technology to take on costly FBDIMMs

AMD today announced its new memory technology to compete with FBDIMM – Socket G3 Memory Extender, or G3MX, technology. G3MX technology allows for larger memory capacities in Opteron-based systems while using regular JEDEC spec memory.

The company plans to support standard DDR3 memory with its G3MX technology. The use of standard DDR3 allows AMD to offer large memory capacities while keeping it cost-effective. AMD does not reveal if G3MX will require registered ECC DDR3 modules or standard desktop DDR3 memory.

G3MX technology should benefit enterprise-class servers used for databases, virtualization and other memory-intensive tasks, according to AMD.

AMD has collaborated with IDT and Inphi for G3MX technology development. IDT and Inphi plan to sell G3MX components when the technology hits future Opteron platforms in 2009.

“G3MX technology opens new opportunities and options for IDT to continue the company’s leadership in advanced memory interface solutions,” said Jimmy Lee, senior vice president and general manager for the IDT timing solutions group. “By establishing an easy and affordable way to increase the total memory footprint, AMD has again established itself as a valuable partner in the industry.”

Expect G3MX technology to grace Opteron platforms in 2009.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Question
By FITCamaro on 7/26/2007 8:52:06 AM , Rating: 2
I didn't think FB-DIMM had anything to do with expanding memory capacity. I thought it was just like an addition to ECC.

Why do we need this to expand memory capacity? Isn't that determined by what the chipset manufacturers support and the processors themselves? Or are memory manufacturers needing new technology to create DIMMS greater than 4GB in size(I believe those are the largest sticks at the moment)?




RE: Question
By fehu on 7/26/2007 9:01:36 AM , Rating: 2
FB-DIMM use a serial protocol that allows up to 8 (maybe even more, I don't remember) memory stick for channel

FB-DIMM use regular DDR2/3 memory chip


RE: Question
By meson2000 on 7/26/2007 9:02:23 AM , Rating: 5
FB-DIMM allows you to have more memory slots on a motherboard. It runs a serial link between the memory controller to the memory and then the extra controller chip on the FB-DIMM converts the serial signal into a parallel signal the memory can understand. The serial links significally cuts down on the amount of signal wires needed to run on the motherboard allowing you to have room for more physical memory slots. That allows you to have larger memory capacities. It also allows you have to more memory channels like quad channel instead of dual for more memory bandwidth.


RE: Question
By FITCamaro on 7/26/2007 12:08:14 PM , Rating: 2
Ok thanks.


RE: Question
By zombiexl on 7/26/2007 9:02:36 AM , Rating: 2
I could be wrong but i think it has more to do with using cheaper ram in the systems rather than the amount of memory on a single stick.

I believe the idea is to cut costs and make it more cost effective to increase system ram.


RE: Question
By Gul Westfale on 7/26/2007 9:07:08 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
Fully Buffered DIMM (or FB-DIMM) is a memory technology which can be used to increase reliability, speed and density of memory systems.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FB_DIMM


RE: Question
By Fenixgoon on 7/26/2007 11:39:47 AM , Rating: 3
the only problem is that despite better theoretical speed and bandwidth, FB-DIMMS are no faster than standard DDR2 memory due to excessively high latencies. Anandtech showed this when it compared a Intel Mac Pro workstation to a DDR2-based Intel setup.

see the bottom of this page:

http://anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=11


RE: Question
By Khato on 7/26/2007 12:10:26 PM , Rating: 2
Quite true, the latency hit with having another chip between the CPU and memory is bad. And in the case of current FB-DIMMs, it's exaggerated by the fact that the memory controller is relatively un-optimized - it's not making proper use of all the potential bandwidth. Hehe, just wait and see how well clarksboro performs.


RE: Question
By AmbroseAthan on 7/26/2007 10:18:46 AM , Rating: 2
Stolen from eWeek:

"Within its current Opteron platform, AMD uses two memory channels with a total of four DIMMS per channel. The new G3MX technology will add two additional memory channels and bring the number of DIMMs up to 16, said Kishna Weaver, an Opteron product manager for AMD." Source: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2162188,00.as...

Basically, it will double the number of DIMMs you can put into the system.

Basically,


*golf clap*
By Khato on 7/26/07, Rating: -1
RE: *golf clap*
By wetwareinterface on 7/26/2007 12:28:50 PM , Rating: 5
this isn't a technology similar to fb-dimm.
this is a similar end result to the fb-dimm advantage of large amounts of ram without having the instability issue and extra power regulation and supply requirement.

amd and intel have 2 completely different memory controller strategys and implementations. intel's memory controller is in the chipset while amd's is on die in the cpu.

amd isn't going to serialize their memory link. it already is serialized a.k.a. hypertransport memory link.

intel is late to the party here not amd. amd is simply looking at ways to increase memory density without hitting a brick wall in stability as the more memory you add the more power regulation circuitry you need to keep it all stable and eventually you hit the wall anyway as the power supply can only provide so many amps on the rails used by the memory channels. this looks like a 12v rail conversion system in the motherboard as an add in chip to increase memory voltage stability to allow more dimms.


"Intel is investing heavily (think gazillions of dollars and bazillions of engineering man hours) in resources to create an Intel host controllers spec in order to speed time to market of the USB 3.0 technology." -- Intel blogger Nick Knupffer

DailyTech Poll
Which web browser do you use on your primary personal machine? 






44 Comments









botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki