They may work fine, but they are extremely expensive, poorer performing and you can't overclock them above 400Mhz because the highest rated modules are only 333Mhz. It's like living in 2004.
Actually FB-DIMMs aren't the thing limiting overclocks, and they're available as 400MHz pretty soon, they're already listed on many manufacturers sites. Besides, the memory frequency isn't the limiting factor since they run with 4 channels (FB specs even allow 6 channels). If only the efficiency wasn't so crappy we we would see more than 7GB/s or so. Then again Seaburg offers a slight improvement, so FB-DIMMs don't perform that much worse.
The reason, however, you can't
currently get them over 400MHz has nothing to do with the FB-DIMMs.
As for extremely expensive, that's the same 2004 story you're talking about, prices have dropped significantly in the past 6 months.
Lets turn it around now, the V8 offers a lot of processing powers, desktop systems are lacking here. So I could now attack C2Q/Phenom on CPU power. How do you decide which is more important? Memory bandwidth or raw CPU performance? Benchmarks show very different results, memory intensive ones perform rather poor on i5000, however CPU intensive ones that don't rely on memory perform a lot faster on i5000. I think both platforms have good arguments and can't get near eachother in the others domain.
Lets conclude that C2Q/Phenom are living in 2004 and FB-DIMMs are as well and we require Clovers with standard DDR2/DDR3, best of both worlds. Perhaps NV will offer us that, if the rumors were true.
