512rdram or 1G ddr 400????

[Jincuteguy]

Do 512 rdram (PC1066) better or 1G ddr 400???
My current system is P4 2.4Ghz 533FSB
512 Rdram (PC1066)
ATI Radeon 9800 Pro
80Gb 7200rpm 8Mb cache
Sound Blaster Audigy
WindowXP Pro with SP1 and all the updates

Im planning to buy a new motherboard, cpu, memory:
P4 3.0Ghz 800FSB
1G Ddr 400
Asus P4C800 (875chipset)

But im not sure if 1G ddr 400 run desktop enhancement programs that make windows transparent (DesktopX, WindowBlinds, StyleXP, etc) faster than 512 rdram, let say I have the same cpu 2.4Ghz 533FSB.

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Let's see ...

Half a gig of slow RAM, or a full gig of fast RAM?

1GB DDR400 >> 512MB RDRAM.

- M4H

 

[Lyfer]

1GB of DDR400. If you overclock, the DDR will compeletly dominate the outdated RDRAM.

 

[Vonkhan]

more RAM !!!

 

[Jincuteguy]

You guys said 1G ddr 400 will run programs faster and games too than 512 pc1066 right?
Im not talking about overclock here. I just want to know a real answer so I dont waste my money

 

[JZilla]

Yes, that's what they said.

But if you don't want to waste money, then why upgrade? IMO your system is more than fine.

 

[Jincuteguy]

Ok here is a clearer question

For a system with 2.4Ghz 800FSB , 1Gddr 400
and a system with 2.4Ghz 533FSB, 512 rdram (pc1066)

Which one is faster in term of running any applications, programs, games, etc.?

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Is your grasp of basic fundamentals that bad?

The 2.4C/1GB (first system) will massacre the second. Even more so if you overclock it to 3.0GHz.

- M4H

 

[dmw16]

Well....800mhz is faster than 533mhz and DDR400 is faster than PC1066...so what do you think.
-doug

 

[GnomeCop]

wow I wish I had enough money to upgrade my cpu from a 2.4ghz to 3.0ghz



?!

 

[Jincuteguy]

how can ddr 400 faster than rdram pc1066? is this really true? i thought rdram always the fastest?

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: Jincuteguy
how can ddr 400 faster than rdram pc1066? is this really true? i thought rdram always the fastest?

/sigh

another no0b baffled by the marketing BS. Let's debunk this right here and now, shall we?

RDRAM runs on a 16-bit wide bus. 16 bits is two bytes. 1066MHz x 2 = 2132MB per second.
DDR RAM runs on a 64-bit wide bus. 64 bits is eight bytes. 400MHz x 8 = 3200MB per second.

Both RDRAM and DDR are available in dual-channel configurations, which doubles the width of the bus. This puts DCRDRAM at 4264MB/sec and DCDDR at 6400MB/sec.

Thank you.

/closes up projector screen
/takes slides
/goes home

- M4H

 

[JZilla]

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire


/closes up projector screen
/takes slides
/goes home

- M4H

ROFL

 

[Jincuteguy]

thx for the information

I wonder why Rambus didn't make rdram goes for 64 bit bus instead of 16 .

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: Jincuteguy
thx for the information

I wonder why Rambus didn't make rdram goes for 64 bit bus instead of 16 .

They figured that their MHz advantage would give them the edge they needed, since at the time they were only competing with SDRAM. Guess they didn't figure on DDR stomping them silly.

- M4H

 

[Jincuteguy]

Also, what is the best ddr 400 out there right now? I heard that Corsair XMS , but is it only better when overcloking? or at normal speed when compared to other regular ddr 400?

 

[Afro000Dude]

Note that if you decide to move from rdram to ddr, you will have to change your motherboard as well.

 

[Jincuteguy]

Yes i know that, im planning to get a P4C800 from Asus.

 

[AgaBoogaBoo]

Originally posted by: Jincuteguy
Ok here is a clearer question

For a system with 2.4Ghz 800FSB , 1Gddr 400
and a system with 2.4Ghz 533FSB, 512 rdram (pc1066)

Which one is faster in term of running any applications, programs, games, etc.?

First, the Asus board only supports DDR RAM. Any new boards will only support DDR RAM except for a few others but they're a very small minority.

I would go for the 1GB DDR400 RAM. In your case, you could get away with DDR 266 and not notice any speed difference as long as the CAS latency timing is the same. I would personally go with DDR 400 as it will provide for more upgrade paths in the future at a lower cost.

One more question I should ask you. Look into the next 2 or 3 years, and do you see yourself upgrading? If you do, more than likely you will be going to a Prescott CPU or something of the like, that will use DDR2 memory, making your current DDR RAM useless in that configuration. If you aren't going to reuse that memory and still keep a 533Mhz FSB cpu, there is no point i buying DDR400 since only 266mhz from each stick will be used.

In the case of keeping a 533mhz FSB and upgrading to Prescott or beyond, you should buy DDR266 but if you are going to use an 800mhz FSB cpu, the DDR 400 is better.

 

[Jincuteguy]

thx for the information

Also, I herad Corsair XMS ram modules are very efficient and good in performance, how do they compare to regular ddr 400 modules? And should I get 2x512ddr sticks or 4x256ddr sticks? which config gives better efficient timing and performance? thx.

 

[Jincuteguy]

u still here?

 

[joeryu]

you would want 2x512 mb sticks, as the more # of ram sticks you have their is an increase in latency. besides it gives u room to add more ram later if you want.

 

[DX2Player]

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire

Originally posted by: Jincuteguy
thx for the information

I wonder why Rambus didn't make rdram goes for 64 bit bus instead of 16 .

They figured that their MHz advantage would give them the edge they needed, since at the time they were only competing with SDRAM. Guess they didn't figure on DDR stomping them silly.

- M4H

You guys are funny, not shure if you can remember way back to January but until that point RDRAM stomped DDR. Dual DDR 400 only came out a few months ago and untill then RDRAM had significant advantage. Early in 2002 you could get dual PC1066 with 4.2GB/sec bandwidth, at the same time single DDR266 was its compatition with a pultry 1.06GB/sec bandwidth. Between then and now DDR closed in on RDRAM and just recently surpassed it, in the mean time Rambus created 32bit RDRAM which made it possible to install ram 1 piece at a time like traditional DDR or SD Ram. Unfortunatly this change only made it more convienient not more powerfull. Rambus has not been asleep though they are working with SiS creating 64bit RDRAM which will be out by the end of this year or early next year. At 1200Mhz 64bit ram will be able to push 9.6GB/sec bandwidth and only need to be installed 1 at a time, for easy upgrades. Dual DDR400 is definatly the best choice now but I really do not think its a good time to upgrade since it seems the system you are using is still pretty good. 8 months from now Prescott will be out with new chip interface, 1066MHz psb (they are changing (fsb) front side bus to (psb) procesor side bus), and PCI express support. Quad channel PC1066 64bit RDRAM at 8.528 GB/sec, probably called RIMM8400, will work perfectly inline with a Prescott 3.6 with 1066MHz psb, and most likley dominate anything else out there.

Also once XDR, codenamed Yellowstone, is introduced than bandwidths will be able to scale to 100GB/sec!!!

As far as I see it Rambus dominated in the past and will dominate in the future, in terms of top performance.


SiS R659 Chipset for Quad RDRAM

News of Samsung 64bit ram, XDR (yellowstone), and R659

 

[bgeh]

DX2Player, you forgot that DDR-2 and DDR-3 are also coming out
and i don't think there'll be a 3.6GHz Prescott with 1066FSB unless DDR-2 533MHz has came out
if you're buying now, get DDR

 

[bjc112]

Truthfully i don't think i could justify the cost of a new MOBO/CPU/Ram when your computer is already more than enough...

Why not just throw in another 512 of PC 1066??

YOur 2.4 B should still overclock to at least 2.8 or higher with the retail HSF...



Besides, AMD and Intel are coming to the end of the line for Socket A/478..

Don't waste your money.

:disgust: