Why do the majority of people here like DDR better than RDRAM??

[SexyK]

There is so much misinformation floating around in this thread, it blows my mind. It has been shown that PC1066 RDRAM has latency similar to DDR, I will dig up a llink on that soon. RDRAM does not cost twice as much as DDR. Latency has NOTHING to do with bandwidth. How anyone could think otherwise is shocking.

Intel will soon relegate RDRAM to nothing more than a niche market, and possibly not even in server roles.

Well, RDRAM was never designed to be used in servers, so thats a non-argument, and as far as the "niche market", i could refer you to many articles, but Ill just quote HardOCP:

Our friends at Anandtech reported yesterday that Mr. Siu had stated that the current i850E would be the last chipset supporting RDRAM, although upon writing this it seems that the statement has been removed from their website. Mr. Siu explained to us that he had been misquoted. While he would not go into detail, he gave the impression that Intel would continue to support RDRAM in the future. So it seems as though we'll certainly see RDRAM and DDR RAM both stay strong in Intel's current marketing strategies.

So, looks like Intel is sticking with RAMBUS.

Finally, how do you explain the "elderly" Athlon XP DDR platform outperforming any P4 implementation clock for clock?

Hah, this arguement made sense about, oh, 9 months ago when the P4 was stuck at 1.7GHz, but you look sort of foolish today trying to claim that the AthlonXP architecture is anywhere near as flexible as the P4 architecture, Athon is old technology, there's no way around it.

Kramer

 

[Budman]

Here's a little test i did.

Rambus Vs my DDR. Mem test

 

[SteelCityFan]

Originally posted by: Soccerman
the Athlon IS as bandwidth hungry as the P4. that explains why you see increases in performance as the fsb and RAM increase in speed.

Trouble is, the AMD FSB is at 266Mhz, so how much of a gain will you see from DDR333? Not much. Worth it? No way.

It would be like taking an 18 inch pipe from a water line and attaching a 12 inch pipe to the end. You are not going to see any more water come out the end.

The increase in FSB increases it's need for the bandwith.

 

[fkloster]

lol Budman that is such a joke. My P4 is in the 3200's....nice comparison to a 1.6ghz P4

fkloster's P4 @ 2400mhz with rdram: reference here

Ram Int buffered: 3363
Ram float buffered: 3355

Budman's P4 @ 2400mhz with ddr:

Ram Int buffered: 2694
Ram float buffered: 2682

what an embarrasment....

 

[SteelCityFan]

Originally posted by: apoppin
Let me step in here with a question . . .

Evidently I am going to get a BUDGET P4 system - a 1.6A and OverClock it as high as it will go.

Isn't it true that a DDR solution is the best (budget) choice for me? By increasing the FSB to (hopefully) 160 on an Epox 4G4A MB, I get some serious memory bandwith (at a really cheap price).

Correct me if I am wrong, but IF I chose NOT to O/C - but buy a P4@2.53 and run RDRAM - then bandwith would be better than non-o/c'd DDR RAM? Much like fkloster - a more elegant solution, but also more expensive?

If you get Samsung 16 device 256MB sticks of PC800, they will hit PC1066 (533FSB) pretty easily with the RAM multiplier at 4X. If you are hoping for a FSB of 160, then you would just have to put the RAM Multiplier at 3X and run (160 x 2 x 3 = PC960). Those ram sticks will run about $75 each for 256MB, and PC960 should be easy to hit. You could hit 160FSB using DDR or RDRAM. Your choice.

 

[apoppin]

Hello . . . I feel like my question (below) has got lost in the heat of the discussion.

Perhaps, fkloster or another RDRAM supporter could address it. Can I build a RDRAM system for about the same money as a nearly equivalent (performancewise) DDR SDRAM system?

Originally posted by: apoppin
Let me step in here with a question . . .

Evidently I am going to get a BUDGET P4 system - a 1.6A and OverClock it as high as it will go.

Isn't it true that a DDR solution is the best (budget) choice for me? By increasing the FSB to (hopefully) 160 on an Epox 4G4A MB, I get some serious memory bandwith (at a really cheap price).

Correct me if I am wrong, but IF I chose NOT to O/C - but buy a P4@2.53 and run RDRAM - then bandwith would be better than non-o/c'd DDR RAM? Much like fkloster - a more elegant solution, but also more expensive?

If you get Samsung 16 device 256MB sticks of PC800, they will hit PC1066 (533FSB) pretty easily with the RAM multiplier at 4X. If you are hoping for a FSB of 160, then you would just have to put the RAM Multiplier at 3X and run (160 x 2 x 3 = PC960). Those ram sticks will run about $75 each for 256MB, and PC960 should be easy to hit. You could hit 160FSB using DDR or RDRAM. Your choice

EDIT: OOPS, I got Impatient and felt a bit ignored with my question - thanks for the answer.

Remember I am ONLY getting a 1.6A P4. And I want to be as CHEAP as possible and still get good performance.

How will these o/c'd systems compare? Which is the better bang for the buck? (I am REALLY open to suggestions as I haven't ordered yet).

 

[fkloster]

apoppin...this is what I did hope it helps...

 

[mchammer187]

Originally posted by: apoppin
Hello . . . I feel like my question (below) has got lost in the heat of the discussion.

Perhaps, fkloster or another RDRAM supporter could address it. Can I build a RDRAM system for about the same money as a nearly equivalent (performancewise) DDR SDRAM system?

Originally posted by: apoppin
Let me step in here with a question . . .

Evidently I am going to get a BUDGET P4 system - a 1.6A and OverClock it as high as it will go.

Isn't it true that a DDR solution is the best (budget) choice for me? By increasing the FSB to (hopefully) 160 on an Epox 4G4A MB, I get some serious memory bandwith (at a really cheap price).

Correct me if I am wrong, but IF I chose NOT to O/C - but buy a P4@2.53 and run RDRAM - then bandwith would be better than non-o/c'd DDR RAM? Much like fkloster - a more elegant solution, but also more expensive?

If you get Samsung 16 device 256MB sticks of PC800, they will hit PC1066 (533FSB) pretty easily with the RAM multiplier at 4X. If you are hoping for a FSB of 160, then you would just have to put the RAM Multiplier at 3X and run (160 x 2 x 3 = PC960). Those ram sticks will run about $75 each for 256MB, and PC960 should be easy to hit. You could hit 160FSB using DDR or RDRAM. Your choice

EDIT: OOPS, I got Impatient and felt a bit ignored with my question - thanks for the answer.

Remember I am ONLY getting a 1.6A P4. And I want to be as CHEAP as possible and still get good performance.

How will these o/c'd systems compare? Which is the better bang for the buck? (I am REALLY open to suggestions as I haven't ordered yet).

not the same but say $100 more at most for the rambus

though I hate rambus IP for what they did to JEDEC i still own some

still the sooner rambus INC dies the better for all of us

 

[apoppin]

fkloster, I got a "error" when I tried to access your link (I am a subscriber, too).

And now I am getting conflicting info - is it more expensive or not to build an equivalent - performance wise - RDRAM machine?

EDIT: Here's my thread from yesterday
Here's what I am looking at:

EPoX 4G4A - $98 at MWave
Antec PP660B - $95 at newegg
P4 1.6A - $140 at newegg
1x256MB Samsung Original PC2700 - $72 at newegg
$405 before shipping

What could I do with RDRAM for the same price?

 

[SteelCityFan]

Comparing DDR333 to PC800 is about the same price.

Most of the motherboards for DDR are about $50 - $75 more depending on features.

 

[fkloster]

Hmmm link died for me too

IMHO

1) 1.6a + i850 + 256 mb of 16 device PC-800 should be just as cheep as...

2) 1.6a + i845 + 256 mb of PC-2100

Ok now link works again I did not watch my pennies but you had better! I did not need the fancy cooling or special parts.

 

[apoppin]

Here's what I am looking at:

EPoX 4G4A - $98 at MWave
Antec PP660B - $95 at newegg
P4 1.6A - $140 at newegg
1x256MB Samsung Original PC2700 - $72 at newegg
$405 before shipping

With this budget system, I can really hope for 160FSB. Can I get better performance with PC800 (for about the same price)?

If you can answer this, I believe you can answer the topic's question:
Q:Why do the majority of people here like DDR better than RDRAM??
A: Because we're CHEAP!

Just a guess. I'd like a real education.

 

[fkloster]

lol bottom line is the i850 board will cost about 30 bucks more....

U have the potential (75%) chance to reach 533fsb (PC-1066) which would be a faster system....

your choice.

answer to original post....

YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: fkloster
lol bottom line is the i850 board will cost about 30 bucks more....

U have the potential (75%) chance to reach 533fsb (PC-1066) which would be a faster system....

your choice.

answer to original post....

YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR

Is the potential (75%) dependent on the CPU or the RDRAM? Is the o/c'ing potential the same for SDRAM or better?

$30 would not hold me back from purchasing PC800 and an i850.

I am looking for my best "chances" for good-excellent performance.

 

[Soccerman]

oh boy, people here just don't seem to read.

the McDonalds analogy is flawed. people don't normally go in to get something if they're going to drive away and eat it in the car

anywho todays Athlon has had hardware prefetch as well for a while (IIRC). I seem to remember getting excited about it for the Palomino (aahh yes.. that's why it was faster than the T-Bird clock for clock I think).

rdram has higher bandwidth w/no noticable latency penalties (benchmarks proof this) Now what arguement did I lose?

no noticeable latency penalties? how you be able to notice them btw? if you compared it to some RAM with the same theoretical bandwidth but lower latency perhaps?

It has been shown that PC1066 RDRAM has latency similar to DDR, I will dig up a llink on that soon.

good I'd like to know how these two technologies actually do in comparison with each other when it comes to latency measured in real time, not clock cycles (though u can figure out time from clock cycles).

Hah, this arguement made sense about, oh, 9 months ago when the P4 was stuck at 1.7GHz, but you look sort of foolish today trying to claim that the AthlonXP architecture is anywhere near as flexible as the P4 architecture, Athon is old technology, there's no way around it.

how is the Athlon 'old technology'? it's more advanced than the P4 in some areas obviously because it can do more per clock cycle. where the P4 is more 'advanced' than the Athlon is in it's ability to hit higher mhz than the Athlon. remember, when the P4 was stuck at .18 micron, and the Athlon was too, they were neck and neck performance wise. AMD has decided it will no longer improve the Athlon (until Barton) to compete with the P4. if they had done something to the T-Bred core, we would see higher overclocks, and more performance per mhz.

Trouble is, the AMD FSB is at 266Mhz, so how much of a gain will you see from DDR333? Not much. Worth it? No way.

LOL good job reading.. you see a large gain in performance, if you let the athlon have access to DDR333 at full speed. take the hint, and re-read my post. of course you're not going to see a major increase in performance on the P4 either if you don't increase the fsb to 533 but let the RAM run at 533..

lol Budman that is such a joke. My P4 is in the 3200's....nice comparison to a 1.6ghz P4

hey that isn't bad, considering RDRAM has a theoretical bandwidth of 3.2 gigs/second and his RAM has a theoretical bandwidth of 2.8 gigs/second. no doubt you're running a 133mhz fsb and 533mhz RDRAM, which I would hope is capable of 3.2 gigs when it's theoretical max is 1 gig higher.

 

[fkloster]

Soccerman, you know damn well there is a big difference between constant (average) thoughput and peak (highest) attainable throughput. Why are playing devil's advocate

 

[phatcow]

because most of us here are ferengi

 

[Insane3D]

fkloster -

Just an FYI. Current i845D and i845G boards running DDR400 are right up there with your score. There is a guy over in the Motherboards forum getting around 3400/3400 scores on the Epox 4G4A+. I personally get a score of ~ 3100/3100 with a 150mhz FSB and the DDR @ 400mhz on my 4BDA2+. RDRAM does have a higher theoretical bandwith, but the fastest DDR is starting to get very close to matching it. I would dare to say there would be no noticeable performance difference between a 3100/3100 score and a 3300/3300 score... Just a little info...

 

[Dark4ng3l]

Bah rdram=rambus + intel
DDR=AMD
I hope thats enough to prove why rambus sucks so bad

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Insane3D
fkloster -

Just an FYI. Current i845D and i845G boards running DDR400 are right up there with your score. There is a guy over in the Motherboards forum getting around 3400/3400 scores on the Epox 4G4A+. I personally get a score of ~ 3100/3100 with a 150mhz FSB and the DDR @ 400mhz on my 4BDA2+. RDRAM does have a higher theoretical bandwith, but the fastest DDR is starting to get very close to matching it. I would dare to say there would be no noticeable performance difference between a 3100/3100 score and a 3300/3300 score... Just a little info...

That's what I am reading also. DDR SDRAM is more cost effective for likely higher OVERclocked performance. None of the RDRAM supporters can show me anything close to the $400 I would need to spend for my upgrade that would give likely higher performance.

 

[JellyBaby]

I went with DDR mostly because I dislike Rambus's business ethics. And unlike some of the juvies here, I don't get off on slightly higher memory benchmarks, especially when the increase isn't noticeable when using the PC. I also had a wide selection of DDR modules to choose from. So I went with DDR.

 

[SteelCityFan]

Originally posted by: Dark4ng3l
Bah rdram=rambus + intel
DDR=AMD
I hope thats enough to prove why rambus sucks so bad

Very well thought out. You changed my mind. As soon as I get home I am going to snap my RDRAM in half, and rush out to buy a new MoBo and DDR Ram.

 

[phatcow]

it is because most of us are ferengi's here

 

[fkloster]

*sigh*

apoppin. Must I pull all the links for you and hold your hand while purchasing too? I told you, for $30 more dollars you can get slightly higher performance with the i850 / 533fsb system from atacom or mwave/newegg. If you don't want to pay for slightly higher performance, then settle for less.

BOTTOM LINE

rdram performs better for the P4 than ddr does but costs more money. RDRAM DOES NOT PERFORM THE SAME AS OR SLIGHTLY WORSE THAN DDR FOR THE P4.

There is a guy over in the Motherboards forum getting around 3400/3400 scores on the Epox 4G4A+(ddr mobo).

lol I know of two people over @ Madonion forums (digital jesus is one of them) who is getting over 4000 without liquid cooling and can back it up with links if you like. What is your point? Oh, that ddr performs so close to rdram for the p4 that one cannot notice the difference? All I care about is what system memory performs better for the P4. That system memory is rdram.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: fkloster
*sigh*

apoppin. Must I pull all the links for you and hold your hand while purchasing too? I told you, for $30 more dollars you can get slightly higher performance with the i850 / 533fsb system from atacom or mwave/newegg. If you don't want to pay for slightly higher performance, then settle for less.

BOTTOM LINE

rdram performs better for the P4 than ddr does but costs more money. RDRAM DOES NOT PERFORM THE SAME AS OR SLIGHTLY WORSE THAN DDR FOR THE P4.

Sure, why not.



But you still haven't bothered to answer my questions of the likelyhood of o/c'ing a 1.6A P4 with RDRAM vs. the possibilities of o/c'ing DDR SDRAM.

And you have only come up with a figure of $30 more for the MB.

I'd really like more specifics.

I don't mind spending - say 10% more ($450 for a RDRAM system vs. $405 for a DDR setup) if I can get a likely 5% performance increase. If not, I feel I am wasting my money.