Does DDR matter if you're not going with at least a 1.2 Gz CPU?

[Kilgore65]

I read that in a post on here somewhere. Is that the case? I'm planning an upgrade with a 1.0 Gz Tbird. Would using a DDR mobo make sense or just be a waste of money?

 

[Kilgore65]

bump

 

[SerraYX]

Either buy from the KT133A chipset and save a load of money, or wait for VIA's KT266 and buy a quality DDR chipset, albeit much more expensive. Right now I'm going KT133A

 

[MGMorden]

Well, DDR memory (the PC1600) isn't too much more than SDRAM right now, so you're only gonna be paying significantly more for the mobo. Personally I'd say to go ahead and do it since it should give your a very small performance advantage now (albeit slight), but if you want to upgrade to a faster chip in the future (a motherboard usually carries me through 2 or 3 processors) then it would help a lot more then. If you're pressed for cash though I would say it won't make much difference at the moment.

 

[Noriaki]

DDR will be a performance advantage over SDR regardless of CPU clock speed.

It's just a matter of whether or not that performance advantage is worth the price differnce to you.

The KT133A with 266Mhz FSB Athlons performs very nearly as fast as the AMD760 (also with 266Mhz FSB Athlons). And the KT133A boards are cheaper, and SDRAM is much cheaper.

Maybe the performance is worth the price to you, I don't know.

I plan to stick with my AMD750 board and go for KT266 with SDR and DDR slots. I'll stick with SDRAM for some time yet, and then get DDR when it's much cheaper.