New RDRAM chipset "beats DDR by 50%" claim
- Thread starter bgeh
- Start date
That was certainly vague. 50 percent in what? Memory bandwidth? quad channel 1200 RDRAM just might do it.
RDRAM 1200 Quad-Channel
1200MB/sec x 2 x 4(quad-channel)=9600MB/sec
Dual DDR 400
400MB/sec x 2(dual-channel) x 4=6400MB/sec
so there is a 50% bandwidth increase, but i don't believe that the P4 will be able to take up all that bandwidth. it will also take a complex memory controller design to enable quad-channel. and latencies will be higher.
1200MB/sec x 2 x 4(quad-channel)=9600MB/sec
Dual DDR 400
400MB/sec x 2(dual-channel) x 4=6400MB/sec
so there is a 50% bandwidth increase, but i don't believe that the P4 will be able to take up all that bandwidth. it will also take a complex memory controller design to enable quad-channel. and latencies will be higher.
Maybe the 200mhz fsb P4's will use more bandwith. I would rather have excessive bandwith rather than not enough.
theoratically, the 800MHz FSB P4 can only take up to 6.4GB/sec bandwidth, so Dual-Channel DDR fits it.
but we may see situations like Granite Bay, where the memory controller's latency may affect its performance
but we may see situations like Granite Bay, where the memory controller's latency may affect its performance
Something that someone forgot to mention is that this chipset will be able to achieve 6.4GB/s with PC800, which, in the future, might be much cheaper than DDR400. You have to admit, RAMBUS is much better about price stability. Right now we're in a DDR price slump. Just watch. As canterwood blows on the scene the price for DDR400 will explode, just like the price of DDR266 exploded when the i845D came on the scene! BAM!
dullard
Elite Member
- May 21, 2001
- 26,029
- 4,655
- 126
Thoughts:
1) It is about time. PC1200 RDRAM was displayed about a full year ago in several Rambus demonstrations.
2) The P4 itself might not need the full bandwidth of PC1200, but there are other applications of this technology. Dual Xeons, server chips, and if someone really wanted to a powerful integrated video card could be put in there sharing the bandwidth (but that most likely won't happen).
3) RDRAM latency declines significantly with frequency. I suppose a cheaper memory controller might slow the latency back down a bit - making it even. But a quality memory controller combined with the lowest latency memory will be a good performance boost.
4) And as someone said above, the main importance of quad channel RDRAM is that we can use the cheap PC800 that many of us already have in our computers to achive the full P4's 6.4 GB/s potential.
5) Yes I care about RDRAM. It is just in its beginning. I realize so many of you predicted it will die but you were wrong.
6) Companies selling RDRAM are making a profit. Companies selling DDR are selling it at a loss - many subsidized by their national governments in order to keep producing them at a loss. Something will eventually give. The DDR prices will rise dramatically if the national support stops. RDRAM prices can easily plummet if more competition decides to make it. Eventually the companies will be sick of losing money on DDR and will want to switch to RDRAM.
1) It is about time. PC1200 RDRAM was displayed about a full year ago in several Rambus demonstrations.
2) The P4 itself might not need the full bandwidth of PC1200, but there are other applications of this technology. Dual Xeons, server chips, and if someone really wanted to a powerful integrated video card could be put in there sharing the bandwidth (but that most likely won't happen).
3) RDRAM latency declines significantly with frequency. I suppose a cheaper memory controller might slow the latency back down a bit - making it even. But a quality memory controller combined with the lowest latency memory will be a good performance boost.
4) And as someone said above, the main importance of quad channel RDRAM is that we can use the cheap PC800 that many of us already have in our computers to achive the full P4's 6.4 GB/s potential.
5) Yes I care about RDRAM. It is just in its beginning. I realize so many of you predicted it will die but you were wrong.
6) Companies selling RDRAM are making a profit. Companies selling DDR are selling it at a loss - many subsidized by their national governments in order to keep producing them at a loss. Something will eventually give. The DDR prices will rise dramatically if the national support stops. RDRAM prices can easily plummet if more competition decides to make it. Eventually the companies will be sick of losing money on DDR and will want to switch to RDRAM.
Quad Channel = Required 4 RIMMs?
If thats right, thats awfully expensive.
RAMBUS is a crook company anyway...
If thats right, thats awfully expensive.
RAMBUS is a crook company anyway...
Originally posted by: Actaeon
Quad Channel = Required 4 RIMMs?
If thats right, thats awfully expensive.
RAMBUS is a crook company anyway...
Umm if duel channel RDRAM only needs 1 RIMM why would quad need 4? You dont know what your talkign about
It depends on what kind of RDRAM they use. 16-bit RDRAM would require 4 sticks, 32-bit RDRAM would require just 2.
Why would they go backwards, they will probably come out with 64bit RDRAM which is on there roadmap, so probably only need 1.
Yeah, but who wants to buy a Sis chip. If Intel was making this board it would be a different story.
*buzz* wrong.
From everything i've read, PC1200 will be a 64 bit RIMM capable of 4 channels. It's part of Samsung's Roadmap and has been for a long time. Page 28 for a diagram.
From everything i've read, PC1200 will be a 64 bit RIMM capable of 4 channels. It's part of Samsung's Roadmap and has been for a long time. Page 28 for a diagram.
It would cost less to manufacture than a single-channel 128 trace DDR DIMM
Even with 4 channels, it still has HALF the pincount of DDR.Remember, RDRAM is *ARTIFICIALLY* expensive.
Here's a Micro-Law article by Richard Stern, a patent expert at IEEE. You can read all about why DDR sells at a loss and RDRAM sells for a premium.
Granted, this was written BEFORE Rambus won in court, so some things have changed quite a bit.
i stand corrected
anyway, i don't think the general public will want this solution because it is too pricey
but i wouldn't make any conclusions till i see the benchies
(please don't flame me)
anyway, i don't think the general public will want this solution because it is too pricey
but i wouldn't make any conclusions till i see the benchies
(please don't flame me)
GT1999
Diamond Member
- Oct 10, 1999
- 5,261
- 1
- 71
Well, there you have it
This will probably be an expensive board, but you never know. Let's just hope it doesn't have the same problems that P4T533 had (with RIMM4200) -- it couldn't even run a stock speeds stable until tons of BIOS updates. Early revisions of the board still have problems to this date.
ScrapSilicon
Lifer
- Apr 14, 2001
- 13,625
- 0
- 0
They could double the memory bandwidth of DDR and I still wouldn't buy from them. Computer technology and fast systems aside, you're still buying from individual companies and retailers. Many people won't buy from certain retailers due to shady paractices, and I won't buy products from certain companies for the same reasons. I have no respect for Rambus whatsoever due to their past "business" practices, and they will need to do a lot to replace the trust that I and many others have lost in them. I have no problems with their products, just the company behind them.
I have that board and its problems had nothing at all to do with using RDRAM, it had week voltage issues that could happen to any new board.
Why does everyone think RDRAM is so expensive?
Lets see the only thing that can beat 850E board (which has been out how long?) in terms of performance is the brand new SIS R655 with DDR 400
Gigabyte SINXP1394 = $230 Here
2x256 Samsung DDR400 = $158 ($79 each) Here
TOTAL = $388
Asus P4T533-C = $165 Here
2x256 Samsung 1066 RDRAM = $172 ($86 each) Here
TOTAL = $337
Hmm seems the RDRAM solution isnt that much afterall.
Why does everyone think RDRAM is so expensive?
Lets see the only thing that can beat 850E board (which has been out how long?) in terms of performance is the brand new SIS R655 with DDR 400
Gigabyte SINXP1394 = $230 Here
2x256 Samsung DDR400 = $158 ($79 each) Here
TOTAL = $388
Asus P4T533-C = $165 Here
2x256 Samsung 1066 RDRAM = $172 ($86 each) Here
TOTAL = $337
Hmm seems the RDRAM solution isnt that much afterall.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 384
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter