NO DDR2 FOR AMD UNTIL 2006!

[gate1975mlm]

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=20108

 

[fkloster]

good who needs it...

 

[mechBgon]

excellent

 

[fuzzynavel]

there isn't really any benefit for DDR2 over DDR1 at the moment except bigger latencies

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Generic concurrance with above statements.

- M4H

 

[biostud]

:beer:

 

[CALIKUSH]

I concur

 

[NFS4]

WOOT!!!

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: fkloster
good who needs it...

 

[piroroadkill]

Agree with everyone... DDR2 = lame..

 

[Zebo]

"And AMD is, at the highest level, determined not to beat Intel over the head with processors that outperform the chip giant's offerings. It will gauge the release of future processors to maximise profits rather than to rub Intel's nose in it."

<<<found that the most interesting part of the article...should be be sitting on thier small lead? LOL ya right, Personally I don't think they can hit 2.8-3.0 since OCers can't.

 

[slirp]

Not to mention it's the Inquirer, You can't trust those guys for anything.

 

[Dethfrumbelo]

If they're smart, they'll skip right over DDR2 and go for DDR3.

 

[masshass81]

Think of the average Joe at the computer store. Avg Joe, "Whoaaa the Pentium at 3Ghz with DDR TWO must be faster than that 2.4Ghz AMD with only DDR1 - teh bleh!!! Why havent they used DDR2? Its better right?"

 

[StrangerGuy]

Hooray for AMD! My next rig will most likely be an AMD one, but I never thought that my DDR RAM can last for at least a full 3 years or even more.

 

[Andres3605]

wait wasnt higher latency = better performance,ooo never mind i think i read somewhere higher numbers = higher performance, now im happy amd is waiting for the result of the betta testers out there, just to get in when o good improvement is detected

 

[imported_Computer MAn]

Originally posted by: Zebo

Originally posted by: fkloster
good who needs it...

:thumbsup:

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: masshass81
Think of the average Joe at the computer store. Avg Joe, "Whoaaa the Pentium at 3Ghz with DDR TWO must be faster than that 2.4Ghz AMD with only DDR1 - teh bleh!!! Why havent they used DDR2? Its better right?"

The Average Joe doesn't even get that far.

"Whoa, a Celeron with 2.8 GigHURTZ? It must be faster than that stupid Athlon 64, it only runs at 2.4! I want that one!"

- M4H

 

[Abix]

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire

Originally posted by: masshass81
Think of the average Joe at the computer store. Avg Joe, "Whoaaa the Pentium at 3Ghz with DDR TWO must be faster than that 2.4Ghz AMD with only DDR1 - teh bleh!!! Why havent they used DDR2? Its better right?"

The Average Joe doesn't even get that far.

"Whoa, a Celeron with 2.8 GigHURTZ? It must be faster than that stupid Athlon 64, it only runs at 2.4! I want that one!"

- M4H

Hed be lucky to get even that far.

"Wow! That computer with the window in it look sooooooo cool! How much does it cost!?"

 

[imported_Bleh]

Originally posted by: masshass81
Think of the average Joe at the computer store. Avg Joe, "Whoaaa the Pentium at 3Ghz with DDR TWO must be faster than that 2.4Ghz AMD with only DDR1 - teh bleh!!! Why havent they used DDR2? Its better right?"

Hey dont be using my name in the description of a computer noob

 

[JBDan]

Doesnt bother me a bit. Low Latency quality DDR outperforms every DDR2 module out there UNTIL you get to DDR2 667 with decent (3-3-3-10) and above and how common is 667? 800 speeds are where it will surpass DDR for good and I think that will be a while.

 

[miketheidiot]

I hear things about rdram every now and then... I believe it even uses the same pinnings (or at least same number of them) and could be worked in Low-latency + high bandwidth..

 

[Mik3y]

ddr2 = the suxors!