Rambus or dual DDR m/b?

[dhsieh4]

I currently have 2 systems: one with MSI KT3 Ultra using 512M PC2700 and XP1800+. Another is Tyan S2466N-4M using dual MP1800+ and 1G PC2100. One gripe I have about them is slow memory performance when I run memory intensive apps. After running the Sisoft Sandra memory bandwidth benchmark, I was rather disappointed when I compare them with that of Rambus 1066 memory, which leads by a wide margin. If I should build my next system, I am looking for input on the following 3 choices:

(1) ASUS p4T533 based on Rambus 1066
(2) ASUS A7N8X based on dual DDR 400
(3) Some m/o using Intel Granite Bay with duall DDR 266

I have read and heard many reports about (1) and its proven memory performance. However, I am concerned about its uncertain future. On (2), it appears attractive and promising. However, I have read some report indicating that the dual DDR does not really double the memory performance. According to ASUS tech support, I was told that it onlt gain roughly 10% - 15% performance. On (3) it was so new that it only supports dual DDR266 now. Does any one have any recommendation?

 

[Flakk]

do (1) if u have the money and want no waiting
do (3) if u can wait a week or two for the boards to be out. if you overclock a GB board its performance eats rambus for dinner

or (4) just hold off until a more matured dual ddr chipset later this year (springdale/canterwood) comes out which will support dual ddr333 and higher, plus support for 800mhz bus cpu (this is the option im taking)

 

[dmhinz]

I have owned all three systems and here is my advise...

Pass (1) - RAMBUS is on its way out and is too expensive anyway.

Forget (2) I saw only about a 4% memory increase in "dual channel" mode using the ASUS NForce2 - I was so dissapointed I sold it. Marketing scam in my opinion.

I have an MSI GNB Max (Granite Bay) board right now. I run dual Corsair PC3500 w/out a problem - I don't know where this misconception that Granite Bay only supports PC2100 came from but, it's not correct. By running my GNB @ 147 MHz (rather than 133) I am getting an unbelievable 3750 MB/s bandwidth when benched in Sandra.

E7205 (Granite Bay) boards are pretty expensive and hard to find right now. I paid $249 for mine on Ebay. These boards should become more available in the next few week but for now..if you want the best, you have to be willing to pay I'm afraid.

-D

 

[Toymaker]

I agree with Flakk and dmhinz. In my opinion, Granite Bay is the better of the three options that you've given. It's performance overclocked will be unbeatable right now and DDR memory is plentiful. The Asus and Gigabyte boards are looking to be very good overclockers too. Like Flakk, i'm also looking at Springdale/Canterwood as my next upgrade. I also think that you'd be quite pleased with the performance of the A7N8X with a XP2400+, 2600+, or 2700+. You could also use your XP1800+ and PC2700 memory "right now" on that board and upgrade at your own pace. I currently have a P4T533 board and i'm very happy with it. It's very stable and reliable. It doesn't overclock as high as the others but it gives some nice performance at it's limits. But then you'd have to buy a board plus RDRAM.

 

[tapir]

I'd say Rambus. Dual DDR is not ready for prime time yet, paying $250 for a motherboard is just plain stupid IMO. But stay away from the ASUS P4T533, instead get the EPoX 4T4A+, same 32-bit RDRAM setup but it's not supposed to be plagued by the Vcore problems. It's about $140 at Newegg, and 32-bit samsung 256MB RDRAM is $99 at googlegear last I checked. So thats about the same price for the mobo + memory as it is for a high-end GB board like the GA-INXP. I say RDRAM is more cost-effective.

dmhinz, the issue is that GB does not support asynchronous memory speeds. You can plop 2400, 2700, 3000, 3500, or pc1600 that you know overclocks well into a mobo that supports "pc2100 only". The issue is that you can't run any of the above speeds without overclocking. ie. I'm sure you're aware of this but your PC3500 memory is not running anywhere near PC3500 speed, it's more like 2400 (150 fsb). It's a good idea to buy PC3200 now though because that is likely to be the only speed that will carry into the next generation of chipsets.

 

[dhsieh4]

hI dmhinz,

In http://www.motherboards.org/articlesd/motherboard-reviews/1217_2.html,

it prints that Gigabyte 8INXP based on the Intel E7205 supports only DDR 266/333, not DDR 400, unless you overclock it.

- dhsieh4

 

[mechBgon]

What particular memory-intensive apps are we talking about? In compression apps like WinRAR and WinZip, PC1066 RDRAM is much faster than E7205/dualDDR, despite dualDDR's theoretical bandwidth advantage. We're talking over 50% faster on an otherwise-equivalent system, judging by the results I posted here. You might want to find some people who use your apps and see what they have to say.

dmhinz, it sounds like you are looking at the glass as being 46% empty. Even in single-channel mode, nForce2 is faster than any other AMD chipset out there... were you expecting the dual-DDR setup to magically double the CPU performance too? :Q Its big benefit will be for those non-hardcore gamers who would like to be able to ~double the performance of the onboard 3D video of the IGP models. In some apps it does boost performance a great deal, too, as you can see from the chart on this page. Sorry you're disappointed...

 

[glenn1]

Although the price for #2 is perhaps half the other two once you factor in both motherboard, CPU, and memory, it's not going to give you enough of a boost in memory scores to justify the additional funds outlay for upgrading from your current setup. If you REALLY need the memory bandwidth, my vote would be for #1 for the reasons Tapir outlined. Paying double for what at most might be a handful of percentage points in benchmarking scores is foolish IMHO, and you're already going to need to plop down a bundle to move from AMD street to Intel Boulevard.

 

[dannybin1742]

Forget (2) I saw only about a 4% memory increase in "dual channel" mode using the ASUS NForce2 - I was so dissapointed I sold it. Marketing scam in my opinion.

thats kind of a mute point, the best thing about the nforce 2 is not the dual channel ram (which you are right does almost nothing), its really the integrated gf4mx and PCI/AGP LOCKING so you can run 200fsb (400)

 

[mechBgon]

Originally posted by: dannybin1742

Forget (2) I saw only about a 4% memory increase in "dual channel" mode using the ASUS NForce2 - I was so dissapointed I sold it. Marketing scam in my opinion.

thats kind of a mute point, the best thing about the nforce 2 is not the dual channel ram (which you are right does almost nothing), its really the integrated gf4mx and PCI/AGP LOCKING so you can run 200fsb (400)

Not only that, but it runs some pretty tight timings even with all three DIMM slots filled and goes faster, not slower, when you add #3 (unlike the original nForce boards).

 

[bunnyfubbles]

You don't see increased performance from dual DDR because the Athlon CPU is the bottleneck. Intels quad pumped FSB is what allows for such high memory bandwidths to be effective. The nForce2's extra bandwidth isn't useless, it is actually utilized by the integrated goodies such as lan, sound, and in the IGP version, video. 5.4GB/sec with DDR333 is definately prefered to have if you are running such integrated things, especially if one of them is a GF4 MX...

RDRAM simply isn't worth the cost. I've seen DDR Sandra scores that would make dmhinz's 3750 MB/sec look slow, so you can definately get the bandwidth with DDR should you choose such a route.

 

[mechBgon]

Originally posted by: bunnyfubbles
RDRAM simply isn't worth the cost. I've seen DDR Sandra scores that would make dmhinz's 3750 MB/sec look slow, so you can definately get the bandwidth with DDR should you choose such a route.

Well, what's weird is this: copy files from UT disc 1 to hard drive and compress them in WinZip 8.1 at Maximum compression...

• P4 2.53GHz, i850E, PC1066 RDRAM: 1.5 minutes
  
• P4 2.8GHz, E7205, dual-channel DDR266: 2.5 minutes
  
• P4 2.4B, i845G, single-channel DDR333: 3.7 minutes

I think RAMBUS signed a pact with the devil or something

 

[Toymaker]

Every time i read up on RDRAM i'm impressed by it's simple yet internally complex efficiency.
Rdram

 

[RanDum72]

RDRAM simply isn't worth the cost. I've seen DDR Sandra scores that would make dmhinz's 3750 MB/sec look slow, so you can definately get the bandwidth with DDR should you choose such a route.

RDRAM PC1066 is now around $100 per 256mb stick (Samsung) which is about the same as quality DDR such as Corsair PC2700 and is even cheaper than the higher end PC3200/3500 DDR so cost is not a factor anymore. Dual DDR mobo's based on Granite bay can use cheaper PC2100 but this cost saving is offset by the astronomical price of the mobo's ( > $200). Despite people's dislike of Rambus, an objective view would reveal that RDRAM is still very much in the picture and its performance is the benchmark DDR has been trying to achieve.

 

[dannybin1742]

i'd have to agree that rambus pc1066 is the best solution for the p4 hands down

 

[Toymaker]

Since Intel plans to discontinue support for RDRAM after the i850E, it'll be up to SiS and the R658 chipset to continue the support. Looks like RDRAM will dwindle to a small niche market and that doesn't bode well for it's immediate future in the PC. Too bad. It's future tech so we'll see it again. But for now, the stage belongs to DC DDR.

 

[jose]

dual DDR of course .

Rambus , RIAA, MPAA all must die a bloody death.

Regards,
Jose

 

[DX2Player]

Originally posted by: tapir
I'd say Rambus. Dual DDR is not ready for prime time yet, paying $250 for a motherboard is just plain stupid IMO. But stay away from the ASUS P4T533, instead get the EPoX 4T4A+, same 32-bit RDRAM setup but it's not supposed to be plagued by the Vcore problems. It's about $140 at Newegg, and 32-bit samsung 256MB RDRAM is $99 at googlegear last I checked. So thats about the same price for the mobo + memory as it is for a high-end GB board like the GA-INXP. I say RDRAM is more cost-effective.

dmhinz, the issue is that GB does not support asynchronous memory speeds. You can plop 2400, 2700, 3000, 3500, or pc1600 that you know overclocks well into a mobo that supports "pc2100 only". The issue is that you can't run any of the above speeds without overclocking. ie. I'm sure you're aware of this but your PC3500 memory is not running anywhere near PC3500 speed, it's more like 2400 (150 fsb). It's a good idea to buy PC3200 now though because that is likely to be the only speed that will carry into the next generation of chipsets.

Epox 4T4A+ is not 32bit Rambus its 16bit, only thing currently avalible with 32bit rambus is the Asus P4T533. But in any event I do recomend a RDRAM solution Duel DDR still cannot beat 32bit RDRAM in most situations.