Rambus vs DDRI

[ASIMOS]

Many sites on the Internet and especially TomsHardware (He is a changed man now) they are praying Rambus and how is finally proven that is a better memory alternative to DDR as far as performance is concerned.
They testing the new Granite Bay chipset with Dual DDR PC2100 CAS2 against 850E with Dual Rambus PC800 (same bandwidth performance).Ofcource the results are favouring Rambus (By a small margin).But I think This is mainly because Intel wants the Rambus solution (which is more expesive due royalties for Rambus, implamention of technology on PCM, Chipset price and of cource Rambus memory modules high price) to be faster in relation with the cheaper Granite bay version in order to sell the stock of current 850E chipset and for they customers to sell their stock of 850E based motherboards, also to maintain good relationships with Rambus (for future projects) and to have a more balanced product portofolio.
I wish Anandtech site could to a little expirament:
To TEST a SIS 648 based motherboard with DDR PC3200 CAS2 against a I850E based motherboard with Dual Rambus PC800 with 400MHZ based CPU (for example Pentium 4 2GHz(A)).My guess is that the results will be nearly the same and the two implementation will more or less equal.

 

[jbond04]

Ummmm...I don't really follow where you're trying to go with this. I think that if you look through some of Anand's articles, you'll be able to come up with that answer yourself. Why would you want to compare those two platforms, anyway....they're both a little bit behind the cutting edge. And your "guess" about the two platforms performing about the same speed isn't really that earth shattering: they both offer 3.2GB/s of bandwidth...so chances are, they'll have pretty similar performance.

 

[Alptraum]

I am not really sure what the point of that would be either. 1066 was up untill recently the fastest thing out. Its only real competition is that new SIS chipset. I have had mixed results with SIS over the years though and generall avoid their chipsets though. I upgraded recently and went RAMBUS due to its speed advantage over everything. Though I am now thinking about getting a Granite Bay board since memory is so much cheaper. GB usually lags behind RAMBUS a little bit, but its not a huge speed difference and the RAM is SO much cheaper, heh. If I was buying right now I would get a Granite Bay board even if I lost a little bit of speed.

 

[HokieESM]

Intel's choice to go with Rambus was a very good TECHNICAL choice, but a very POOR BUSINESS choice. Rambus is a horrible company--particularly with its high royalties and "scare tactics" for other companies (and the stupid SDRAM suit...). BUT, its technology is top-notch... I've heard more than one person more knowledgeable about memory technologies than myself say that we eventually will HAVE to go to a memory bus similar to RDRAM (I believe its serial in nature, but allows dual channel). And there is, without a doubt, the speed put up by i850E... and the fact that when i850E was released, DDR wasn't up to speed.

As far as NOW, its a moot point. RDRAM is horribly expensive (I know, I have a GB of PC1066 in my "number cruncher" at home), and something like the new SiS 655 chipset (and, of course E7205) offers similar performance with cheaper RAM.

Eventually, though, it becomes a scaling issue. I've heard rumors of VERY high speed octuple channel RDRAM running in test setups. PC1200 would be VERY fast.... and there's the possibility that PC1600 (for an 800MHz FSB Prescott) would be perfect. And patents only last SO long.

Anyhow... its completely moot for MOST computer users. Unless someone needs the bandwidth, the i845PE chipset offers 90% of the performance for MUCH less cost... and you don't have to buy pairs.

 

[lorlabnew]

Originally posted by: Alptraum
I am not really sure what the point of that would be either. 1066 was up untill recently the fastest thing out. Its only real competition is that new SIS chipset. I have had mixed results with SIS over the years though and generall avoid their chipsets though. I upgraded recently and went RAMBUS due to its speed advantage over everything. Though I am now thinking about getting a Granite Bay board since memory is so much cheaper. GB usually lags behind RAMBUS a little bit, but its not a huge speed difference and the RAM is SO much cheaper, heh. If I was buying right now I would get a Granite Bay board even if I lost a little bit of speed.

I built a PC-1066 (16-bit) RAMBUS based rig yesterday, and at default settings got some 3300MB/s mem. bandwidth at Sandra2003, and 12500 3DMarks with Radeon9500Pro.

Was considering GraniteBay ASUS P4G8X board while in the store (more expensive than P4T533-C), RDRAM price was about the same as CL2 DDR PC2700. I used half of my slots only, and can easily add another half gig of RAM if necessary. I'm very satisfied with my RDRAM choice over DDR.

 

[DX2Player]

I dont know where people get off saying that RDRAM is horribly expensive its really starting to piss me off.

Asus P4G8X(Granite Bay) motherboard - $225.00
2 256 mb sticks Crucial PC2700 - $136.00
total - $361.00

Asus P4T533 motherboard - $188.00
2 256 mb sticks of 32 bit RDRAM - $175.78
total - $363.78

"Which one is the best? Granite Bay, the i845 PE, SIS648 or the i850E? Most people like a simple answer. Unfortunately the truth is - in our humble opinion - rather complex. Each chipset has some some advantage but also some serious disadvantages.

The ASUS P4T533, the only i850E board with support for 32 bit RDRAM, is still overall the fastest chipset for the desktopuser. 32 bit RDRAM is a little faster than two channels of 16 bit RDRAM and in some quite a few workstation applications it significantly outperformed the i845PE and DDR333.

But at the same time, it seems to be harder to produce high capacity RDRAM chipsets than DDR SDRAM chips. 512 MB 32 bit RDRAMs are pretty expensive, 1 GB RIMMS are unavailable. This means that with a ASUS P4T533 board, which has only two RIMM slots, you are limited to 1 GB of memory. This is enough for desktop use, but might be insufficient for a lot of workstation users.

For the desktop user, the ASUS P4T533 and P4T533-C are a pretty good deal. Excellent performance and overclockablility push the Pentium 4 to the highest framerates possible. As most desktop users do not need more than 512 MB, the price It is no accident that Intel's own 3.06 GHz evaluation kit shipped with a PC1066 RDRAM based board, and not Granite Bay.

For the people who hardly overclock, there is no need to buy DDR400. Wait until DDR400 is officially supported by Intel in about six months. Intel tends to make sure that the quality of DRAM at a certain speed

Even if it is beaten by the i850E, Granite Bay is no failure. It supports 4 GB of cheap unbuffered DDR266, which is something that no current Pentium 4 chipset is able to do. Nevertheless, it should be noted that Granite Bay only performs well with DDR266 which can run at 2-2-2. While DDR that can run at 2-2-2 is easily accessible to the review sites, I doubt strongly that most PC users will buy and use it. Most DDR333 and DDR266 runs easily at CAS 2 (2-3-3), but is not able to run at 2-2-2. So basically, the performance delta between the i850E-PC1066 and Granite Bay systems is in reality higher than most reviews indicate.

So that is the main reason why Granite Bay's performance is a bit disappointing, it needs fast DDR333 run at DDR266 2-2-2 to keep up with the old i850E chipset and is at the same time much more expensive than the old RDRAM chipset.

The i845PE will remain the most popular Pentium 4 chipset of all, as it is a little faster than the SIS648 and a lot cheaper than Intel's E7205."
-Ace's Hardware

Sandra

Stock
Memory = 3405/3399

OCed
Memory = 3881/3876

I would like to see somebodys stock memory beat that

 

[Alptraum]

The ASUS P4T533, the only i850E board with support for 32 bit RDRAM, is still overall the fastest chipset for the desktopuser. 32 bit RDRAM is a little faster than two channels of 16 bit RDRAM and in some quite a few workstation applications it significantly outperformed the i845PE and DDR333.

As far as I know (and the benchmarks I have seen go the same way) the only difference between 32bit and 16bit RDRAM is you don't need to use sticks in pairs. Its just cheaper/easier to use. Its basically two 16bit sticks crammed on to one stick. There is not performance difference between 16bit and 32bit as far as I know. Though if you have benchmarks showing different I would be interested to see them.

As far as price. I have to disagree. I have a P4T533-C. The RDRAM is MORE expensive. The MB cost offsets this at lower RAM levels but as you go past 512meg of RAM it starts to show. I am thinking about switching to Granite Bay for this. It is a little bit slower, but cheaper. And not that much slower.

Kingston PC1066 256megx4 = $416.
Samsung PC1066 512megx2 = $504 (I don't know if this is actual Samsung though)
Kingston PC2100 512megx2 = $160

So while RDRAM is the fastest its definetly more expensive. And I say this as a fan of RDRAM and somebody that has a gig of it now.

 

[DX2Player]

First of all most ppl dotn buy more than 512 ram, why on earth did you think you needed a gig of it? Secondly your not counting the extra cost in buying Granite Bay chipset, compare things evenly. I already posted the two prices above so Im not gonna do it again.
Lol thinking about switching to Granit Bay! Why? You admit its slower and you say you already have a Asus P4T533-C system!!

Once again I scored 3405/3399 in Sandra Mem test at stock 4200 speeds what do you score

And here is the link showing 32bit ram beating out 16bit ram in every game.

 

[ASIMOS]

What I don't really like is that some of the most succesful Technology Sites which are also opinion makers, to guide an audience (who don't know the market) in favour of an particular technology.
I agree to the fact that memory is holding back computer advancement because it can't keep up with proccesors speed increasment but I don't think it 's right to praying Rambus Technology and creating buz even if this 'll force mainstreem solutions like DDR to speed up.
Rambus is UNACCEPTABLY much more higher priced for what is offering, you will be only confused from the prices you find on the Internet.
Memory market is the most profitable sector (between the major componenets) who can produce a lot of margin to a company that knows trading.
Try to Buy 1K pcs 512MB 2.5CAS DDR (original or major on third) from a memory manufacturer or a big memory trader instead of 1K pcs 512MB PC800 Rimm and you will supprised How much money will be left on your Bank.
Anyway what I want to say is that I hate technology sites to favour companies without reasons.

 

[Alptraum]

First of all most ppl dotn buy more than 512 ram, why on earth did you think you needed a gig of it? Secondly your not counting the extra cost in buying Granite Bay chipset, compare things evenly. I already posted the two prices above so Im not gonna do it again.
Lol thinking about switching to Granit Bay! Why? You admit its slower and you say you already have a Asus P4T533-C system!!


I need more then 512 for a number of reasons. Partly due to photoshop, partly due to work related stuff (try having a zillion network monitoring apps going at once...). Ill go ahead and post the price comparision at a gig of RAM using the prices I used for memory and add MB. The reason I would switch to GB is RAM cost. I don't really mean swap out my P4T533-C as much as I mean switch from buying those to GB boards.

P4G8X and 1 gig = $390
P4T533-C and 1gig (4 256megs) = $581
P4T533-C and 1gig (2 512 megs) = $669


Thats a pretty big difference if you ask me.

And thanks for the link. Looks like 32bit does have a slight advantage.

 

[DX2Player]

Asimos I dont know if English is your native language but your not writing to clearly. Nobody in there right mind would buy PC800 RDRAM because it costs the same as PC1066 RDRAM. No, RDRAM is not the cheapest way to go, nobody said it was, RDRAM is what is used when you want the best. My computer is 7 months old yet it is still the thing to beat, I dont think any DDR solution 7 months ago can still be considered top of the line. RDRAM lasts longer. BUT ITS NOT SUPER EXPENSIVE ITS COMAPABLY EXPENSIVE TO OTHER DDR SOLUTIONS WHICH COMPETE AT THE SAME TOP OF THE LINE SECTOR!!!

 

[DX2Player]

Well maybe for you Alptraum and the other 10 people who need that much ram DDR is the way to go but for the other 98% of the people 512 is more than enough.

Granit Bay
Asus P4G8X = $230 Here
Corsair 2x256 = $118 Here
Total = $348

i850E
Asus P4T533-C = $167 Here
Samsung 2x256 = $172 Here
Total= $339

SEE THESE PRICES? stop tellin me im wrong

 

[Alptraum]

I was only telling you that you were wrong on the high end (need lots of RAM). And its more then me and 10 people. Just out of people I know at work I can think of over 50 that need more then a gig and 10 or so that need over 2 gigs. Granted this is the high end workstation market and other stuff is pricey in that range too. But thats just where I work. Outside of my workplace plenty of other people need lots of RAM too.

Granted, for the average home user 512 is planty. But even there some of the newer games can use more. At 512megs 32bit RAMBUS and GB boards are about the same price. Its just when you go above it that GB really starts to pull away price wise.

So in an average home user enviornment you are right. In the world of RAM eating apps you are wrong. I just disagreed with your original blanket statement that RDRAM is not horribly expensive. Because it is.

 

[lorlabnew]

Originally posted by: DX2Player
Asimos I dont know if English is your native language but your not writing to clearly. Nobody in there right mind would buy PC800 RDRAM because it costs the same as PC1066 RDRAM. No, RDRAM is not the cheapest way to go, nobody said it was, RDRAM is what is used when you want the best. My computer is 7 months old yet it is still the thing to beat, I dont think any DDR solution 7 months ago can still be considered top of the line. RDRAM lasts longer. BUT ITS NOT SUPER EXPENSIVE ITS COMAPABLY EXPENSIVE TO OTHER DDR SOLUTIONS WHICH COMPETE AT THE SAME TOP OF THE LINE SECTOR!!!

I agree with DX2Player ...

RDRAM lasts longer, or at least used to (from my own experience). My 12 month old rig with PC-800 has almost the same mem. bandwidth as PEBT2/PC2700 CL2.5 rig I built last month (both around 2500MB/s).

Now, the new RDRAM rig I ran the 3d Mark right now; on default speeds: 14600 (link here), which is neat for a default I'd hope... wonder what I'd get if I'd overclock both board and the R9700P a bit .... all stock, no extra cooling on anything.

Btw, seems like this score gives me top place if I search projects for exact CPU & GPU speed; is it a good score?

dave

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: DX2Player
Well maybe for you Alptraum and the other 10 people who need that much ram DDR is the way to go but for the other 98% of the people 512 is more than enough.

Granit Bay
Asus P4G8X = $230 Here
Corsair 2x256 = $118 Here
Total = $348

i850E
Asus P4T533-C = $167 Here
Samsung 2x256 = $172 Here
Total= $339

SEE THESE PRICES? stop tellin me im wrong

Just look at percentages of the memory cost and quite figuring in theplatform...The i850e platform as been around a considerable longer period of time and has dropped in price. The GB and its low availability is fueling it high price in the short term. Also comparing a FEATURE RICH asus GB mobo to the i850 is a laugh!!! Try comparing it to the MSI board that can be had for just under or at 200.00


Also figure that someone like me getting a GB motherboard who can hit 171fsb with my cpu can get dual 342mhz ddr and have much higher bandwidth then that pc1066 is going to allow and thus the GB and my configuration would be the best solution...

 

[DX2Player]

RDRAM can OC also how about 172FSB Here. Im not saying that GB is bad choice or anything im just tired of people hounding RDRAM when in reality they are talking out there A$$.

Edit: BTW what do you score in your Mem test

 

[Duvie]

Well the speed in the sig I score obviously just above pc2700....ie around 2600...that board is limited to a 3:4 ratio so I can't go much past 160fsb stably...

With my epox 4g4a+ mobo I could run 4:5 ratio and ran at 428mhz ddr and thus scored around 3200's....at 440mhz ddr I past pc1066 in sandra...

With a GB I have seen ppl at dual 333+ ddr getting just over 4000 in bandwidth score...



That 172fsb is not quite the norm from the ppl I have seen. Most i850 ocing threads have been more about rdram limiting their oc unless the drop the multiplier and thus 172x3 = 516mhz or pc1032....172x4 = 688mhz oc pc1376....that is not too likely from what I have seen....

Pc=1066 scores around = 3300
Pc=800 score around = 2700 with i850e platform
pc=1200 scores around= 3700's
pc=1376 should score around 4200's if interpolation works...However I doubt the average mdule makes that...


However most modules can run 333mhz and most GB mobos can run 166fsb as well....If someone drops in a p4m and hit 225fsb like thugs and puts it in an asus mobo that can handle 200fsb then we are talking about dual pc3200 and you will have around 4800-5000 range in score...

 

[DX2Player]

Well how about Here 165FSB at 4x. I have Revision 1.0A of the P4T533 bought back in Aug and I can get to 156FSB with stock P4 heatsink/fan.

Sandra
-----------------------------
Memory Auto
Ram Turbo on
Vcore @ 1.55

2539.09 @ 133.64FSB
Memory = 3405/3399
Arithmetic = 6834 1439/3342
Multi-Media = 10144/12868

-----------------------------
Memory: 4x
Ram Turbo: On
Vcore: 1.55

2850 @ 150FSB
Memory = 3732/3727
Arithmetic = 7736 1614/3737
Multi-Media = 11393/13360

------------------------------
Memeory: 4x
Ram Turbo: On
VCore: 1.625

2964.6 @ 156.03FSB
Memory = 3881/3876
Arithmetic = 7176 1674/3927
Multi-Media = 11838/15025

Not many other Ram/Mobo combos get 3400 bandwidth without any ocing
Edit: And mind you my setup is 7 months old already, see if Granit Bay is still top of the line in 7 months
Also check out RDRAMs Roadmap here

 

[Alptraum]

Im not saying that GB is bad choice or anything im just tired of people hounding RDRAM when in reality they are talking out there A$$.

I am certainly not hounding RDRAM so I hope you are not thinking of me when you say that. All I am saying is that if you want lots of memory RDRAM is clearly more expensive. By a large margin.

 

[Duvie]

That is true on the basic mobo platform being 3400's with no ocing...However with GB and SIS655 the i850e has company....

They wont be top in 7 months cause the springdale chipsets will surpass them...the fact is until these other mobos release rdram solutions (since Intel wont be!!!) they will continue to be caught and eventually passed...


I am glad you are happy with your purchase...I have found through my extensive research in a lot of the apps I run that 500+ mor bandwidth you have over me at 3700 is often quite neglible. So unless one is going to achieve 4000+ in the GB I undoubtedly will not getting mind breaking increase there either....

The fact is rdram modules themselves cost more. The i850e is more mature in the market and thus cheaper at the time being. The results even with that advantage and lacking many of the new feature of the GB mobos the rdram/i850e platform is more expensive for no greater performance. In the right hands the gains will surpass the i850e platform...This is undeniable...The numbers don't lie...

 

[HokieESM]

I'll reiterate what I said earlier, because I think a LOT of people are losing the point.

At the present time, RDRAM is MUCH more expensive than DDR for memory cost. Period. I know, I have 1GB of PC1066 in my machine right now.

However, a great deal of RDRAM's additional cost is the licensing to RAMBUS, Inc... .which CANNOT and will not last forever. Patents do run out. Thank goodness--or we would still be paying $5000 for IBM PCs.

RDRAM was a superior technology when it debuted. Period. It still has a LOT of potential.... unfortunately, with it still tied to RAMBUS, development has completely stalled. PC1066 was "demonstrated" quite a long time ago. Much before PC3200 (DDR). Supposedly, because of the nature of RDRAM, its not difficult to do octuple-channel--an effective doubling. Then even "measly" PC800 could be matched up with a Prescott with an 800FSB.... which isn't considering that there is no reason that PC1600 couldn't be developed if RAMBUS (the company) wasn't faltering.

Personally, I HATE RAMBUS (the company). They did have some brilliant engineers who developed a GREAT technology... but their "suits" ran it into the ground. I'm busy ordering myself a new computer... and, what a shock, its an i845PE, because I don't want to pay for PC1066 again. BUT, as computer users, we should ALL hope that research goes into improving RDRAM (and RAM technologies, in general).... its the only way to improve speed. Think about how poorly the i845 (SDRAM) and i845D (PC2100) chipsets for the P4 performed upon release. We need something to spur on development, period. And hopefully, without the problems put by the BUSINESS end of RAMBUS.

 

[DX2Player]

RDRAM does cost more but a $80 Samsung 256MB PC1066 isnt exactly gonna break the bank. Up untill very recent that was the best thing out there (I do believe that SiS 655 chipset has taken the crown) and when making a top of the line computer this added price, which is not considerable by any means, should be expected. Just like paying extra for a new GB motherboard. You do it because you dont mind paying the extra cash for getting the best, do you not? We will see what happens with SiS's new R658 chipset supporting 16bit PC1200 RDRAM and 32bit PC4800 RDRAM. Abit already has a board based on it comming out the SI7 we will just have to wait for the reviews. Im glad that RDRAM is being overrun it adds to the competativeness in the market and pushes the industry forward, I just wish people would give RDRAM the respect it deservs.

EDIT: HokieESM I shall state it again, almost nobody needs 1gig of ram, what do you do and what % of the population do you think you represent?

 

[Duvie]

When is sis658 due to arrive??? Do you have an estimated cost???

I think dual ddr has given the choice through their relative closeness in performance now for power users who ma not have wanted to go the rdram route for various reasons from cost to dislike of rdram and their past business practice.

It is clear I believe that the rdram seems to have more potential headroom of their technology then ddr does. DDR will need to go to DDRII technology to push to where these future high fsb p4 chips are going to take us. Rdram can stay quite competitive in this area but without a wide array of support from sis as well as well as Via and with a majority of the mobo manufaturers rdram can be possibly thrown into a niche market.

 

[HokieESM]

An admittedly VERY small percentage. I do quite a bit of NUMERICAL work with my computer (mostly C or Fortran programs performing numerical solutions of PDEs).

My comment is that BOTH Granite Bay AND i850E are completely irrelevant for the average user. Go look at the price of a full-featured i845PE motherboard. And the price of PC2700. And check out actual real-world performance (not synthetic benchmarks, which are heavily weighted by memory performance). Most games (which, other than PhotoChop and encoding, seems to be all anyone here cares about) see VERY little performance gain from an aggressively timed i845PE chipset to an i850E chipset. For MUCH cheaper. For my particular work, memory bandwidth/speed is crucial. VERY VERY crucial. Which is why I popped for i850E (and when I built it in June, DDR couldn't touch it.... there WAS no Granite Bay). But for my "general use" computer (while my i850E chugs away for a couple weeks at a time), I chose i845PE... which is MORE than fine for anything else. Because the small difference in memory bandwidth isn't that crucial on an everyday basis for most real-world applications.

Now, as the future plugs on, memory needs to be advanced. DDRI is going to hit a wall... we're already seeing it, somewhat. RDRAM has a LOT of headroom--there is no reason you can't increase the number of channels (if I remember, the new Cray uses RDRAM in some crazy multiplier--like 256). Not to mention, I've heard there is no reason RDRAM can't be clocked higher than it is now. Its a WONDERFUL technology. But unfortunately, the company RAMBUS strangled it--and is the #1 reason Granite Bay even exists. Hopefully, as the patents wear off (or RAMBUS goes bust), someone will pick up on the technology, and run with it... I would LOVE to see the results.

EDIT: DX2Player... I agree with you more than you think. I think EVERYONE will be using serial-type RAM technology in five years. RAMBUS won't have their hand in it then--the patent will have run out. Its almost infinitely scalable (in terms of channels)... and the actual memory CHIPS don't have to be as fast as their DDR counterparts to give the same speed (although at the penalty of latency--but something like the P4s prefetch helps this tremendously). Like I said, when I was making my number cruncher, I chose RDRAM DESPITE the cost (which was considerable--at that time, nearly $500 for 1GB). And as far as how much memory I use.... while its "unusual" for regular gamers and users, its almost trivial compared to some workstations/supercomputers. I actually use my RDRAM machine to test "mini" models 1000s of times smaller than the ones I submit to our Cray.

 

[DX2Player]

Wish i knew wen the R658 will be out, but hopefully in the next month or two.

"According to ABIT, SI7 is in mass production now. When the actual products will hit the shelves of stores and how much will they cost was not unveiled at this time."- X-bit labs