DDR vs. RDRAM

Discussion in 'General Mac Discussion' started by Shrek, Aug 13, 2002.

  1. Shrek macrumors 65816

    Shrek

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Nashville, Tennessee USA
    #1
    DDR or RDRAM? Which is better? Post your opinions and thoughts about it here. . . :rolleyes:
     
  2. jeffberg macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2001
    #2
    Look at this this way, Intel started making the Pentium 4 compatible with DDR SDRAM why? because it is way more bang for your buck and now that both AMD and Intel use DDR RD has stopped, there is nothing happening with it, so DDR will keep getting faster and right now I think it is, but it didn't start out that way.
     
  3. vniow macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    I accidentally my whole location.
    #3
    RAMBUS sucks ass. Not only do they have shady business practices, but there's not much of a performance gain with it either. :rolleyes:
     
  4. Shrek thread starter macrumors 65816

    Shrek

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Nashville, Tennessee USA
    #4
    Well, at least there's something. :rolleyes:
     
  5. vniow macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    I accidentally my whole location.
    #5
    Well sorry if I can't provide any benchmarks, but from using it day after day along with similar computers with different ram, I become less and less impressed with its 800 Mhz bandwith.
     
  6. bousozoku Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    Gone but not forgotten.
    #6
    Compared to the price differential, there's not enough of a performance improvement.
     
  7. Rajj macrumors 6502a

    Rajj

    Joined:
    May 29, 2002
    Location:
    32° 44' N 117° 10' W
    #7
    Actually, DDR SDRAM is Faster Than RDRAM!!!

    It is like comparing the G4 and the P4!!

    DDR Ram runs at a slower clock speed(266Mhz or 333Mhz), but like the G4, it sends data thru the bus at huge chunks at 3.3Gb/sec, compared to RDRam's 2.9Gb/sec, @ 800Mhz/1060Mhz and DDR is hell of a lot cheeper:p ;)
     
  8. Beej macrumors 68020

    Beej

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2002
    Location:
    Buffy's bedroom
    #8
    AFAIK, the only reason Intel ever user Rambus in the first place is because they were locked into a contract with the co that made it. I think it was pitched before DDR, Intel liked what they saw, but DDR actually happened (and was better) than Rambus.
     
  9. Sun Baked macrumors G5

    Sun Baked

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    #9
    Rambus is EVIL ... and being cleansed in the courts as we speak.

    Funny how the P4 and the P4 chipsets which were designed for RDRAM are transitioning over to DDR.

     
  10. jefhatfield Retired

    jefhatfield

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2000
    #10
    for some hard core techies and gamers, they really don't care that much about price

    as for techies on a budget, rambus is not a good deal

    and for hard core gamers on a budget...wait, there's no such thing:p ;)
     
  11. jadam macrumors 6502a

    jadam

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2002
    #11
    err RDRAM is a 16bit peace of ****.

    DDR ram is a 64bit savior!! soon to be 128bit also :p
     
  12. topicolo macrumors 68000

    topicolo

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2002
    Location:
    Ottawa, ON
  13. G5orbust macrumors 65816

    G5orbust

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2002
    #13
    DDR has so much going for it. In addition to its relative low price compared w/ RD, its fast. Most new DDR equipted Athlon XPs can smoke or at least tie their rated speeds (example: a 1.76 GHz athlon can smoke a 1.8 Ghz P4 w/ Rdram and everthing; it could even smoke a 1.9 or even a 2 ghz)

    Also, DDR is starting to phase out RD, even w/ the new 533 MHz system bus of the new P4s and the PC-1066 ram thats appearing. Now I'm starting to see the new P4s paired w/ DDR (maybe because of the lack of PC1066 chips or maybe intel is having second thoughts about Rambus).

    Bottom Line: RD RAM IS TOO DAMN EXPENSIVE FOR THE PREFORMANCE!
    RD may be faster, but DDR is better and more worth your money and time.

    P.S.: All Hail DDR333!!!!
     
  14. jefhatfield Retired

    jefhatfield

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2000
    #14
    well put!!!

    also, we can say that about ibm taking over the high end macs...actually, i used to hate motorola and love ibm but now i am seeing moto is actually trying now

    i was so pissed during that long drought stuck at 500 mhz on the g4...but no drought has happened since and ibm just laid off 15,000 workers or will do so soon as i heard on the news

    i have no idea now if apple is better off with moto or with ibm

    the last chip at 1.25 ghz does make me feel a little better now even though people want to call the new g4 case hannibal...too funny, but kind of cute like the flower power machine was (and the stats on the inside were not bad for that imac model...just ask backtothemac...he he):p
     
  15. topicolo macrumors 68000

    topicolo

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2002
    Location:
    Ottawa, ON
    #15
    What I want is DDR-II. It goes up to 1Ghz! think about that. It's like a 1x fsb multiplier if a 1 Ghz G4 mobo supported it.
    *drool* They're gonna use it on the NV30 and on the Radeon 9700 next year

    Well, I can dream, can't I?
     
  16. G5orbust macrumors 65816

    G5orbust

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2002
    #16
    hmmm, thats seems like a cool idea. But saying that Apple cant even adopt a full on DDR set up, im a little skeptical that a set up like that would come in the near future.
     

Share This Page