Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

i850 Rambus Vs. 760 PC2100

Last response: in Memory
Share
May 28, 2001 4:04:10 PM

Um just an interesting point. Alot of the posts on here are talking about how effective the pentium 4 is with RAMBUS memory particularly with the i850 chipset.

The i850 chipset has dual interleaved memory for a total of 3.2 GB/sec of maximum theoretical through put. I was wondering what sort of comparison we would get if the 760 chipset had dual interleaved channels for a total of 4.2 GB/sec through put and if there are any plans for AMD to make such a chipset.

It seems a bit silly of AMD not to do so, especially with the AMD 760MP, when INTEL and RAMBUS are raving so much about bandwidth. And the fact that interleaved memory is a good thing in general. :) 

More about : i850 rambus 760 pc2100

May 29, 2001 12:17:09 AM

Yeah, it would be great if AMD would come out with dual channels for DDR-SDRAM, then we could finally get a true comparison of RDRAM and DDR-SDRAM.

<i>I don't know anything about computers... but I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night...</i> :lol: 
May 29, 2001 3:32:42 AM

Rumored that the crush 12 will have it, but only allow 2 dimms, not intel's 4 dimms... but intel ram is twice the price.

IMacs for the blind
Related resources
May 29, 2001 4:03:41 AM

who needs more then 2gb of ram?

<font color=green>I can draw tyte give me the damn crayon!</font color=green>
May 29, 2001 12:37:11 PM

who needs computers... we can all be farmers... but thats not the point now is it? servers etc will use over 2 gigs of ram... or people who use ramdisk in linux and the like silencing the hard drive...

you do not strengthen the weak by weakening the strong
Anonymous
a b } Memory
May 29, 2001 9:18:23 PM

I used M$ Ramdrive once like that... it took out my drivers.
- [-peep-] Windoze 98. >:|
People will also use 1GB+ of RAM when doing many large prints (speeds up print time), or if they have a specialised workstation. Its mainly servers though that use this amount of RAM.
Anyway...
SDRAM DDR is really only a short term memory solution: RDRAM is the more long term technology of the two.
Unfortunately...:( 
May 30, 2001 3:14:22 AM

You will in 2 years. RAM is soooooo cheap now. I think we're going to see a large boost in standard RAM sizes in the next couple years.

-MP Jesse

"Signatures Still Suck"
May 30, 2001 3:20:42 AM

Well, AMD is going to incorporate that idea in it's sledgehammer chipset. AMD plans on giving each processor it's own block of memory (at full bandwidth capabilities). While dual channels help with bandwidth in the i850 the processors are still sharing the same memory. AMD's idea is to give each processor it's OWN piece of memory on it's own bus- not allowing any sharing of the bus. So, each processor would have a 2.1 GB/s to use (assuming the sledgehammer will use PC2100 DDR or something similar). Where as Intel's Xeon's are all fighting over the same bus.

-MP Jesse

"Signatures Still Suck"
May 31, 2001 2:26:53 AM

The reason dual channels was done in the first place is because the number of circuit pathways required for dual channels of RDRAM is slightly smaller than the number of circuit pathways required for a single channel of SDRAM (SDR or DDR.) The smaller circuit pathways for RDRAM is due to the serial nature of the memory system. Thus, dual channels were implemented with RDRAM without any space penalty on the motherboard.

Were someone to create a true dual channel SDRAM (SDR or DDR) memory system, it would take up slightly more space than a quad-channel RDRAM memory system. Due to the physical nature of both technologies, RDRAM systems will likely always have double the number of channels of equivolent SDRAM systems. It's just a space consideration.

-Raystonn

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
!