DDR VS. SDRAM

[Rassler]

i've just purchased an asus board that supports both sdram and ddr ram... for gaming would sdram be ok or should i get some ddr?

 

[Arrow]

I believe that DDR is about 15% faster than SDRAM... so take your pick

Rob
Please visit <b><A HREF="http://www.ncix.com/canada/index.cfm?affiliateid=319048" target="_new">http://www.ncix.com/canada/index.cfm?affiliateid=319048</A></b>

 

[FatBurger]

Definitely go with DDR. They're the same price now.



<font color=blue>Quarter pounder inside</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Change the Sig of the Week!!!</font color=red>

 

[MadCat]

PC2100 DDR has at least 1.66 times more bandwidth than PC133 SDRAM.

Using the PC2100 observed SiSoft Sandra bandwidth benchmark data <b>taken</b> from Van Smith's <A HREF="http://216.194.77.198/news/2001/july/010731_Sandra_Mutates/010731_Sandra_Mutates.htm" target="_new">article</A>: (best observed bandwidth numbers for PC2100)/(theoretical bandwidth of PC133) ~ (84.4% * 2.133 GB/s)/(100% * 1.066 GB/s) ~ (1.772 GB/s)/(1.066 GB/s) = 1.66 times.

IMHO, it's probably way more efficient, but we will have to wait for faster processors that can suck up the data at a faster rate before we can judge the efficiency of the memory controller.

Whether your favorite applications will benefit from this extra bandwidth is another question. I think most applications will access data from the cache memory more times than not. Need bandwidth limited applications to see the effects of DDR memory. One such application is SiSoft Sandra latest memory bandwidth benchmark.
<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by MadCat on 08/13/01 06:56 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[FatBurger]

No, not Van Smith!
I have no respect for that man...



<font color=blue>Quarter pounder inside</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Change the Sig of the Week!!!</font color=red>

 

[MadCat]

I'm simply using the data from that article. I don't think he would fabricate <b>the</b> data.

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by MadCat on 08/13/01 06:55 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[Raystonn]

He has in the past...

-Raystonn


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

 

[MadCat]

You have any reasons to believe that bandwidth data is not accurate? I've tried the new enhanced SiSoft Sandra benchmarks hoping it would have information on the other systems but nothing was on file for the new tests.

 

[AMD_Man]

What are you guys talking about? DDR RAM is not for the serious gamer! Sure, 640*480*16 is 15% faster but 1024*768*32 shows no difference. DDR is good for the future but now it's useless for the hardcore gamer of today. The price difference is very small or nothing so just get DDR now for the games of the future.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor

 

[killall]

depends on how graphics card dependant the game is... but as games become more complex... as in more things are taken into account... larger maps etc... ram becomes more important.... i see no reason not to get ddr unless you are on a tight budget...

if in doubt blame microsoft...

 

[FatBurger]

I don't think he would fabricate data.

He has in the past...

I agree with Raystonn on this one. He's doesn't have the best reputation as a journalist, even though he used to write for THG.


And why are you guys even talking about SDRAM vs. DDR on a price basis? According to <A HREF="http://www.crucial.com/store/listModule.asp?module=allModules&x=15&y=17" target="_new">Crucial</A>, they're <font color=red>exactly the same price!</font color=red>

What more do you need?



<font color=blue>Quarter pounder inside</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Change the Sig of the Week!!!</font color=red>

 

[xxsk8er101xx]

heh there is a reason why he USE to work for THG heh.


Have fun!