Is DDR RAM that much faster than normal sdram?

I want to find out how much of a performance increase I could expect to get from upgrading 192MB of SDRAM (1 128MB stick @ 133MHz; the other 64MB module @ 100MHz) to 256MB DDR RAM. I'm running windows 98SE on an ecs k7S5A mobo, athlon xp 1600+ geforce 2mx 400 64MB (upgrading to geforce 3 ti200) and western digital 40 gig HD. I'm looking into upgrading to windows xp but not until I have more memory. Upgrading to windows XP isn't really that important to me but I'm still considering it. Will DDR RAM make that big of a difference in my comp? I use it mainly for games, music (downloading/listening/burning) and just everyday mundane tasks (checking email/talking on aim, etc.) I was originally planning on just going along with the ram upgrade, however, I'm really tempted to buy the 400 watt logitech z560 speaker set from newegg ($130+ shipping) and if I buy the RAM i don't think I'll have enough money to buy the GF3 and speakers too. I'm using the onboard sound (AC97) right now. It works fine with my logitech z340 speakers now and I don't really expect it to be a problem with the newer speakers. My computer seems to run fast enouogh right now. Will DDR RAM make a NOTICABLE difference?
9 answers Last reply
More about faster normal sdram
  1. It's hard to say how much performance difference there is between DDR SDRAM and regular SDRAM. It depends on whether the application is memory intensive or not. Games can be but generally depend even more on the graphics card speed than system memory. Since DDR has a theoretical maximum bandwidth of 2133 MB/sec (when FSB is at 133 Mhz) it can offer significant performance boost for memory intensive applications over SDRAM which has max bandwidth (133 Mhz FSB) of 1066 MB/sec.

    By the way, I have the Logitech Z-340 speakers and they are amazing. They are just ho-hum with onboard audio try a better sound card or quality audio source, like audio CD player. These are exceptionally clear and dynamic speakers and the bass goes down to 28 hz. (I used a test CD not just specs).

    It wouldn't be a 5.1 system but have you considered two sets of Z-340's with a 3D sound card to make a 4.1 system. (Would that be a 4.2 system since it would have two subwoofers?) Whatever, two sets would put out tremendous bass. Only cost you another $36 at Newegg and you could put some of the savings toward a Soundblaster Audigy.

    Anyway, just try the speakers with another sound source. I think you won't feel the need to upgrade.

    <b>I have so many cookies I now have a FAT problem!</b><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by phsstpok on 03/23/02 00:33 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
  2. hm.....i dunno think about it this way the z-340 have 33 watts RMS and the z560 has 400RMS total......that's a big difference! Besides, I have used them on a different source (bose wave radio/cd player). I had both of those hooked up to my tv and played games, music, tv, etc. through them it was pretty nice, but they didn't sound all that different than they did on my PC. There's really nothing WRONG with these speakers, I'll admit they're pretty nice too. But I like things loud...heheh<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by henryo11 on 03/23/02 11:23 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
  3. Two sets of Z-340s would have 66 watts but I can't argue the power issue. Still, at only 33 watts these deliver exceptionally clean sound.

    How loud do you need PC speakers!?!?!? I can't even turn these to max.

    As for onboard sound, maybe yours is better than mine. I just have Via AC97. No bass at all and very subdued sound. Even my six-year old Turtle Beach card sounds better.

    When you get the Z-560, let me know how they compare.

    <b>I have so many cookies I now have a FAT problem!</b>
  4. I have an ECS mobo with "Avance AC97" on-board audio and it seems to sound fine. the only thing I noticed is that when I turn the volume to the max with winamp it gets a little fuzzy but when I'm playing music from a CD on my computer, the sound remains clear at all volumes. Not a big deal, it could also be because of my EQ settings that could be causing that, but i'm not sure. The reviews I have been reading about the z-560s are really good. And as for the wattage 188 watts RMS for the sub alone, that's starting to rival some of my friends' car systems<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by henryo11 on 03/23/02 02:25 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
  5. Hey, you edited your post. I thought the idea of putting the Z-560s in a car was a good one, a funny one but a good one. LOL! One speaker driver alone for a car system costs more the Z-560s complete. Nevermind the amps, cables, crossovers, etc. Just need the power inverter. LOL! Logitech would make a lot of manufacturers unhappy if they made car products at these kind of prices.

    Yup, seen lots of Z-560 reviews, some Z-540 reviews, and only one Z-340 review. All of them pretty good. The Z-540s don't have a headphone jack was about the only complaint. I think the cables are too short on the Z-340s.

    <b>I have so many cookies I now have a FAT problem!</b>
  6. lol yeah.......heh actually I have a power inverter, but it only works at 150watts, so I don't think it would support the Z-560s, or would it? i'm not an expert at this stuff.
  7. I'm not an expert either but I think a rule of thumb is if an amp produces X watts at full output then it needs 2X watts for input.

    <b>I have so many cookies I now have a FAT problem!</b>
  8. then i'd need 800watts? heheh oh well I'm not worried about it, well my order is processing. we'll see how the speakers are.
  9. Would you use max volume in your car? You DO LIKE IT loud.

    <b>I have so many cookies I now have a FAT problem!</b>
Ask a new question

Read More

Memory DDR RAM