Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

What's the performance gain by DDR-333?

Last response: in Memory
Share
August 4, 2002 11:31:33 AM

I have a kt266 board with 128mb ddrram.i'm plannig to buy a kt333 board but is it really worth of it?
how many percentage of performance will it give to me if i use 128mb(333mhz) or 256mb(333mhz)?i mean just changing the memories.

"Don't necessarily listen to tersagun,he's been advocating AMD systems,he thinks Intel sucks ass.."
August 4, 2002 1:25:18 PM

Well it's 133FSB (DDR) upped to 166 DDR (333).

Or PC2100 to PC2700.

Or 2.1GB/s bandwidth to 2.7GB/s

So it's effectively a 35% increase in bandwidth.

<b><font color=blue>~ BIOS SETTINGS: Fast, Hot, Unstable...That ought to work. ~</font color=blue></b> :wink:
August 4, 2002 1:36:59 PM

I know that, but i wanna know what's the "direct" difference in performance.i'm sure the games won't play 35% faster for example.

"Don't necessarily listen to tersagun,he's been advocating AMD systems,he thinks Intel sucks ass.."
Related resources
Anonymous
a b } Memory
August 4, 2002 2:49:53 PM

If you change the FSB to 166 without changing the multiplier you would get your 35%.

A 333MHz mem bus asynchronously linked to a 266MHz FSB will gain you nothing at best, negative performance in the case of a bad design, barring other performance enhancements to the chipset.

Chances are though there are other chipset enhancements on the newer boards though so you might get a false sensation of speed from some other improvements.
Anonymous
a b } Memory
August 4, 2002 3:07:35 PM

Regarding the direct increase due to the memory/CPU bandwidth assuming no resulting CPU core speed increase. I'm wondering if we can assume the following: the performance scales linearly with the performance difference between DDR200 systems and DDR266 systems.

Sounds like a good argument but is it true?
Anonymous
a b } Memory
August 4, 2002 4:39:51 PM

Well maybe everyone else just needs to learn telepathy. heh heh.
August 4, 2002 4:49:06 PM

I'll start tomorrow Isaac.

<b><font color=blue>~ BIOS SETTINGS: Fast, Hot, Unstable...That ought to work. ~</font color=blue></b> :wink:
August 4, 2002 5:09:04 PM

1% that all except if you overclock and maybe 0 if you use slower timing

The day i meet a goth queen that tell me Intel suck.I turn in a lemming to fill is need in hardware.
Anonymous
a b } Memory
August 5, 2002 2:58:55 AM

If only I could live up to a fraction of Sir Isaac.
August 5, 2002 4:25:10 PM

to answer your question tensagun, the difference is not much, unless you plan on OCing the FSB. Then its worth it. This is what I've been told, since I'm currently considering the same thing (2100 vs 2700).

-
Cheap memory: $26
Unstable OS: $95
Your boss getting the BSOD late on a Friday: Priceless
August 5, 2002 5:19:59 PM

With an AMD system, unless you increase the speed of the FSB you will not take advantage of much, if any, improvements.

You could a 1% to 5% increase without increasing the FSB. You could see 0% to slightly negative. Depends on the board and the memory configuration setup.

Intel has a 1:1 ratio between the memory bus and the CPU/FSB. Until AMD uses a wider FSB, all of the memory speed improvements will be useless. This is one reason they are moving to the hypertransport route with the hammer.

<b>"If I melt dry ice in a bathtub, can I take a bath without getting wet?" - Steven Wright</b>
August 5, 2002 5:57:24 PM

Quote:
Or 2.1GB/s bandwidth to 2.7GB/s

So it's effectively a 35% increase in bandwidth.

Ummm, a 600 MB/sec increase from 2100 MB/sec is only 28.57%

<b>I have so many cookies I now have a FAT problem!</b>
August 5, 2002 5:58:04 PM

Don't know but look at it this way. The switch from SDR to DDR for AMD systems produced a bandwidth gain from 1.1 GB/sec to 2.1 GB/sec and yielded a 15% to 25% improvement in gaming. A 90% gain in bandwidth only produced a 25% improvement at best.

Going from PC2100 to PC2700 is only a 29% gain in bandwidth.

Of course dumping that KT266 (not KT266A) might make an upgrade worth it.

<b>I have so many cookies I now have a FAT problem!</b>
August 5, 2002 8:48:05 PM

You're right.

Dunno how I got 35%. Hmmm.

<b><font color=blue>~ BIOS SETTINGS: Fast, Hot, Unstable...That ought to work. ~</font color=blue></b> :wink:
a b } Memory
August 5, 2002 9:49:05 PM

No, it's totally not worth it! The performance gain of using DDR333 on a CPU bus of DDR266 is around 1%, when the Cas Latency setting is the same. That's because Cas Latency is measured is cycles, so Cas2 at 166MHz is less time than Cas2 at 133MHz.

Some people suggest you get the KT333 chipset board so you can overclock the CPU bus to 166MHz, thereby getting a gain in bandwidth also. Such people are stupid and do not deserve the right to speak in public. Why? You can overclock the KT266A to 166MHz bus speed also, so getting a KT333 board to reach that speed is needless, a waste of money, since both chipsets will do it.

The one thing that the KT333 offers over the KT266A is the ability to gain that 1% by running your memory asychronously as described above.

There are other minor revisions to the KT333 compared to the KT266A which make it ever so slightly more desireable when building a new system, but definately not worth the price of a motherboard.

<font color=blue>By now you're probably wishing you had asked more questions first!</font color=blue>
August 5, 2002 10:15:07 PM

Tersagun doesn't have KT266A but rather KT266 which is probably the worst VIA chipset since the MVP3+ (and that's saying something).

<b>I have so many cookies I now have a FAT problem!</b><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by phsstpok on 08/05/02 06:22 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
a b } Memory
August 5, 2002 10:46:12 PM

Hmmm, remember the KT133?

<font color=blue>By now you're probably wishing you had asked more questions first!</font color=blue>
August 5, 2002 11:05:40 PM

Yup, used an Abit KT7 for 14 months. My nephew 6 months after that, and still is using it. I can't say "no problems" but it was 10 times better than my old MVP3 mobo (although 4-in-1 drivers finally made that mobo usuable for light duty stuff).

My friend has an Asus A7V and it hasn't crashed on him in 20 months of ownership (except when he first got an early release of Age of Empires). Frankly I'm amazed. He's never had a BIOS update or VIA 4-in-1 update. He uses a Sound Blaster Live and a Radeon DDR with maybe one driver update 15 months ago. He even plays games like Return to Castle Wolfenstein and Medal of Honor. The d*mn thing never crashes. One in a million, I think.

Every once in a while he asks me if he should do updates and I tell him, "don't touch a thing unless it breaks".

I've got a KT133A mobo, Epox 8KTA3PRO. It's a little better than the KT7 but nothing like my friend's machine. This is my last VIA chipset, though. I'm tired of the quirkiness.

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