Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

RIMM 4200 and PC1066, whats difference?

Tags:
Last response: in Memory
Share
August 7, 2002 5:53:50 AM

I was researching this and it seems that they do the same speed and are the same thing, but I know they are not. I know they have a different ammount of pins, but what is the difference between them? Which is better? Thanks.
August 7, 2002 3:51:33 PM

RIMM 4200 is a newer form factor and a slightly different architecture. PC1066 with the new PCB form factor that fits the RIMM 4200, is the 32bit module for the next round of RDRAM memory architecture. (See page 4 of the <A HREF="http://www.rambus.com/rdf/presentations/RIMM3264_06.12...." target="_new"><i>Rambus® 32 and 64 bit RIMM™ Module - Technology Summary</i></A> Note: That paper is from June 2001 and some things have changed, but you get the idea.) For the current PC1066 under RIMM 1600 and RIMM 2100, all are 16-bit. (Well except any engineering samples with the RIMM 1600 and RIMM 2100 form factor.) Here is another good paper on the RIMM 4200 showing the up to date layout of the RIMM 4200 module, use of both channels, clock speeds, etc. (Plus it is only 3 pages long...good for those who can only do a quick read.) It is the <A HREF="http://www.rambus.com/downloads/rimm_4200_white_paper.p..." target="_new"><i>Rambus RDRAM® RIMM™ 4200 white paper - By Mike Feibus, Feibus SC -May 2002</i></A>.

As for PC1066 modules themselves...

"<font color=green>The 512/576 Mb RDRAM devices are extremely highspeed CMOS DRAMs organized as 32M words by 16 or 18 bits. The use of Rambus Signaling Level (RSL) technology permits 600 MHz to 1066 MHz transfer rates while using conventional system and board design technologies. 1066 MHz RDRAM devices are capable of sustained data transfers at 0.9375 ns per two bytes (7.5 ns per sixteen bytes).</font color=green>" - Taken from page 1 of the <i>Rambus 1066 MHz RDRAM 512/576Mb (8Mx16/18x4i) Advance Information Fact Sheet</i>. Look at page 16 and 17 of the <A HREF="http://www.rambus.com/rdf/presentations/1_05_RambusRoad..." target="_new"><i>RDRAM RDRAM® Device and Device and RIMM RIMM™ Module Roadmap Module Roadmap - Frank Fox Frank Fox - VP, RDRAM Standards Division VP, RDRAM Standards Division Rambus Inc. Rambus Inc. - October 22, 2001 October 22, 2001</i></A> for a good explination for the 16 bit, 32 bit, and 64 bit module designs for the existing form factor using the RIMM 1600 and the RIMM 2100. But as you have seen from the Tom's, <A HREF="http://www.tomshardware.com/mainboard/02q2/020624/i850e..." target="_new">Warp Speed with Rambus: Six Boards for PC1066</A> article you can see the RIMM 4200 form factor. It looks like they are using what they had designed for the form factor for the 64 bit. (See all of the Rambus papers above.) It looks like they needed to eliminate one of the keys for the extra pins. {That is just my speculation...}

Back to you...

<b>"If I melt dry ice in a bathtub, can I take a bath without getting wet?" - Steven Wright</b>
August 7, 2002 4:23:18 PM

I am trying to summarize all that and it looks like I should go with RIMM 4200? Is that your suggestion? Based on me wanting the best performance.
Related resources
August 7, 2002 5:19:09 PM

Using the RIMM 4200 form factor PC1066 will be a little faster, but it will cost you. So based on your budget... Do you want to spend the money for something that is comperable using the existing form factor? That is the question...

<b>"If I melt dry ice in a bathtub, can I take a bath without getting wet?" - Steven Wright</b>
a b } Memory
August 8, 2002 2:06:36 AM

The same chips go onto each kind. A SINGLE RIMM4200 512MB basically has the same chips as TWO PC1066 256MB modules. The main reason for the change from 16 to 32 bits is so that you will no longer need to buy pairs for your i850 chipset board. The newer form factor chips are very hard to find, and the only board that supports them is the Asus P4T533. The P4T533-C uses the more common 16-bit variety, PC800/PC1066 modules.

<font color=blue>By now you're probably wishing you had asked more questions first!</font color=blue>
August 8, 2002 3:05:27 AM

Very helpful thanks.
August 8, 2002 3:08:32 AM

That is very useful. This makes me wonder which way technoligy is going. Do I want to go with the better one or the one that is more standard.
a b } Memory
August 8, 2002 4:08:43 AM

The performance difference between them is so small, I would go for the one that is more standard. Besides, the Gigabyte GA-8IHXP is a nicer board, and it uses the normal stuff.

<font color=blue>By now you're probably wishing you had asked more questions first!</font color=blue>
August 8, 2002 4:40:19 AM

So you would take which one if you had these to to pick from? Which one do you have if you have one? Thanks.
a b } Memory
August 8, 2002 6:02:52 AM

I would go with the GA-8IHXP, it has a better set of features.

<font color=blue>By now you're probably wishing you had asked more questions first!</font color=blue>
August 8, 2002 6:36:56 AM

Thanks for the opinion
!