Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Memory Bandwidth on Hammers

Tags:
  • Memory
  • Bandwidth
  • Processors
  • Product
Last response: in Memory
Share
August 9, 2002 9:36:41 PM

If anyone would like to know...

Hammer will have an agregate bandwidth through hypertransport of 19.2GB/s to it's own memory and to the memory of any other processor in a multiprocessor setup.

Fast stuff!

<A HREF="http://www.hardforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=44..." target="_new">Thread started by cheeta05r over at the Hardforums</A>. Thanks again cheeta...


Or <A HREF="http://www.muropaketti.com/artikkelit/sekalaista/amd_ha..." target="_new">see here at the site</A> he took the slides from. Very good read. Well, even better to look at.

:smile:

<b>"If I melt dry ice in a bathtub, can I take a bath without getting wet?" - Steven Wright</b>

More about : memory bandwidth hammers

August 15, 2002 3:46:48 PM

Mucho interesting!
Now the bottleneck will reside with the RAM module itself and no longer the FSB.
I just hope we'll have QDR800 (or more) modules by that time.


<font color=red>A platform is not an oil rig.</font color=red>
August 15, 2002 8:05:46 PM

QDRII with the SRAM Column registers and with the new packaging will definately be nice.

<b>"If I melt dry ice in a bathtub, can I take a bath without getting wet?" - Steven Wright</b>
Related resources
August 16, 2002 2:59:21 AM

Yeah it all sounds wow, but the thing is, isn't DDR II just another way of increasing bandwidth further? I mean really, let's face it, we can hype the new RAM type as much as we want, but the end result is 90% by how much bandwidth the thing gives, and if no FSB out there can output this much, I don't see why DDR II is so much hyped about.

--
Is the opportunity to earn money by working, free?
August 16, 2002 1:46:47 PM

Well, the way I understand it, FSB speed would be irrelevant in the case of Hammer with regards to memory accessibility since it will have on-die memory controller with a dedicated high-bandwidth path (call it HyperTransport or other) to the actual RAM.
So, as BUM said, a 20Gb/s bandwidth or so path to the memory opens the door to the high memory performance expected from DDR-II.


<font color=red>A platform is not an oil rig.</font color=red>
August 16, 2002 2:35:28 PM

DDR 1 timing 2-2-2

DDR 2 timing 5-5-5

I call that a trade off

The day i meet a goth queen that tell me Intel suck.I turn in a lemming to fill is need in hardware.
August 16, 2002 2:40:47 PM

<A HREF="http://www.qdrsram.com/news/3_20_02.html" target="_new">JEDEC Approves QDR™II Family of High-Speed SRAM Products</A>

<A HREF="http://www.qdrsram.com/news/6_26_2002.html" target="_new">Samsung Leads Next-Generation Networking with
Industry’s First 36Mb QDR™II SRAM</A>

We talked about DDRII, QDR and QDRII at length before on a thread. (<A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardware/modules.php?nam..." target="_new">Rambus and AMD?</A>

Eden, you were ther for that.

So far the bandwidth for QDR will be about 36GB/s.

<A HREF="http://www.qdrsram.com/datasheets/Samsung/k7i323684m.pd..." target="_new">See here for the data sheets from Samsung</A>.

I looks to be very impressive stuff. (My opinion)

You decide for yourselves.

<b>"If I melt dry ice in a bathtub, can I take a bath without getting wet?" - Steven Wright</b>
August 16, 2002 3:35:41 PM

All that stuff is pretty nice, but mass production might not be just around the corner.


<font color=red>A platform is not an oil rig.</font color=red>
August 16, 2002 6:42:58 PM

Already is. Engineering samples have been available for a long time now.

<A HREF="http://www.qdrsram.com/news/4_15_02.html" target="_new">NEC Electronics Ships QDRII/DDRII Family of High-Speed SRAM Products - 4-15-2002</A>

"NEC is proud to be one of a handful of vendors currently shipping this leading-edge memory technology."

Vendors are:

1. Cypress
2. Hitachi
3. IDT
4. Micron
5. NEC
6. Samsung

Anyone here you wouldn't want to buy from?

<b>"If I melt dry ice in a bathtub, can I take a bath without getting wet?" - Steven Wright</b>
August 16, 2002 6:50:50 PM

Here is another thing that is interesting abut QDRII or QDR SRAM.

<A HREF="http://www.qdrsram.com/news/7_15_2002.htm" target="_new">NPF LA-1 Interface Specification Compatible with QDR SRAM</A>

Quote:
“QDR’s adoption, innovation, and market growth continues to make the QDR SRAM family of products the high performance memory of choice in the networking market. We feel this standard will be beneficial to both our networking customers and integrators,” said Mario Martinez, director of Strategic Marketing for Cypress’s Memory Products Division.


Now the Networking Processing Forum(NPD) adopted QDR SRAMs.

Very interesting.

<b>"If I melt dry ice in a bathtub, can I take a bath without getting wet?" - Steven Wright</b>
August 16, 2002 8:18:02 PM

Yeah but I had given up on the thread, I was there late and it was much long.

My point is, it's all nice and big numbers, but who's to say we will use it now! I mean if DDR II only provides bandwidth but in games, it won't boost by even 10% even if the FSB is bottlenecking, then I see no point than just to ensure the future which seems far from now, to use DDR II bandwidth.



--
Is the opportunity to earn money by working, free?
August 16, 2002 8:32:57 PM

Did you read the post above this one?

As you can see it has been adopted as the go-to solution for future networking applications. The 36GB/s bandwidth is a very nice fit.

"if DDR II only provides bandwidth but in games, it won't boost by even 10% even if the FSB is bottlenecking, then I see no point than just to ensure the future which seems far from now, to use DDR II bandwidth."

That future is now. They are already shipping product.

Q:Who would be buying it?

A:p roducers of end user products.

<b>"If I melt dry ice in a bathtub, can I take a bath without getting wet?" - Steven Wright</b>
Anonymous
a b } Memory
August 17, 2002 3:57:56 AM

The pentium 4's seem to love all the bandwidth they can get. It would be interesting to throw something like that in with one of those to find out if/where there is a limit.

Who wants to bet that the next gen AMD's will be capable of utilizing a much bigger memory bandwidth than current memory can offer?
August 17, 2002 3:07:41 PM

Wait a minute, DDR II is QDR?

Yes they are shipping but that still won't make sales any stronger if there are no current performance benefits on CURRENT desktop systems.

To knewton, maybe P4s would benefit, but you would want their bus to be ready as well. I mean if you want to use 10GB/sec, you need a big 1.25GHZ bus!

Also I dunno but I think we are not on the same page here. Unless you are reading off the SRAM QDR, and I am thinking DDR II, I am being mixed here!
All I want to know, is what is the point of coming out with DDR II, when all it does is up the bandwidth considerably, if current systems will not use it until a good while? What is the FIRST bandwidth offered by the lowest model for that matter?

--
Is the opportunity to earn money by working, free?
August 19, 2002 3:58:50 AM

LOOK SRAM it dont say DRAM

The day i meet a goth queen that tell me Intel suck.I turn in a lemming to fill is need in hardware.
August 19, 2002 5:22:39 PM

Eden,

Sorry I went on ahead. Let me come back to the DDRII standard. The DRAM memory types will be the form FPBGA, higher clock speeds, and lower voltages. That is all DDRII really is.

DDR as you know is Double Data Rate.

QDR is Quad Data Rate.

QDR is 4 bits per signal cycle where DDR is 2 per signal cycle.

However: The next round of memory parallel types will take the form of DDRII (SDRAM, FCDRAM, RLDRAM), DDRII VCSDRAM, DDRII SRAM, QDR SRAM, and QDRII SRAM.

The latter three are the lowest latency forms of parallel memory types.(To date.) DDR SRAMs and QDR SRAMs are in production and the others are in engineering forms. However the production of the others are slated for this quarter.

I bring up the SRAM side because this is being shipped to end user product manufacturers.

Network applications, video applications, etc. With 36Gb/s of bandwidth imagine the improvements that can take place. This is only the surface.



Juin,

You are correct. I should have posted <A HREF="http://www.samsungusa.com/cgi-bin/nabc/semiconductors/s..." target="_new">this for you</A>. However those are only showing engineering samples available in November. Also that is only Samsung.

Either way..."Where are you getting your numbers from?"

Why would the latency settings increase?

Everything out there points to lower latencies, lower voltages, smaller packaging, and higher speeds as the next round of technology comes out.

I mean even Micron and Infineon are building low latency versions of DDRI and DDRII. It is called ELDRAM.(Reduced Latency DRAM) Get the <A HREF="http://www.rldram.com/datasheets/index.html" target="_new">data sheets here</A>. Toshiba and Fujitsu call it FCRAM.(Fast Cycle DRAM) Get the <A HREF="http://www.fme.fujitsu.com/products/fcram_new/consumer...." target="_new">sheets here from Toshiba</A> or read <A HREF="http://www.toshiba.com/taec/components/Generic/WP_memor..." target="_new">this to understand what they are doing by looking here</A>. If memory makers use the SRAM column registers for <A HREF="http://www.lostcircuits.com/memory/eddr/" target="_new">EDDR DRAM</A> and EDDRII DRAM, that means that a CAS latency of zero cycles. (CL0) The memory will have the row strobe and the column will have its info static, a.k.a. No latency penalty.

So why would you state 5-5-5. Which settings are those anyway?

SDRAM Idle Limit: 0, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 48 cycles
tRC Timing: 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 cycles
tRP Timing: 3, 2, 1, 4 cycles
tRAS Timing: 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 cycles
CAS Latency: 2.5, 3 cycles
tRCD Timing: 1, 2, 3, 4 cycles

Only two have settings for 5 cycles...tRAS and tRC.("tRAS" the minimum page open time and "tRC" the bank cycle time.) And as I posted above there are a lot of improvements already started and some are scheduled for mass production this quarter.


<b>"If I melt dry ice in a bathtub, can I take a bath without getting wet?" - Steven Wright</b>
Anonymous
a b } Memory
August 20, 2002 2:52:04 AM

Post deleted by knewton
Anonymous
a b } Memory
August 20, 2002 2:53:38 AM

Sorry eh, forgot to answer until i read it today.

If you believe like I do that Processor manufacturers would gladly keep bumping FSB capabilities, and the ability of their processors to benefit from it, to reap the rewards of speed improvements of newfound memory types, then there isn't any question left in your mind. I mean, why wouldn't they?
August 20, 2002 3:14:08 AM

Yeah, but they would have to tinker a lot into multipliers, also the added FSB may not even be needed at the time. I very much doubt even the hungry-for-bandwidth P4 would benefit from twice the FSB ,the current NW Bs have, at 2.53GHZ. While it all sounds nice, it's so early in fact, even AGP 8X sounds closer than this novelty.

Although Bum's talk about SRAM uses for digital stuff sounds quite interesting.

--
Is the opportunity to earn money by working, free?
Anonymous
a b } Memory
August 20, 2002 2:03:13 PM

The P4 may not benefit all that much since it's now such an old design, and maybe we are sseeing almost all it can do. I was thinking more specifically of the hammer. We'll have to wait and see, but I think this will be one of the new "features". I think there are many clues that point to this.
August 21, 2002 1:17:37 AM

wait for the retail version
Lower lantency dont mean faster internal timing.

Also all this QDR 2 or version 17827 will allwayse run in major trouble

Super production cost,small capacity,low effectives and......This will never get to desktop

The day i meet a goth queen that tell me Intel suck.I turn in a lemming to fill is need in hardware.
August 21, 2002 2:12:40 AM

That's why there's people like me to support it:)  I dun care about the price- if it I like it, I'll buy it. Paid 1 grand for my DDR when it came out.

My frog asked me for a straw...dunno what happened his ass all over the place :eek: 
August 21, 2002 1:26:36 PM

But I don't think too many people like the idea of jumping all over new technology and paying up 1G for it...

<i>Past mistakes may make you look stupid, but avoiding future ones will make you look smart!</i>
August 21, 2002 4:08:16 PM

I still don't know where you are comming from....???

Engineering models have always been large in size and small in capacity. DDRSDRAM was this way.

Quote:
DDRII, QDR, and QDRII will be utilizing a FBGA design for its memory chips. (Fine-Pitch Ball Grid Array) They will be using 165 pins vs 66 pins for DDR SDRAM.

This means that the thickness is only 1.20mm in depth, 15mm in height, and 13mm in length. That is by no means big. If you look at the size of DDR SDRAM chips they are 22.22mm high, 11.76mm wide, and the same height,1.20mm. I will note this, the size of the chips are the prototypes and are only 18Mb in size compared to the 128Mb chips that are in full production which I noted both. However the 16Mb prototypes for SDRAM 21.04mm in height, 11.86mm in width, and 1.2mm in depth. So I am sure that once DDRII, QDR, and QDRII go to full scale production the Mb will be the normal numbers we see now. <font color=blue>(I got all of my info for the size of the chips from the white pages off of Micron's website and the QDR website's links.)</font color=blue>

I posted this back in January of this year. This was the case for DDR (SRAM and SDRAM) and I am sure it will be the case for DDRII. Do you actually think that producers like Micron would shell out a large some of start-up capital for a larger, slower, and more costly memory solution.

You make no sense at all. Read the white papers of both and then come back here with real, logical, and meaningful points to discuss.

And as for your comment about QDRII problems...

Then why is <A HREF="http://www.qdrsram.com/news/6_26_2002.html" target="_new">Samsung already shipping it to producers?</A>

Now before you say anything like..."Oh that is not SDRAM again." I know. However how long do you think it will take until the engineering samples are out for developers to make use of them? Let me give you an idea...the already are being produced. It is just a matter of time.

<b>"If I melt dry ice in a bathtub, can I take a bath without getting wet?" - Steven Wright</b>
August 21, 2002 9:07:49 PM

Do you realize this may go over 1000 $ buck for a 64 meg stick

The day i meet a goth queen that tell me Intel suck.I turn in a lemming to fill is need in hardware.
August 21, 2002 9:36:00 PM

that's cool...I'll just get 512 instead of 2gigs then.

My frog asked me for a straw...dunno what happened his ass all over the place :eek: 
!