RDRAM ..... still King

Saad

Distinguished
Jan 27, 2004
14
0
18,510
I personally have a P4 2.4GHZ on an Asus mainboard.I work in an office related to computers.My field is Memory.We all know there are 2 main memories in earth today and these are:
1:SDRAM(A bit slow)
2:DDR SDRAM(standard memory)
There is also a Ram RDRAM which is not used today.Now I have made my story long,sorry.back to the topic.
My office PC is p4 3.06GHZ with intel 875PBZ and DDR-400.
I seemed to be unsatisfied with my mem although it is 1 of the best memories today.
1 day I went out to buy a PC for my little brother.The components I bought for him were:
IntelD850GB
P4 1.5GHZ 400MHZ bus
PC800 RDRAM samsung
Nvidia TNT2 M64
Creative Vibra 128
LG CD-ROM
I bought it just for gaming for my bro.But when I started to install windows XP it was like F-16.it installed windows in just 7 or 8 mins.I was really surprised and shocked as well.all components in the PC were slower than mine but installing windows in just 7 mins is really surprising.The overall performance of PC was superb,remind u NAV 2004 pro was installed(which ususally maske PC slow).That was simply the magic of RDRAM.I work in a memory field,I know it is a propoganda against RDRAM,the main drawback with RDRAM is that its design is serial and latency!I myself have changed my PC to RDRAM.875PBZ is of no match against RDRAM.Intel must go back to RDRAM not that DDR!any comments about ram please Reply.
 

coylter

Distinguished
Sep 12, 2003
1,322
0
19,280
Rambus sound like Rambo and Rambo suck

My own beast: Athlon 2700xp+ (oc: 3200xp+ with 200fsb) , Radeon 9800pro (oc: 410/370) , 512mb ddr400. SO MUCH faster than my last computer (pIII 550......)
 

Crashman

Polypheme
Former Staff
Dual Channel PC1066 is noticably faster than dual channel PC2100, and that's as far as it goes. PC1200 isn't fast enough for the 800 bus, you'd need RIMM6400 to compete with dual channel PC3200. I went from a 2.4B w/PC1066 to a 2.6C w/PC4000 dual channel, at stock speed (PC3200 speed) it was noticably faster, but just enough to attribute that to the CPU speed.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>
 

Saad

Distinguished
Jan 27, 2004
14
0
18,510
U have athlon right?the most flopped PC ever created in the history!and DDR400 is just cost-effective .if u poor people ever manage to buy a P4 with RDRAM that u say Rambo then u should reply to me.
 

Johanthegnarler

Distinguished
Nov 24, 2003
895
0
18,980
So poor that he has a radeon 9800pro. I agree with you with RDram though it's still fast as [-peep-]. My 2.8b with 1gb of RDram is fast as shite. But.. that's the limit of the RDRam.
It can't produce enough bandwidth for 800fsb. So in turn.. if you aren't buying at least pc3200-3500 Rdram is better.
But another problem with RDram is it doesn't oc for [-peep-], and the best board for it is an intel board that also doesn't allow any type of overclocking. As well that board is limited due to it only being 4xagp compatible.
Yes i realize now that 4xagp and 8xagp there isn't really any noticeable difference yet but that's due to the GPU's and not the chipset. So in a year if you want another bomb as video card that supports all out 8x you can't get it using that board.. as well as the RDRam will be the bottleneck at that point.

<A HREF="http://arc.aquamark3.com/arc/arc_view.php?run=610166081" target="_new">http://arc.aquamark3.com/arc/arc_view.php?run=610166081</A>
Figured i'd do it too..reality my ass.
 

Vapor

Distinguished
Jun 11, 2001
2,206
0
19,780
Weird, I have a 2.66B with 1GB of PC1066 RDRAM--it sucks, I'd much rather have a P4C and dual channel PC3200 (or better due to overclocking capabilities that are not found in RDRAM). Last I checked, 6.4GB/s of bandwidth is better than my PC1066's 4.2GB/s bandwidth...especially when it is possible to get 8.8+GB/s with DDR and a P4C (2,4C with PC4400 Corsair at 3,3GHzm for instance).

Rather than saying DDR400 is <b>just</b> cost-effective, you might want to say that RDRAM is poorly priced, especially for its performance relative to DDR400 (or better).

From the looks of it, you're just a rich, stupid person...really stupid in fact.

Maxtor disgraces the six letters that make Matrox.
 

Johanthegnarler

Distinguished
Nov 24, 2003
895
0
18,980
Heh, schooled.

<A HREF="http://arc.aquamark3.com/arc/arc_view.php?run=610166081" target="_new">http://arc.aquamark3.com/arc/arc_view.php?run=610166081</A>
Figured i'd do it too..reality my ass.
 
G

Guest

Guest
``My office PC is p4 3.06GHZ with intel 875PBZ and DDR-400``
Maybe you should put a 533mhz cpu in a 800mhz motherboard, it might help memory bandwith...
 

juin

Distinguished
May 19, 2001
3,323
0
20,780
Unlike many myth RDRAM have about 25% to 50% less lantency on the same memory array.Also performe better by about 5% on read and 50% on write

I dont like french test