Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

More Intel Future Secrets

Last response: in CPUs
Share
November 3, 2004 5:02:46 AM

<A HREF="http://x86-secret.com/?option=newsd&nid=805" target="_new">http://x86-secret.com/?option=newsd&nid=805&lt;/A>

:tongue: <A HREF="http://www.geocities.com/priyajeet/fing.jpg" target="_new"><i><font color=red>Very funny, Scotty.</font color=red><font color=blue> Now beam down my clothes.</font color=blue></i></A> :tongue:

More about : intel future secrets

November 3, 2004 2:11:04 PM

DDR3 seems to be closer than we think... Which is a good thing. After even THG put a pathetic light on DDR2-711 at 4-4-4 timings, I don't think DDR2 will miraculously make it through to be a wondeful memory type. Maybe they'll make interesting processors for LGA775, but that still doesn't change the fact that DDR2 sucks. There's no other way to put it.

But since DDR3 has DDR2 clocks and DDR1 timings, it should be far better than DDR2 (which is easy) and even DDR1 (which is harder).

So DDR3-800 should finally make us believe that there's something else besides the good old trusty DDR-400 memory.
Related resources
November 3, 2004 4:07:10 PM

Bring out the new stuff NOW!!!!!!!!!
November 3, 2004 5:08:50 PM

I've been saying this all along, DDR2 is crap, take a look at the FX5800. DDR3 is much much better.
November 3, 2004 6:33:58 PM

since we're on the topic, what are the essential differences?
from an earlier post it seems that (roughly) DDR has good timings, but limited clock speed, and DDR2 has better clock speed, but worse timings. Where does DDR3 fit in, and what makes these differnces occur?
November 4, 2004 4:50:55 PM

Quote:
So DDR3-800 should finally make us believe that there's something else besides the good old trusty DDR-400 memory.

There's always RDRAM. :o 

<pre><b><font color=red>"Build a man a fire and he's warm for the rest of the evening.
Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life." - Steve Taylor</font color=red></b></pre><p>
November 4, 2004 4:52:19 PM

Quote:
I've been saying this all along, DDR2 is crap, take a look at the FX5800. DDR3 is much much better.

DDR and GDDR are somewhat different animals. (Though it would be nice to see the differences between DDR3 and GDDR3.)

<pre><b><font color=red>"Build a man a fire and he's warm for the rest of the evening.
Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life." - Steve Taylor</font color=red></b></pre><p>
November 5, 2004 1:59:15 AM

RDRAM still has some really good bandwidth tech.
The new one is XDRAM or something. See rambus.

:tongue: <A HREF="http://www.geocities.com/priyajeet/fing.jpg" target="_new"><i><font color=red>Very funny, Scotty.</font color=red><font color=blue> Now beam down my clothes.</font color=blue></i></A> :tongue:
November 5, 2004 2:35:25 PM

Id rather see the transtion to MRAM (Magnetic RAM) then to ddr3 lol. mram would solve alot of the problems current ram has, including the need for error correction at all. they actually arent that far off form having the capability to mass produce them. im pretty sure i read taht 32mb dimms have already been manufactured. so maybe by 2008 we could be seeing mram.
November 5, 2004 3:08:03 PM

now now, take it easy. Lets not JUMP TO CONCLLUSIONS. Well unless you have a mat. :wink:

:tongue: <A HREF="http://www.geocities.com/priyajeet/fing.jpg" target="_new"><i><font color=red>Very funny, Scotty.</font color=red><font color=blue> Now beam down my clothes.</font color=blue></i></A> :tongue:
November 5, 2004 3:18:39 PM

Intel=Satan

_____________________________________________
<font color=red> And the sign says "You got to have a membership card to get inside" Huh
So I got me a pen and paper And I made up my own little sign </font color=red>
November 5, 2004 5:14:08 PM

Quote:
Intel=Satan

Proof that Intel is Satanic:
<font color=blue>Intel = (ge)ntile</font color=blue> and <font color=blue>gentile != Jew</font color=blue> so <font color=blue>Intel != Jew</font color=blue> (and therefore is the work of the Devil)!

Of course, <font color=green>AMD = MAD</font color=green>. Enough said there.

And then the old standby of proof that Santa exists:
<font color=red>Santa = Satan</font color=red> and <font color=red>Satan = Devil</font color=red> and <font color=red>Devil = Lived</font color=red> so <font color=red>Santa = Lived</font color=red>!

<pre><b><font color=red>"Build a man a fire and he's warm for the rest of the evening.
Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life." - Steve Taylor</font color=red></b></pre><p>
November 5, 2004 10:25:40 PM

Static RAM would be a better solution.

Xeon

<font color=red>Post created with being a dickhead in mind.</font color=red>
<font color=white>For all emotional and slanderous statements contact THG for all law suits.</font color=white>
November 5, 2004 11:51:27 PM

Here's one that isn't in French

http://www.eetimes.com/article/printableArticle.jhtml?a...⊂_taxonomyID=2251

DRAM vendors slot DDR3 for 2006 debut


With DDR2 SDRAM just getting ready to crack the market, memory makers last week confirmed that the architecture's follow-on, DDR3, will debut in 2006.

At a JEDEX conference here, the JEDEC Solid State Technology Association said a feature set for the DDR3 standard will be defined in 2004.

"It took 24 months to reach a consensus on DDR3, and it will take another 24 months to reach a final DDR3 specification," said Bill Shen, marketing applications manager for memory products at Germany's Infineon Technologies A.G.

DDR3 SDRAM speeds will pick up at 800Mbits/s, which is where DDR2 is expected to top out, and will range upward to 1,600Mbits/s.

Shen said the consensus among DRAM makers is to set DDR3 operating voltage at 1.5V, although some DRAM users had asked that manufacturers achieve 1.2V operation. The new architecture is expected to include 8-bit pre-fetch for each clock cycle, double the 4-bit pre-fetch of DDR2.

Shen said hardware validation for the first time might also become part of the DDR3 standard.
November 6, 2004 7:03:35 AM

yeah but would we see static ram before mram? they would have to make alot of progress to make up for how far mram has come along
November 6, 2004 9:42:13 AM

Quote:
DDR3 SDRAM speeds will pick up at 800Mbits/s, which is where DDR2 is expected to top out, and will range upward to 1,600Mbits/s.

Forgive me if im wrong but doesnt DDR1 top out at 3,200MBytes/s? Looks like DDR2 is going to be a regression?
!