Tom's Hardware > Forum > CPU & Components > CPUs > RDRAM is DEAD!

RDRAM is DEAD!

Forum CPU & Components : CPUs - RDRAM is DEAD!

Tom's Hardware: Over 1.4 million members in 6 different countries available to answer all your high-tech questions. Sign up now! Its free!
Ask the community Add a reply
Page:    Previous 1 2 Next Bottom Search this thread
Word :    Username :           
 
AMD_Man   06-04-2002 at 06:32:12 PM

LONG LIVE DDR RAM!!!

<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1631&p=6" target="_new">Link</A>


Sorry if this looks like an AMDMeltdown type post but I don't know what to say. I'd appreciate your comments.

:wink: <b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b> :wink:

Add a reply
Sponsored Links
Register or log in to remove.
FatBurger   06-04-2002 at 06:37:29 PM
- 0 +

Is this the article that Bill Siu said wasn't true and he was misquoted?

Yeup, that's the one. Even remembered his name correctly. HardOCP said that in their interview with him, he said there was more RDRAM on the way.

<font color=blue>Hi mom!</font color=blue>

Reply to FatBurger
labdog   06-04-2002 at 09:35:25 PM
- 0 +

nice but not surprising.


<i>if <b>you know</b> <font color=white>you don't know<font color=black>, the way could be more easy ...

Reply to labdog
labdog   06-04-2002 at 09:39:41 PM
- 0 +

RDRAM is killing itself because of its expensiveness & its inefficiency.


<i>if <b>you know</b> <font color=white>you don't know<font color=black>, the way could be more easy ...

Reply to labdog
AMD_Man   06-05-2002 at 12:42:35 AM
- 0 +

Yup, my bad. I missed the rest of the thread because I had to go back to class, lol! I was at school while posting this which is why it's brief.

:wink: <b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b> :wink:

Reply to AMD_Man
FatBurger   06-05-2002 at 12:58:05 AM
- 0 +

RDRAM is neither, care to play again?

<font color=blue>Hi mom!</font color=blue>

Reply to FatBurger
Dark_Archonis   06-05-2002 at 01:08:52 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

RDRAM is killing itself because of its expensiveness & its inefficiency


What makes you say that? PC1066 RDRAM mops the floor with all but DDR 400. And the price of it is actually not that high right now compared to DDR. For the future, RDRAM is the only way to go if Intel wants the P4 to perform great. Even Dual channel DDR 400 will barely provide enough bandwith for P4's at 3Ghz, and higher. The upcoming P4 Prescott will have a 800mhz FSB, which will nead huge amounts of bandwith. Plus, add to the fact, that it will debut at about 4GHz. IMHO, RDRAM is the only logical memory which can be used for future P4's. And, if Rambus is smart, then they'll continue their R&D on their QDR RDRAM, which will allow the memory to transfer 4 bits per clock cycle. Imagine, dual channel 32-bit PC2000 QDR RDRAM (of course, that's just an estimate).

Reply to Dark_Archonis
labdog   06-05-2002 at 01:34:02 AM
- 0 +

what?

change your fuse pls.


<i>if <b>you know</b> <font color=white>you don't know<font color=black>, the way could be more easy ...

Reply to labdog
AMD_Man   06-05-2002 at 01:41:28 AM
- 0 +

Quote :


Even Dual channel DDR 400 will barely provide enough bandwith for P4's at 3Ghz, and higher.


Huh?

Dual Channel PC1066 = 4.2GB/s
Dual Channel DDR400 = 6.4GB/s



:wink: <b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b> :wink:

Reply to AMD_Man
labdog   06-05-2002 at 01:43:21 AM
- 0 +

when it will be the time for, a new DDR SDRAM will come up as it done until now which will kill the RDRam before it will be buy by the major part of users.


i would like to recall you the events till now which point out that even intel makes a backward with its RDRam to implement DDR SDRam under its mbs instead of it.


laugh. laugh. laugh.


<i>if <b>you know</b> <font color=white>you don't know<font color=black>, the way could be more easy ...

Reply to labdog
labdog   06-05-2002 at 01:48:54 AM
- 0 +

im going to forget.... hello mod.


<i>if <b>you know</b> <font color=white>you don't know<font color=black>, the way could be more easy ...

Reply to labdog
labdog   06-05-2002 at 01:56:06 AM
- 0 +

maybe he speaks about dual real channel SDRAM staying at 3.2Gb but with a better bandwith than the DDR (Double Data Rate) SDram?


<i>if <b>you know</b> <font color=white>you don't know<font color=black>, the way could be more easy ...

Reply to labdog
AMD_Man   06-05-2002 at 02:22:41 AM
- 0 +

Quote :



maybe he speaks about dual real channel SDRAM staying at 3.2Gb but with a better bandwith than the DDR (Double Data Rate) SDram?



Sorry, but I have no idea what you just said.

:wink: <b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b> :wink:

Reply to AMD_Man
labdog   06-05-2002 at 02:59:16 AM
- 0 +

a dual real channels SDRAM vs a DDR (Double Data Rate) SDRAM so a newest model of SDRAM which implement a real multiple parallel synchronous channels in a SDRAM memory instead of the current Double Data Rate mechanism which is not a real time bichannel synchronous memory system.

is it more clear? i hope it would be.



<i>if <b>you know</b> <font color=white>you don't know<font color=black>, the way could be more easy ...

Reply to labdog
ritesh_laud   06-05-2002 at 03:15:03 AM
- 0 +

<A HREF="http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame46.html" target="_new"><font color=green>Labdog</font color=green></A>

Reply to ritesh_laud
labdog   06-05-2002 at 03:25:01 AM
- 0 +

prefer this <A HREF="http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame35.html" target="_new">one</A>.

btw, yo can go outta your hiding place.
but hmmfff... maybe you are shy, timid, afraid? roflMAO.


<i>if <b>you know</b> <font color=white>you don't know<font color=black>, the way could be more easy ...

Reply to labdog
jiffy   06-05-2002 at 06:39:33 AM
- 0 +

hehe lol funny pic




Hey Baby, want to play with my computer?

Reply to jiffy
labdog   06-05-2002 at 02:45:40 PM
- 0 +

yes. <A HREF="http://www.xbitlabs.com/mainboards/i845g-i845e/" target="_new">link</A>


<i>if <b>you know</b> <font color=white>you don't know<font color=black>, the way could be more easy ...

Reply to labdog
buddry   06-05-2002 at 03:31:16 PM
- 0 +

I think most people just ignore his posts because they make no sense.

That is a nice <b><font color=green>Garbage Can</font color=green></b> you have there!

Reply to buddry
labdog   06-05-2002 at 03:37:18 PM
- 0 +

what's your pb? a chemical brain as ritesh_laud?


<i>if <b>you know</b> <font color=white>you don't know<font color=black>, the way could be more easy ...<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Labdog on 06/05/02 09:38 AM.</EM></FONT></P>

Reply to labdog
labdog   06-05-2002 at 03:42:03 PM
- 0 +

WTF?!? are you too stup to understand?!? do you want a drawing?


<i>if <b>you know</b> <font color=white>you don't know<font color=black>, the way could be more easy ...

Reply to labdog
slvr_phoenix   06-05-2002 at 04:22:33 PM
- 0 +

Quote :

Huh?

Dual Channel PC1066 = 4.2GB/s
Dual Channel DDR400 = 6.4GB/s


Huh? You're comparing DDR SDRAM's future to RDRAM's present to determine which can offer more bandwidth. Oh yeah, that's fair. Why not try on the future of RDRAM instead? We'll start easy...

Dual Channel <b>32-bit</b> PC800 = 6.4GB/s
Dual Channel <b>32-bit</b> PC1066 = 8.4GB/s
Dual Channel <b>32-bit</b> PC1200 = 9.6GB/s

Now where does DDR SDRAM sit in the picture?


Tech support said take a screen shot.
Putting it down with my .22 was the humane thing to do.

Reply to slvr_phoenix
Matisaro   06-05-2002 at 05:37:32 PM
- 0 +

Quote :

Dual Channel 32-bit PC800 = 6.4GB/s
Dual Channel 32-bit PC1066 = 8.4GB/s
Dual Channel 32-bit PC1200 = 9.6GB/s



Do they even have plans for dual channel 32 bit rdram? 32 bit rdram is just 2 channels in a single socket remember.

Basically dual channel 32 bit rdram would be quad channel 16bit rdram with half the memory slot requirement.

:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:

Reply to Matisaro
FatBurger   06-05-2002 at 07:10:31 PM
- 0 +

Quote :

Basically dual channel 32 bit rdram would be quad channel 16bit rdram with half the memory slot requirement.



Pretty much, yeah. I thought I remembered SiS talking about something like that, but I could easily be wrong.

<font color=blue>Hi mom!</font color=blue>

Reply to FatBurger
slvr_phoenix   06-05-2002 at 07:43:09 PM
- 0 +

<font color=blue>

Quote :

Basically dual channel 32 bit rdram would be quad channel 16bit rdram with half the memory slot requirement.


</font color=blue>Yep Matisaro, you've got it. In other words, Dual Channel 32-bit RDRAM is 2 memory sticks per slot and <i>possibly</i> only two slots per CPU, pending testing of four and all that.

So basically a system using it is no different in theology from an RDRAM board now... except <i>possibly</i> with only two slots for memory. We'd have to wait and see.

<font color=green>

Quote :

Pretty much, yeah. I thought I remembered SiS talking about something like that, but I could easily be wrong.


</font color=green>FatBurger, me too. I thought I read an article on SiS and Rambus playing naughty in the closet, all behind Intel's back, because Rambus wants to hurt Intel for adopting DDR. ...Or something like that anyway. And their love child was in the oven and after sonograms doctors had declaired it a 32-bit RDRAM PC800/PC1066/PC1200 bandwidth monster for Willamette/Northwood and/or Prescott.

But then, it also could have been subliminal programming on the TV or psychotropic drugs in the city water supply. You just never know what that silly government will do next to control the populace... ;)


Tech support said take a screen shot.
Putting it down with my .22 was the humane thing to do.

Reply to slvr_phoenix
jiffy   06-05-2002 at 10:43:52 PM
- 0 +

I don't have any pb? At least not any I'm willing to admit to.







Hey Baby, want to play with my computer?

Reply to jiffy
labdog   06-05-2002 at 11:26:44 PM
- 0 +

good night m.


<i>if <b>you know</b> <font color=white>you don't know<font color=black>, the way could be more easy ...

Reply to labdog
Crashman   06-06-2002 at 12:27:58 AM
- 0 +

RDRAM is not dead, but it's dying. Dual Channel PC2100, which is dirt cheap, has 4.2GB/s, same as PC1066. And less latency, which means it should allow the processor to perform better. DDR400 (PC3200) is already out, and Dual Channel PC3200 will have the same bandwidth as RDRAM "1600". And be available in much larger quantities, since 1600 RDRAM is a long ways off from being released.

If a good Dual Channel DDR board was available for the P4, I'd own it. Supposed to be released between August and October though, which is the only reason I'm going RDRAM.

What's the frequency, Kenneth?

Reply to Crashman
FatBurger   06-06-2002 at 01:27:55 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

If a good Dual Channel DDR board was available for the P4, I'd own it.



You and most of the other people that currently have RDRAM.

<font color=blue>Hi mom!</font color=blue>

Reply to FatBurger
Dark_Archonis   06-06-2002 at 01:54:13 AM
- 0 +

I was in fact comparing a future DDR chip to a present RDRAM chip. This was to show, that even when DRR 400 does come out, it will have alot of competion form RDRAM when used on the P4.

Mat, of course they could do dual 32 bit RDRAM sticks, if they use QDR. QDR is 4 channels in a single socket (according to Rambus). Unfortunately, it's unclear whether Rambus will actually release QDR sticks.

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Dark_Archonis on 06/05/02 07:58 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

Reply to Dark_Archonis
AMD_Man   06-06-2002 at 01:57:26 AM
- 0 +

Quote :


Um, AMD_Man, the bandwith for DUAL-CHANNEL PC1066 RDRAM is higher than 4.2, as slvr stated.


Actually, that's wrong. The bandwidth of dual-channel PC1066 is 4.2GB/s. That's using the current 16-bit RDRAM.

Quote :


This was to show, that even when DRR 400 does come out, it will have alot of competion form RDRAM when used on the P4.

Besides, neither AMD nor Intel are going to use 32-bit PC1066 any time soon. 8.4GB/s bandwidth needs a 1066MHz FSB, not even Prescott will have that. You're looking 3 years into the future while I'm only looking 6-9 months or so ahead.



DDR400 is here, as far as I'm concerned and a DDR400 motherboard is here (the P4S533).

:wink: <b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b> :wink:

Reply to AMD_Man
Dark_Archonis   06-06-2002 at 02:00:10 AM
- 0 +

Sorry, I just corrected that mistake.

And as for DDR 400, I have yet to see it in any stores or see someone actually using it. But if it's out, I just wanna see how it competes vs RDRAm on the P4.

Reply to Dark_Archonis
eden   06-06-2002 at 03:26:33 AM
- 0 +

Go check out a recent THG article on DDR400 vs PC1066.

--
Meow

Reply to eden
Matisaro   06-06-2002 at 11:31:52 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

So basically a system using it is no different in theology from an RDRAM board now... except possibly with only two slots for memory. We'd have to wait and see.



And thats quad channel, with all the issue quad channel brings, I dont think rdram will be able to go much further than that.

:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:

Reply to Matisaro
FatBurger   06-06-2002 at 07:39:28 PM
- 0 +

Quote :

with all the issue quad channel brings



Like...?

<font color=blue>Hi mom!</font color=blue>

Reply to FatBurger
slvr_phoenix   06-06-2002 at 08:47:50 PM
- 0 +

Quote :

Like...?


ROFL @ FatBurger. :)
Hey, no fair. That was my thought too. You read my mind. :-p


Tech support said take a screen shot.
Putting it down with my .22 was the humane thing to do.

Reply to slvr_phoenix
labdog   06-06-2002 at 11:30:44 PM
- 0 +

i try another thing for you, penguin@dum.

<b>DDR SDRRAM</b>:
an acronym for Double Data Rate or SDRAM. It is touted to be the next generation of the SDRAM. DDR finds its foundations on the same design core of SDRAM, yet adds advances to enhance its speed capabilities. As a result, DDR allows data to be read on both the rising and the falling edge of the clock, delivering twice the bandwith of standard SDRAMS. DDR essentially doubles the memory speed from SDRAMs without increasing the clock frequency.

fondamental difference with the RDRAM (rambus).

& this one, do you understand it or a drawing is yet needed?


<i>if <b>you know</b> <font color=white>you don't know</font color=white>, the way could be more easy ...

Reply to labdog
Dark_Archonis   06-07-2002 at 01:34:34 AM
- 0 +

I found DDR 333, but 400 is knowhere to be seen. I looked around at online sites too, and you can't buy DDR 400 yet. Read the computex articles, and here is an Article from Anand:

<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1631&p=4" target="_new">http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1631&p=4</A>

If you can actually show me DDR 400 benchmarks vs Pc 1066 RDRAM, I'll be happy to look at them.

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Dark_Archonis on 06/06/02 07:35 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

Reply to Dark_Archonis
AMD_Man   06-07-2002 at 01:57:20 AM
- 0 +

I can get DDR400 at my local computer store. <A HREF="http://www.canadacomputers.com/" target="_new">Link</A>

:wink: <b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b> :wink:

Reply to AMD_Man
labdog   06-07-2002 at 02:43:22 AM
- 0 +

thx for your efficient comment. it is invaluable.


now im a tank, armoured against bs@dum.
<i>if you know you don't know, the way could be more easy

Reply to labdog
eden   06-07-2002 at 03:03:20 AM
- 0 +

You must be relatively blind to THG. I found it on the first page of the Search:
<A HREF="http://www6.tomshardware.com/mainboard/02q2/020501/index.html" target="_new">http://www6.tomshardware.com/mainboard/02q2/020501/index.html</A>

--
Meow

Reply to eden
FatBurger   06-07-2002 at 03:30:47 AM
- 0 +

As opposed to your pointless spam.

<font color=blue>Hi mom!</font color=blue>

Reply to FatBurger
labdog   06-07-2002 at 03:42:06 AM
- 0 +

i dont care. have a sleep or make a break.


<i>if <b>you know</b> <font color=white>you don't know</font color=white>, the way could be more easy ...

Reply to labdog
eden   06-07-2002 at 03:44:27 AM
- 0 +

PM Fredi or something, the guy is worse than Melty now.

--
Meow

Reply to eden
FatBurger   06-07-2002 at 07:21:31 AM
- 0 +

You think I haven't before? dhlucke has too.

<font color=blue>Hi mom!</font color=blue>

Reply to FatBurger
Matisaro   06-07-2002 at 11:51:29 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

Like...?



Crosstalk, em interferance, extra traces.


From what I recall the 800mhz speed of data transfer on rdram leaves it very vunerable to crosstalk and other electrical issues.

:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:

Reply to Matisaro
labdog   06-07-2002 at 01:09:25 PM
- 0 +

haha. let me laugh. Fredi already knows everything is going on here.

but something you didnt understand:
HE DONT CARE ABOUT YOUR PMs

he is a moderator & he has his manner, a moderator manner to moderate the forum.

you are a lambs gang with a naivety which pass all the edges & the limits.

roflm. roflm. roflm. roflm. roflm. roflm. roflm. roflm. roflm. roflm. roflm.

haha.


<i>if <b>you know</b> <font color=white>you don't know</font color=white>, the way could be more easy ...

Reply to labdog
labdog   06-07-2002 at 01:13:34 PM
- 0 +

Quote :

You must be relatively <b>blind to THG</b>.


pls, stop it. it is too hilarious. hahahaha.


<i>if <b>you know</b> <font color=white>you don't know</font color=white>, the way could be more easy ...

Reply to labdog
labdog   06-07-2002 at 02:00:30 PM
- 0 +

i forget something...

hOw Old are yOu? fifteen?


<i>if <b>you know</b> <font color=white>you don't know</font color=white>, the way could be more easy ...

Reply to labdog
AMD_Man   06-07-2002 at 02:31:30 PM
- 0 +

How old are you, Labdog? :tongue:

:wink: <b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b> :wink:

Reply to AMD_Man
Previous
1 2
Next
Ask the community Add a reply
Tom's Hardware > Forum > CPU & Components > CPUs > RDRAM is DEAD!
Go to:

There are 1095 identified and unidentified users. To see the list of identified users, Click here.

Forum map
Bestofmedia Forum ©
2000-2009 Bestofmedia Group
Page generated in 0.390 seconds
Please mind

You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months.
If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.

Add a reply Cancel
Sponsored links
  • Ask the community now
  • Publish
Ad
They won a badge
Join us in greeting them