New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

DDR -> DDRII -> DDRIII

post #1 of 77
3/15/05 at 7:45pm
Thread Starter 
Curious,

Toshiba, among others, have built their Sonoma using DDR. So that is pretty much F* for those who wanted to upgrade their memory to a faster one.

But with the talk about DDII having latency problem, what is the chance that DDRII is F* in the same boat as DDR since DDRIII have been annouced and knowing that some manufacturers are holding out for DDRIII and jump straight to it instead
Reply
Reply
post #2 of 77
3/15/05 at 7:54pm
Once DDR3 becomes mainstream, I'd give the other modules about a year to get phased out. In the meantime, DDR2 can enjoy its brief place in the sun.
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 77
3/15/05 at 8:04pm
I dunno. I think DDRII is kind of a joke. It hasn't brought any real improvement in speed (at least nothing concretely measureable, as far as laptops go), and the only real benefit to it is its power mana
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 77
3/15/05 at 8:40pm
Thread Starter 
hmm something to ponder on...the memory is only as good as the bus speed it is trying to go against, no?

so
PC2700 -> 333Mhz Bus Speed
PC3200 -> 400Mhz Bus Speed
PC4200 -> 533Mhz Bus Speed?

Interesting that Gateway uses DDR2-400 (PC3200).

Hmmm all these memory giving me a headache.

I am very curious to know the performance different between let say

Toshiba S2 w/PC3200 DDR vs Gateway M460 w/PC3200 DDR2

Hmm
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 77
3/15/05 at 8:47pm
That's precisely why buying a Sonoma Laptop might be a mistake, in paying premium for a memory technology that currently offers no performance enhancement, and when it's clocked higher for an advantage over DDR-I, DDR-III will be available.

DDR-III will first become commercially available sometime during mid-year 2006, that is only about 15 months away.
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 77
3/15/05 at 9:11pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by smilepak

I am very curious to know the performance different between let say

Toshiba S2 w/PC3200 DDR vs Gateway M460 w/PC3200 DDR2

Hmm

Precisely. I have been looking at the lack of real difference between DDR and DDR2 quite a bit as I am trying decide between, say, an M6 and a z71v. In the end, I'm pretty sure an M6 with 1gb DDR low latency, like Corsair xms, would kick the z71v's butt if it had 1 gb DDR2, other things being equal. I am also not that convinced that the nVidia 6600 is all that much better than the MR9700, save for the memory difference.
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 77
3/15/05 at 11:23pm
i wouldn't want an old m6 though simply because the chipset is so OLD (it is VERY OLD) that is doesn't have dual channel, and the many integrated southbridge niceties.
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 77
3/16/05 at 12:17am
Quote:
Originally Posted by farmersckn
I dunno. I think DDRII is kind of a joke. It hasn't brought any real improvement in speed (at least nothing concretely measureable, as far as laptops go), and the only real benefit to it is its power mana
DDR2 is shaping up to look like another RIMM situation. Unless something changes soon, people with current DDR2 setups with be left with extremely high memory upgrade costs when DDR2 is phased out after a short life. Look at the price of RIMMs now
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 77
3/16/05 at 7:43pm
Thread Starter 
http://www.xtremeresources.com/modul...wcontent&id=44

Quote:
The era of DDR RAM is slowly coming to the end and DDR2 is replacing the older format o*n the newest Intel platform. Companies began manufacturing DDR2 RAM in small quantities just a few months ago because of the low demand but production is projected to be in massive quantities by the end of the year. O*nly a very few select companies have made DDR2 modules for the enthusiast and overclocker to this day. Even fewer manufacturers took a step forward and offer 1GB capacity modules for the enthusiast who believes that size does matter. Crucial took the step forward and offers 1GB modules from their top of the line of Tracer Ballistix DDR2 PC2-5300 RAM. Since Crucial was kind enough to let me test a matched kit as samples, let us see if these can provide both high capacity and performance to the hardcore enthusiasts of the world.
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 77
3/16/05 at 9:29pm
Thread Starter 
DDR vs DDRII Test Result in Single Channel Mode

http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/...-rmma-1ch.html
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 77
3/16/05 at 10:12pm
So...what do these articles say in layman terms?
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 77
3/16/05 at 10:16pm
Sonoma is actually not a very smart or upto date architecture, and certainly does not meet the standard for next generation of chipsets:

http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/20...0303029422.htm

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geek.com
Intel's current shared bus architecture and off-chip memory access scheme have been outdated for years now, but in the next few years Intel promises to update its bus architecture. The proposal put forth by Intel is called CSI, or Common Serial Interconnect, and should sport similar features to AMD's competing HyperTransport bus architecture. CSI is intended for use only in server-level Intel processors, namely the Itanium and Xeon class chips, but consumer-level chips, namely the Pentium and Pentium M lines, will be stuck with the old shared bus interface. Intel is taking its time in designing the CSI architecture because along with it they need an on-chip memory controller to match the memory controller in AMD64 chips. Even so, it's hard to imagine that Intel is unable to implement the bus and memory controller architectures before the end of 2007, over two years away. And although using a common bus architecture for both its IA64 and x86-64 server chips will make the IA64 transition easier, it makes little sense to leave consumer-level Pentiums behind with their old and slow shared bus. Perhaps Intel is concerned that the transition to CSI within the next year would be overshadowed by the transition to dual-core processors scheduled for this year. Intel is debating whether or not to release CSI as an open standard, and it will be interesting to see whether or not it can compete in the open market with the now mature and widely used HyperTransport.
Reply
Reply
post #13 of 77
3/16/05 at 10:29pm
Translation: Intel has what we want but doesn't want to put it all out there at once because slowly implementing it means much greater profit in the longer term. AMD, in contrast, had no choice but to go big or else be forever lost in the game against Intel.

At least that's my take...
Reply
Reply
post #14 of 77
3/16/05 at 10:34pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by subtle_spectre
Translation: Intel has what we want but doesn't want to put it all out there at once because slowly implementing it means much greater profit in the longer term. AMD, in contrast, had no choice but to go big or else be forever lost in the game against Intel.

At least that's my take...
That's not the whole story, if you considered that AMD implemented HTT in Q2 2003, and Intel isn't close to implementing CSI to this date, and when it comes to being, it will have lagged behind HTT by 3-5 years. And also consider HTT will get its first major revision in 2006 to 25.4 GHz duplex in the 2.0version; you kind of wonder what Intel's strategy is about its I/O bandwidth.
Reply
Reply
post #15 of 77
3/16/05 at 10:35pm
Thread Starter 
Exactly. So for mobile, aint going to get it and save your money on DDR II because the bus will never be able to support it for the current time.
Reply
Reply
post #16 of 77
3/16/05 at 10:42pm
I won't have a choice but to get it, albeit with hopefully a Turion chipset when I go to college this fall. Meh. I'll use whatever I get until it irretrievably craps out, and then get something with DDR-whatever.
Reply
Reply
post #17 of 77
3/16/05 at 11:36pm
Exactly...which is what has kept me from going for, say, the z71v. I just wonder, though, when and if DDR tech systems will come down in price?
Reply
Reply
post #18 of 77
3/18/05 at 12:20am
Thread Starter 
Something to consider:

http://www4.tomshardware.com/mobile/...alviso-03.html

From what this chart is basically pointing out, using Dual Channel DDR II is basically a waste of money because the FSB can't seems to handle it at the moment.

So laptop with PC3200 Dual Channel DDR should be a good match for the new Sonoma!! or Single channel DDRII
Reply
Reply
post #19 of 77
3/18/05 at 12:40am
I quickly skimmed thorugh this thread, and didn't find a clean answer to a question of mine.

Does DDR always outperform DDR2? If not, and which speeds/latencies does DDR2 outperform DDR?
Reply
Reply
post #20 of 77
3/18/05 at 12:49am
Quote:
Originally Posted by B Nietsnie
I quickly skimmed thorugh this thread, and didn't find a clean answer to a question of mine.

Does DDR always outperform DDR2? If not, and which speeds/latencies does DDR2 outperform DDR?
It entirely depends on the type of application. Where memory access is in large continuous blocks, such as encoding tasks, latency matters little, so DDR-II will be almost as fast as DDR-I of the same speed (PC2-4200 will be faster than PC-3200 in this case). But if memory access is done over a large number of locations within a memory bank in a short period of time, then the latency will play a huge role, such as in gaming and scientific apps. (so in these cases, we might need to see PC2-6400 in order to see significant improvement over DDR-I)
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Notebook Forums - General