SDRAM Vs. DDRAM

RAMBUS Vs. DDRAM

Question.

Rambus is said to be the faster technology (I know it is, I've read up on computer architecture ) by quite someway. But nowadays is DDR catching up or has it overtaken because of the silly clock speeds?

Rambus is like... instant though.

So which is superior in a high performance no cost limit machine (I think Rambus still?)?

DDR IS SDRAM, it just sends data on the rising AND falling of each hertz, so it is double the bandwidth at the same speed. By the way, DDR ram has been superior since day 1, even if the difference at first couldn't be felt, like with DDR2 nowadays.

Sorry for sounding mean, but I just can't believe you posted what you did.

I think he meant RAMBUS vs. DDRSDRAM.

JDXNC said:

I think he meant RAMBUS vs. DDRSDRAM.

Click to expand...

I may have. I'll get back to you.

Seems I mucked up my reading (note to self: never try to sound confident again... ever.).

Oh, I never thought of that. I was very completely surprised at his post. The problem with rambus is cost. It is supposedly better I guess, but with ddr's high clock speeds and dual channel now, I would vouch for ddr.

Oh, I never thought of that. I was very completely surprised at his post. The problem with rambus is cost. It is supposedly better I guess, but with ddr's high clock speeds and dual channel now, I would vouch for ddr.

Click to expand...

DDR has surpassed it now, I believe, but RAMBUS had the highest bandwidth for quite a while. Cost, yes, was a big factor. Another factor was that although RAMBUS had higher bandwidth, it also suffered from much higher latency, which caused a performance hit in a lot of applications; servers, for example.

Rambus has their quad data rate RDRAM coming out too... I thinks it's called XDR... yep, here it is XDR

That should be interesting to see.

You can't just go by benchmarks. I still have a dedicated RDRAM rig, and keep several boards for it. Yes, current state of DDR where something like an 800 fsb 875P board at 250, 1:1, 2-2-2-5 in DC will give 3550 unbuffered. Highest I got on RDRAM was 158-160/4x or so for 2500, limited by overclockability of the ram. If I could run 175/4x, 3500 might be possible.

However RDRAM seems particularly well-suited for the 3D and video editing environment. Despite the fact I have DDR rigs running up to 4.02 gig of late, with unbuffered bandwidth of 3550, I use my RDRAM rig for gaming.

I recently plugged in my RDRAM rig to fool with it. I had been running an X800XT PE at 545/590 clock on my DDR rig. I swear to God the RDRAM board running a Geforce5900 was smoother in 3DMark2001! Of course the score was several thousand points less (the ATI card scored 234 fps in Nature, with a max of 410 fps), but the X800XT PE actually stuttered at a certain area in Dragothic and was more high strung, with tearing evident. Driver issues, perhaps.

Since I run all my games at 1600x1200x32, 4xFSAA, 16xAniso, where the card is doing all the work, I'll run a killer video card on the RDRAM rig for gaming, together with the latest 24-bit SBLive card. This provides the optimum 3D experience.

Besides, the 3.06B cores are very good now, and I'm able to run 3.63 gig at around 1.55 VCORE on the RDRAM boards (P4T533-C or P4T533-R, which support HT).

XDR should be quite something. It will of course have it's drawbacks, high heat, lots of power need and generally high cost.
It will be damn fast by the looks of it though.