• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

Why is RDRAM going down?

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

metra

Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2002
Location
New Jersey
Isnt it faster than DDR (at least until ddr-II comes out or something). And 800mhz is a little cheaper than pc3200+ ... I heard somewhere that dell is going to stop using rdram next year. If its better (at least in some points) , why not keep it?
 

FleshEating Bob

Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2002
Location
I forget.
because:

A. It's too expensive

3. It can only be used with Intel mobos, and Intel sucks

Q. It won't have an advantage over DDR when the Nforce2s w/ Dual Cannel DDR feature come out.
 
OP
M

metra

Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2002
Location
New Jersey
Its not more expensive - theyre about the same. Intel doesnt suck. And we dont know if it will be worse or better. I dont think anyone has a comparison of ddr-II and 1200mhz rdram...
 

FIZZ3

Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2002
Location
NL, Europe
seamadan000 said:
the real reason is that Intel has moved away from supporting RAMBUS, and the reason any tech stays around is the support of major OEMs. As Intel stops supporting RAMBUS, the OEMs do as well.

Not quite... PC1066 has come around and Intel scrambled to approve it after OEM's pushed it regardless of Intel's 'wish' to stick to PC800.

Rambus isn't entirely dead yet either:

http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=stateofpc1066&page=1&bhcp=1
 

lonewolf1983

Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2001
Location
perth, Australia
where i am RDRAM is ridiculously expensive, and i cant get sticks over 256mb.
It needs to be used in pairs also, limiting expansion options.

The main word here with RDRAM is Latency, where DDR really kills it performance wise, and why ram with lower bandwidth can still keep pace.

Like it or not, dual channel DDR is the final nail in the RDRAM coffin....
 

FIZZ3

Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2002
Location
NL, Europe
lonewolf1983 said:
where i am RDRAM is ridiculously expensive, and i cant get sticks over 256mb.
It needs to be used in pairs also, limiting expansion options.

The main word here with RDRAM is Latency, where DDR really kills it performance wise, and why ram with lower bandwidth can still keep pace.

Like it or not, dual channel DDR is the final nail in the RDRAM coffin....

From the article:

" Pro : Latency Issues Fixed with PC-1066
Remember how people complained that memory latency was the issue which would kill RDRAM? Well, you can safely put that to rest, as the latest generation of RDRAM (PC-1066) have superb latency. As RDRAM's latency decreases with clock speed, latency is no longer an issue of concern with PC-1066. Latency of PC-1066 is now on par with today's DDR SDRAM solutions, and no doubt will surpass DDR's low latency with next generation PC-1200 / PC-1333 RDRAM. "

32bits RDRAM does NOT have to be installed in pairs, either.
 
OP
M

metra

Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2002
Location
New Jersey
I hope RDRAM doesnt go down.. it'll give competition to DDR or vice versa. And i still think that you cant talk about dual channel ddr vs RDRAM 1200mhz. Its a little like believing hammer is going to be the messiah for AMD and intel will go straight down when hammer hits the shelves. The newer (relatively) models of rdram ARE more expensive than ddr but the cheaper 800mhz, which is the same price as pc3200 for 512mb, can be overclocked. I'm not sure whether 800mhz oced is better than pc3200 though. If someone can enlighten me on this, i'd be grateful. I'll read that article (THIS IS THE RIGHT SPELLING. I've seen at least 10 posts spelling article like artical and its driving me CRAZY esp because article is a basic word! Ok rant over) Yeah, i'll read that article fizz.
 
Last edited:

Edward2

Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2002
Location
[email protected] in Ball Ground, GA
I think RDRAM got a bad name due to the way Rambus (the company that holds the patent on RDRAM) managed their marketing. As you probably know, Rambus is a lot like Apple was back in the 80's. They would not license any other company to sell their product or use their patent (even with royalties). That way they could totally control the pricing for their product.

I think Rambus really thought they had the corner on the market especially with their connection with Intel, but as they found out, the market does not like being cornered. And people ran away from RDRAM like crazy, even Intel.

Whether or not RDRAM makes it long term is yet to be determined, and is partially dependent on how Rambus decides to market their technology.
 

mbentley

Gloriously Lead, Overclockix Chief Architect
Joined
Sep 26, 2002
Location
Indianapolis, IN
metra said:
Its not more expensive - theyre about the same. Intel doesnt suck. And we dont know if it will be worse or better. I dont think anyone has a comparison of ddr-II and 1200mhz rdram...

intel doesn't suck, but it *is not functional* to use if you want to oc any. i just use it because it has made my system a lot more reliable using all intel components. they can test better than anybody else their processors with their boards... i figure that i will just live with the performance i have from the processor...

*edited*
 
Last edited:

mbentley

Gloriously Lead, Overclockix Chief Architect
Joined
Sep 26, 2002
Location
Indianapolis, IN
CrystalMethod said:
Guys, could you please keep the "Intel sucks" comments in Gripes and Moans? It really doesn't have any place in here.

i am just stating that intel boards do not work to oc. that is because the user can't change anything but memory timings in most.
 

cack01

Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2002
Location
San diego or UC Davis
mbentley said:


i am just stating that intel boards do not work to oc. that is because the user can't change anything but memory timings in most.

Ahhh... So bascally stability sucks. j/k :D


Personally I would like to see RDram make a return to the scene. I have always been on the DDR side of the arguments, but I have no wish to see my purchase options starting to become limited. Plus RDram still kicks but in the benchmarks.
 
OP
M

metra

Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2002
Location
New Jersey
I always thought that intel cpu's oc more than amd cpus... While AMD has the xp1600, intel has 1.6, 1.8, and 2.26 and maybe more... OK back to the topic: Yeah, RDRAM beter not go down. I'm look for quad channel rdram or 1200/1333 mhz. =]