Author: Ernst Walet
Date: 14:44:36 10/02/00
Go up one level in this thread
On October 01, 2000 at 12:12:42, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On September 30, 2000 at 05:58:57, Dan Andersson wrote: > >>As usual I wonder where you get your facts? 100 MHz DDR on a beta board gave >>between 5 and 15 % percent increase. See Aces Hardware for example. > >from the biggest computermagazine in netherlands. >they produced a lot of tables. > >Note that i remember when P60 came out that everyone said it >was slow compared to a 486dx2. I got P60 after some time it was hell >faster as any 486 for me. > >I remember the first reports about the pentiumpro. It would be faster >for 32 bits, but fact was most said: "everything is 16 bits". It would >be dead slow they said. > >It was 3 TIMES faster as a P133, and still is. > >I remember that some people in the rgcc/ccc group said that SDRAM >isn't faster as EDO ram basically. > >I got SDRAM and it speeded my draughtsprogram 2 times up, BECAUSE IT IS >HELL FASTER. > >Now if you can't believe that DDR ram is reported to be slower, >may i point out to the history i've seen? > >First reports are to be taken with a bit of salt! > >I don't *doubt* ddr-sdram will in the end be exactly 2 times faster as >SDRAM. Note that it's not 2-2-2 DDR ram yet, so if you compare that >with 133Mhz 2-2-2 SDRAM i can imagine it's faster seemingly now. > >I don't doubt that RDRAM kicks ass either. If i see in a table that >latency from SDRAM is 15T, and that it potentially runs way faster as >SDRAM, that this is gonna outperform SDRAM with less latency 10T namely for >2-2-2 sdram, but that it just can't beat its speed. > >You just need a good chipset for RDRAM and a new and very fast processor, >only if something is your 'bottleneck' it will help speeding it up. > >Also i don't see how you can ever keep running with such slow RAM. >I have a dual 800 PIII, but my RAM runs at 100Mhz (even though it's 133Mhz >sdram). that's 8 times difference!!!!!! > >Real soon we'll be able to buy 1.xx Ghz processors, still with 133Mhz >SDRAM? It seems to me that you are forgetting about one thing, that RDRAM uses a 16 bit data path. Compared to SDRAM's 64 bit. RDRAM has a higher latency with random memory access as well. Even Intel nowadays admits that SDRAM beats RDRAM. Ernst.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.