Slashdot Mirror
Is DDR Worth It?
Wing asks: "I'm about to build a new box and I was looking at all the different things I could do to make it faster, better, etc. What I was wondering was, is it worth the extra money to invest in a DDR capable motherboard and RAM? Is there that big of a speed difference or should I stick with the same old SDRAM?"
The DDR memory itself is still quite expensive. Don't even consider getting anything less than a 1.2 GHz Athlon for a DDR system. Right now it is cheaper and better to get a fast processor and more memory than DDR memory.
Also, the DDR capable board itself is not a good investment now. If you plan to migrate to DDR later, better to buy the motherboard when it is reasonably priced. The hardware & BIOS will be more mature as well.
What is a good buy right now are the boards rated for 133 MHz FSB. 133 MHz FSB Athlons (not Palomino core tho) are available already for a very good price, but are in somewhat short supply for the next few weeks.
I'm told you can reduce the multiplier setting to run an older Athlon fairly safely at that speed (e.g., 10 * 100 is about 6.5 * 133). Of course that counts as overclocking and will void your warranty.
When all is said and done, it's a great time to buy a computer. Enjoy!
A SDRAM PC133 256MB CL2 DIMM from Crucial.Com is US $94.94
A DDR PC1600 256MB from Crucial.Com is $94.94.
They are the same price! I know Crucial RAM is a little more then generic, but it is great quality RAM with a life time warranty!
Now that I think of it, if one's main server/workstation is/was Linux, is it then acceptable for one to comment ignorantly on it (Linux)?
I don't consider anyone who's worked with MSware disqualified from commenting on it, but it does tend to provoke comments that shouldn't be uttered in polite society (and cause the realization that one knows more of those impolite phrases than one previously realized).
I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
Doesn't that sort of rule invalidate any comments about MS products from Linux power users?
I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
The way I heard it glass doesn't melt because it's not a solid in the first place, just an *extremely* viscous liquid. Mind you, this is not the area of expertise of either myself or the E.E. that I heard it from.
I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
I don't consider anyone who's worked with MSware disqualified from commenting on MSware, but MSware does tend to provoke comments that shouldn't be uttered in polite society (and cause the realization that one knows more of those impolite phrases than one previously realized).
I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
Just want to point out the fact that many new DDR boards have both the 184-pin DDR SDRAM slots and older 168-pin SDR (i.e. "normal") SDRAM slots. Of course you have to choose one or the other when you buy/install, but it's still nice to have the option (and upgrade path).
In addition to dual-SDR/DDR support, you'll get a better and wider range of supported SDR types. Why? VIA makes most of the chipsets on these boards and even the older SDR memory interface and memory compatibility matrix has been improved with the newer chipset.
If you're interested in all the details, I cover the broad spectrum of different chipsets and their memory support/issues here. It includes a discussion of VIA's latest Intel/Athlon DDR chipsets and their SDR support.
-- Bryan "TheBS" Smith
-- Bryan "TheBS" Smith
Independent Author, Consultant and Trainer
No offense, but your analysis seems a bit flawed. You are increasing the speed of the SYSTEM by 5-12%, but you compare this to the price increase of COMPONENTS. Sure, these components make up a substantial portion of the price of the system, and your final tally will still probably show a 5-12% increase in system performance vs. a %50 (number out the ass) increase in system price. But the comparison isn't quite on the mark.
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
First, I wanted to provide a URL that provides an example of the speed differences between CAS speeds. This is one of several URLs I came across. 3dhardware.net review of cas2 vs cas3 at various bus speeds.
Second, in their article, they made a very good point. For almost all tasks, you're going to be better off INCREASING the amount of SDRAM you have in your system, versus upgrading to DDRAM. Why? Because with the extra RAM, you're going to be caching more and you're going to be churning your hard drive a whole lot less. And if you think SDRAM is slow, in comparitive terms, getting data off of the hard drive is like watching glass melt at room temperature. (Note: It does happen. Just VERY VERY slowly.)
So, if you are UPGRADING a system, you're going to be better off with more memory rather than going DDRAM. Way more bang for the buck, unless you've got a major specific thing you work with that you know that DDRAM is somehow going to give a big advantage (rare).
I was also reading a bit about the future of memory. It seems that there are things coming down the pipe, that by the time you want to upgrade your NEW system, you probably won't be using your current SDRAM or DDRAM modules. So it almost makes sense to keep with your current memory modules and get more life out of them. Or at least to spend your money on MORE memory, rather than FASTER memory. (Which MORE memory will equal FASTER performance, even if you don't have the fastest memory around.)
Hope this helps!
What is DDR?
It's the German initials for what used to be East Germany.
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
I was considering DDR RAM for my new system for a while, but I decided against it. Many places I have seen (anandtech.com, tomshardware, and others that I can't recall at the time) say that if you use PC2100 DDR RAM, you can expect a 10% to 15% increase in speed over using PC133 SDRAM. If you have money to burn, it is worth it, but don't bother with the PC1600 DDR RAM. Most placed I've seen reviewing it say there is very little difference between that and PC133 SDRAM.
If you are not sure, then get a motherboard that supports both SDRAM and DDR RAM. That way, you can get SDRAM real cheap now (256 MB of PC 133 RAM picked up last weekend for $85 - no shipping). When prices go down later in the year (as they are expected to), then you can have a painless upgrade.
I just bougt a new AMD based system and was confronted with the same choice. Being an Engineer I allways solve these problems by calculating Cost vs. Effectiveness or Bang for Buck if you prefer.
Basically you get a performance increase of what? 5-12%? Or there abouts.
From what I have seen these new DDR's and the motherboards that can take them cost alot more than 5-12% more than the old stuff more like 250-350% more for a 5-12% performance increase.
I concluded that buying DDR's was pitifully little bang for obscenely many bucks. I decided to buy a PC133 SDRAM based system and use the money I would have blown on DDR's to pay for a proper 19" flatscreen monitor. After two weeks of using it I am pleased to report that I get more of a kick out of the monitor than buying 5-12% extra performance for a kings ransom would have given me.
Only to idiots, are orders laws.
-- Henning von Tresckow
I've been heavily researching this issue, lately, going from hardware site to hardware site. A summary of what I have found is as follows:
A 133mhz front side bus is significantly better than a 100mhz front side bus.
There is almost no performance difference between CAS 2.5 and CAS 2 memory.
On the Athlon, the choice between DDR and SDR RAM makes little difference in terms of performance, except in unusual circumstances.
In order to better answer the question, we have to know what you're doing with the machine.
For example, will you be playing one of the first person shooters where the graphics card is traditionally the bottleneck? If so, your answer is obvious -- don't DDR. But if you're playing some of the others where memory transfer rates are important, and performance in that game is important to you, the DDR is a good bet.
For a "general task" computer running Windows, SDR is fine. BTW, none of the benchmarks I've seen consider how a Linux OS would respond. Interesting, no?
Double Data Rate SDRAM. Instead of transferring data on only the positive edge of the clock cycle, DDR transfers data on both edges, doubling the theoretical data transfer rate. There also isn't much extra that has to be done to make DDR; only a little extra support circuitry is required, and for that the bandwidth doubles. It's been used in nVidia's GeForce series since the GeForce1, and it helps a lot when high resolution and high colour depth are being used.