Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Hardware

Is DDR Worth It? 27

Posted by Cliff from the extra-boost-or-waste-of-money dept.
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?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Is DDR Worth It? More

Is DDR Worth It?

Comments Filter:

  • In my mind, this is troll bait. But I just have to bite.

    Doesn't that sort of rule invalidate any comments about MS products from Linux power users?

    Most Linux power users have had a lot of experience working with MS products, and many still have to use them (because of their job or what have you). The opposite is not true. I myself was responsible for introducing a hard-core MCSE (if such a thing exists) to Linux, sometime in late 1999/early 2000; he had never seen a Linux box before.

  • Instead of argueing over semantics why not just look at the spirite of the comment - if you are a Windows person, give Linux a spin, and then complain your ass off just shut the fuck up. *nix has a high learning curve and requires quite a bit of digging by the user to become proficient. Many people don't have the time or the will and enjoy simply lambasting *nix because it makes them feel better about their lack of knowledge.

    Some of your will argue that Linux is now easy to use, etc. etc... Well, whatever. I'm all for making it easier to use but at the moment I think we still have a long way to go.

    (note: if the Windows person is giving constructive criticism that is one thing, simply trolling is another...).

  • Argh, I just reread my comment - I meant to give an example of a seemingly often occurance - a Windows users first experience with *nix. I wasn't aiming at you but talking about things in general. More of a "for example"... (/me notes to reread comments before hitting submit).
  • Memory interleaving gives some interesting results and kinda throws your arguement out the window...
  • Actually, there's some contention about that whole glass melting thing. The majority of classial evidence, old stained glass etc is thicker at the bottom, turns out to be a stylistic thing. Or something along those lines.
  • Yes, but there's also melted glass in the ancient egyptian pyramids. :)
  • I saw this a while ago and thought the same thing - 'cept I was wrong.

    "equivalent" PC100 memory with DDR is called PC1600. I believe PC133 is 2100, and MUCH more expensive.

    I've been quoted $150 for an Asus A7V133 board and about the same (a little higher) for a 128MB PC2100 DIMM. On top of that, the CPUs with the 133FSBs are still around $250 and it's the slowest 133FSB Athlon CPU I have access to (Southern Ontario).

    Tom's [http] has a pretty good set of articles on the whole DDR situation. I've read around 5-10% overall speed increases with DDR memory.

  • Even if it costs a dollar or more per game.

    Mind you, we might not be talking about the same DDR [konami-arcade.com].

    On an off-topic note, games like this are rather easy to write; so why don't we have more of them? I'm sure someone has/will publish schematics + drivers to allow us to use DDR mats. And I'm sure you'll agree with me when I say the Linux community could probably use a better sense of rhythm.

  • As an annendum. 10k SCSI hard disks make a noise that is a cross between an airplane preparing to take off and a dying cat.

    If your PC is near where you work/sleep, buy a 7200rpm or stick with IDE!
  • HardOCP [hardocp.com] predicts good performance with higher speed processors, and initial tests seem to confirm this. You need a fast (~1GHz+) processor to see significant benefit, though.
  • PC1600 is the DDR version of pPC100 ram. It still runs at 100 Mhz, but with DDR signaling.
    IOW, you are comparing apples and oranges.

    According to this search [pricewatch.com] on Pricewatch [pricewatch.com], you can get Micron (Crucial) 256MB PC2100 DIMMs for ~220 + shipping.
    ---
    nuclear presidential echelon assassination encryption virulent strain
  • 5-12% increase in performance for 5-12% increase in price is optimal

    5-12% increase in performance for 50% increase in price is still barely tolerable.

    5-12% increase in performance for 100% or higher increase in price is unacceptable.

    That is what engineers do for a living, compare performance to the cost of achieving that performance and choosing the solution that gives the most performance for the lowest price. The comparisons I made is the essence of good engineering.

    I paid 1200 Deutsch Marks for my system: processor, motherboard, PC 133 ram and DVD drive. To make it DDR capable would have cost me about 850 Deutsch Marks ontop of that 1200 I paid for the PC133 based system assuming I bought the same amount of DDR ram as PC 100 ram (256 megs). That is an increase of 70% in total system price for a 5-12% total increase in performance. I might as well flush them 800 Deutsch Marks down the toilet or do something sensable like buy a monitor or something mildly insane like buying a Geforce 3 card.

    Would you pay 70% more for a house that has is an extra 10% bigger?
  • Right now, an AMD Thunderbird 1200MHz processor can outbeat a Pentium IV processor in almost any race. However, this only beats out the wretched Intel and it's sidekick Rambus. To tell the truth, nothing is any worse than buying something that you don't need at the time. Why buy a 200 dollar mouse for playing games when all you do is play Solitaire? I can hear yourself say "Gotta beat Solitaire in 3 minutes and 20 seconds with that new mouse of mine."

    You just don't need it. The AMD 760 chipset isn't that great, if I mind saying. I would really wait for a chipset by VIA than ALi or AMD. Once AMD's processor take full advantage of DDR, or until Intel decides to trash Rambus and become a good competitor once again, I will wait.

  • At current prices (Score:2)

    by Anonymous Coward
    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!
  • So should that be changed to "Unless Linux is your main server/workstation, or was so previously for a significant length of time, quit ignorantly commenting on Linux!"?

    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).

  • "Unless Linux is your main server/workstation, quit ignorantly commenting on Linux!"

    Doesn't that sort of rule invalidate any comments about MS products from Linux power users?

  • 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.
  • Perhaps I should have been more clear in my wording of that last sentence. Let's try again

    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).

  • 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 [zepa.net]. It includes a discussion of VIA's latest Intel/Athlon DDR chipsets and their SDR support.

    -- Bryan "TheBS" Smith

  • 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.
  • 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 [3dhardware.net].

    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.
  • 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.

  • DDR vs SDR vs FSB Speed (Score:3)

    by AtariDatacenter ( 31657 ) on Monday March 12, 2001 @02:34AM (#371524)
    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?

  • Re:What is DDR? (Score:3)

    by DeeKayWon ( 155842 ) on Sunday March 11, 2001 @08:25AM (#371525)
    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.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Protozoa are small, and bacteria are small, but viruses are smaller than the both put together."

Close