Go Back   nV News Forums > Hardware Forums > CPUs, Motherboards And Memory

Newegg Daily Deals

View Poll Results: Which is better: AMD or Intel?
AMD 25 41.67%
Intel 13 21.67%
How many times is someone gonna post these stupid polls!? 22 36.67%
Voters: 60. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-29-02, 04:04 AM   #49
SavagePaladin
info*****
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,395
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by d1rX
Hammer time baby!
woot! woot!
SavagePaladin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-02, 05:09 AM   #50
StealthHawk
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by mavis


Yeah "set to be released" is really the key part of your post there, isn't it?

I'd love to know when exactly it will be released ... Anyway, my point was that RIGHT NOW, as in this month, this summer, right this second, with the choices CURRENTLY ON THE MARKET, RDRAM is the best performer. You seem to forget that SiS is releasing a new RDRAM chipset, and that Rambus is going to be releasing a new 1333MHz module, with greater than 10Gb/s bandwidth.

If the fastest DDR is at PC3200 right now (3.2Gb/s) I expect DDR2/Dual channel DDR will theoretically double that, right? If so, it's only about 4Gb/s slower than next generation RAMBUS ...

As for price, I have already illustrated that the difference is negligable... Yes, RDRAM used to cost substantially more than DDR RAM, but that is no longer the case. So the argument you posted should read: Slightly above average prices, Big Latency, Big Bandwidth= Decent sales. Or am I missing something here?

mavis
"some time early next year" is when dual channel ddr support from Intel will be introduced last i heard.

you seem to be forgetting one thing about RDRAM and Pentium 4, mavis. each speed of RDRAM is in sync with the P4 FSB, providing exactly as much bandwidth as the FSB can handle. PC800 provides what the 100MHz FSB maxes out with, and PC1066 provides all that 133MHz can cope with. unless Intel is increasing the FSB to quad pumped 166MHz or something, the new RDRAM won't help at all. i haven't seen any roadmaps or info on when Intel will be doing this. it is obvious that dual channel PC800 RDRAM cannot even compete with DDR333 single channel(the new Intel and SiS mobos), let alone DDR400(the SiS mobo). PC1066 still has them beat by a little though. dual channel DDR will change this, as it will double the bandwidth.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-02, 05:17 AM   #51
vampireuk
**** Holster
 
vampireuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The armoury
Posts: 2,813
Send a message via AIM to vampireuk
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by SavagePaladin

woot! woot!
I second that with my own series of connected w00ts

w00t w00t!
vampireuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-02, 05:24 AM   #52
Kruno
TypeDef's assistant
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,641
Send a message via ICQ to Kruno Send a message via AIM to Kruno
Default

Intel = W00t 1337 cpu
Intel 2.8ghz@3.4ghz is faster than an AMD XP 2100
__________________
"Never before has any voice dared to utter the words of that tongue in Imladris, Mr. Anderson" - Elrond LOTR
Kruno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-02, 05:28 AM   #53
StealthHawk
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

P4 2.8GHz isn't out yet

my 3GHz Hammer is faster than your 6GHz P5!
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-02, 05:53 AM   #54
mavis
Radeon X800 Pro
 
mavis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Posts: 44
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by StealthHawk


"some time early next year" is when dual channel ddr support from Intel will be introduced last i heard.

you seem to be forgetting one thing about RDRAM and Pentium 4, mavis. each speed of RDRAM is in sync with the P4 FSB, providing exactly as much bandwidth as the FSB can handle. PC800 provides what the 100MHz FSB maxes out with, and PC1066 provides all that 133MHz can cope with. unless Intel is increasing the FSB to quad pumped 166MHz or something, the new RDRAM won't help at all. i haven't seen any roadmaps or info on when Intel will be doing this. it is obvious that dual channel PC800 RDRAM cannot even compete with DDR333 single channel(the new Intel and SiS mobos), let alone DDR400(the SiS mobo). PC1066 still has them beat by a little though. dual channel DDR will change this, as it will double the bandwidth.
hmm... I have a question.

If RAMBUS delivers "exactly as much bandwidth as the FSB can handle," how will having dual channel (higher bandwidth DDR2) help in any way? The FSB will be the limiting factor still - until, of course, Intel ups their FSB, which is why RAMBUS is planning PC1333 modules with 10Gb/s bandwidth ...

Second, I should hope the new DDR333 and DDR400 SDRAM can beat the three year old PC800 RAMBUS!! lol



mavis
__________________
my rig
mavis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-02, 08:33 AM   #55
SavagePaladin
info*****
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,395
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by mavis


hmm... I have a question.

If RAMBUS delivers "exactly as much bandwidth as the FSB can handle," how will having dual channel (higher bandwidth DDR2) help in any way? The FSB will be the limiting factor still - until, of course, Intel ups their FSB, which is why RAMBUS is planning PC1333 modules with 10Gb/s bandwidth ...

Second, I should hope the new DDR333 and DDR400 SDRAM can beat the three year old PC800 RAMBUS!! lol



mavis
As I've been saying, RDRAM has higher latency than DDR on random access.
This is why it performed horribly compared to SDRAM on a pentium 3 system, where the extra bandwidth doesn't even come into play.
Now you're seeing where it obviously does come into play, and the single channel DDR can't keep up. Dual can, however, not with bandwidth, but with the reduced latency.

Sorry if any of this is patently obvious, but...
SavagePaladin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-02, 05:20 PM   #56
Gator
Unreal Tournament Gamer
 
Gator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: New York
Posts: 2,279
Default

AMD is simply more for your money, nough said

although I must say, that 1.6a P4 sure does overclock like a motha!
__________________
Athlon64 3200 Clawhammer / Asus K8N-E Deluxe / 1GB Crucial DDR400 / Geforce 6600GT 128MB AGP / Windows XP Pro
Gator is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 07-29-02, 06:20 PM   #57
PCarr78
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 505
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Gator
AMD is simply more for your money, nough said

although I must say, that 1.6a P4 sure does overclock like a motha!
Yes and yes.

But it's amd for me, next box.

Ive used intel all my life, it will be hard to switch.
PCarr78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-02, 08:02 PM   #58
LORD-eX-Bu
Horus the pointy master
 
LORD-eX-Bu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 4,609
Talking

Intel said a while back that the Pentium 4 will reach 11 ghz in its lifetime. Lets see if AMD can last long enough to compete with it.
__________________
http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/image.php?type=sigpic&userid=171&dateline=12152329  84
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ!
LORD-eX-Bu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-02, 08:10 PM   #59
PCarr78
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 505
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by |TX|-LORD-EX-BU
Intel said a while back that the Pentium 4 will reach 11 ghz in its lifetime. Lets see if AMD can last long enough to compete with it.
You never DID send me those benchmarks from your system?

Check ur PM
PCarr78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-02, 09:31 PM   #60
StealthHawk
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by mavis


hmm... I have a question.

If RAMBUS delivers "exactly as much bandwidth as the FSB can handle," how will having dual channel (higher bandwidth DDR2) help in any way? The FSB will be the limiting factor still - until, of course, Intel ups their FSB, which is why RAMBUS is planning PC1333 modules with 10Gb/s bandwidth ...

Second, I should hope the new DDR333 and DDR400 SDRAM can beat the three year old PC800 RAMBUS!! lol



mavis
well, single channel DDR is not getting the job done so to speak. DDR400 only provides as much bandwidth as dual channel PC800 RDRAM. obviously the 133FSB P4's can handle more bandwith than that.

second, they would come out for the same reason that DDR333 and DDR400 chipsets for AMD come out. marketing reasons purely. DDR333 offers little to no benefit, since DDR266 already saturates Athlon's FSB. DDR333 offers very minuscule benefits, although i'm not sure whether this is totally attributed to improved memory controllers in the new motherboards, or whether DDR266 only really provides say 99% of the bandwidth that the FSB can handle(due to the nature that a 10Mb/sec network won't ever transfer at 10Mb/sec).
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Maintain Your Privacy by Manually Accepting and Rejecting "Cookies" (nV News) MikeC Open Forum 2 02-02-13 08:15 PM
Why even Intel fans want a stronger showing from AMD News Archived News Items 0 10-03-12 03:40 PM
DOE Doles Out Cash to AMD, Whamcloud for Exascale Research News Archived News Items 0 07-12-12 08:50 PM
AMD Gooses the Clocks on 'Bulldozer' Opterons News Archived News Items 0 06-04-12 03:24 PM
AMD vs Intel druga runda CPUs, Motherboards And Memory 7 08-20-02 02:09 PM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:00 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1998 - 2014, nV News.