RDRAM -vs- SD and DDR

[zbtmage]

RDRAM -vs- SD and DDR
RDRAM is still really expensive compared to SD and DDR (and I believe DDR is newer than RD?) Is there any advantage to having RDRAM -vs- the other types? Is the higher price justified in any way?

 

[cdogg]

No, not anymore. Motherboards that support Dual-DDR SDRAM are capable of running at speeds of 800MHz (theoretical anyway), compared to PC1066 RDRAM which runs on a bus speed of 533MHz. The motherboard you choose is the deciding factor. Today, only SiS chipsets are offering newer RDRAM platforms to support PC1200 and PC1600 RDRAM. So far, tests haven't shown any real advantage by either.

It's important to note that Intel dropped all future support of RDRAM in favor of DDR and the upcoming DDR-II.


~cdogg
[tab]"All paid jobs absorb and degrade the mind";
[tab][tab]- Aristotle
[tab][navy]For general rules and guidelines to get better answers, click here:[/navy] faq219-2884

 

[zbtmage]

Two years ago when I built my computer I could have sworn that the whole RD idea was going to be the best for a while. I should have known better. Thanks for your help!

 

[cdogg]

Yeah, I actually had the same view there for a while. Especially when DDR first came out, there was still a huge gap that it had to make up before catching up to RDRAM. Unfortunately for Rambus, low prices for DDR stimulated growth and development for newer platforms. It eventually led to Dual-DDR, and once Intel saw prospect in DDR-II technology, they dropped Rambus altogether. Hard.




~cdogg
[tab]"All paid jobs absorb and degrade the mind";
[tab][tab]- Aristotle
[tab][navy]For general rules and guidelines to get better answers, click here:[/navy] faq219-2884