RDRAM

[KAknight]

What is everyone's impression of RDRAM? I haven't heard anything good about it.

[Szech]

You probably haven't heard anything good about it (except for Intel or the company that produces it, of course), because there is nothing good about it. In computer applications at least. It is expensive to produce, it gets really hot, it is subject to interference (and errors, accordingly), and the company that produces it gets a pretty good chunk of money off each unit sold (which results in a higher price). The real kicker is that despite its supposed faster speed, it does not perform much better than its competitors.

[This message has been edited by Szech (edited 08-08-2000).]

[Warthog]

Performance level, is around PC133 but five times the price. It will use it's full potential when Intel's Willamette (sp?) comes out. Right now, it is not. I read this - I know. Part of the reason that it is so much more expensive, is because not many people buy it, thus making it "specialty" memory because there isn't much of it.

Some of you may not like it simply because Intel supports it and instead absolutely love AMD supported DDR memory even though no one knows enough knowledge about it yet. I say, go for whatever product is better.

Rambus is before it's time. It's too expensive at the moment to justify it's quite small speed increase. I would get it (maybe), if the speed increase was equivelent with the price increase: 5 times as much. THAT would be worth it, IMO.

Warthog

[jjsole]

I think it was arrogant of Intel to support it and pump it so much already. Its way to early to justify its price and performance, and has cost alot of ignorant people much money who expected to get the latest and greatest technology (latest maybe, but its far from great so far, and is disgustingly expensive).

I almost fell for it when putting together a computer for work, until I read the horrible reviews about it.

Caveat emptor.

[Dputiger]

Here's something good about RDRAM, (sorta).

It has potential. In fact, it has a lot of potential. If the tech bugs can be worked out, it probably IS the wave of the future.

But Intel and Rambus have botched it so badly that I doubt it'll happen any time soon.

[Warthog]

Exactly, Dputiger.

I don't think it will disappear. That is why I said that Rambus is before it's time. Just like you said, they have to work the bugs out of it.

Warthog

[sherlock]

Rambus Dynamic Random Access Memory (RDRAM) is a memory subsystem that promises to transfer up to 1.6 billion bytes per second. The subsystem consists of the random access memory, the RAM controller, and the bus (path) connecting RAM to the microprocessor and devices in the computer that use it. Direct Rambus (DRDRAM), a technology developed and licensed by the Rambus Corporation, will be used with Error, invalid term microprocessors beginning in 1999. High-speed RAM is expected to accelerate the growth of visually intensive interfaces such as 3-D, interactive games, and streaming multimedia. Rambus is intended to replace the current main memory technology of dynamic random access memory (dynamic random access memory). Much faster data transfer rates from attached devices such as videocams using FireWire and the Accelerated Graphics Port (Accelerated Graphics Port) make it important to reduce the bottleneck in getting data into the computer, staging it in RAM, and moving it throught the microprocessor and to the display or other output devices

[Nomadd]

Hey Szech..,

Come, come now! Your a senior member. People are intitled to their opinions, even if you don't see the logic behind them.

Lets maintain some courteousness with this public forum and not resort to sarcastic remarks that are weak and not constructive.
If you are not able to post anything positive, spare us your knowledge (or lack thereof).

[Dputiger]

Don't forget your history, Szech:

Go back to 1997 when EVERYONE was thrilled about RDRAM and its promise. RDRAM has been badly marketed and badly implemented, and rushed to production before it was truly ready--but the idea behind the technology is still more advanced than SDRAM.

I hate the way Intel & Rambus have marketed the technology, but I try to separate the technology from the company in cases like this.

[Warthog]

...but I try to separate the technology from the company in cases like this.[/quote

Just what I think too:

[quote]Some of you may not like it simply because Intel supports it and instead absolutely love AMD supported DDR memory even though no one knows enough knowledge about it yet.

I think it does have "potential" - they need to work out the problems and make it better (obviously) exactly what I said before...

Many opposers of Rambus technology are against it only because Intel supports it, which is stupid. I feel like I'm repeating myself. Of course it's not any good right now, but may be in the future.

Warthog

[Szech]

Sorry if you took it in a bad way, I meant to make fun of RAMBUS, not you Dputiger http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/smile.gif. All good?

[Dputiger]

Of course! We're all one big happy family here. http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/smile.gif

[Szech]

(poof)!

[This message has been edited by Szech (edited 08-09-2000).]