DDR Fumbles, RDRAM Scores
who cares if ddr memory is now more expensive? who cares if the mobo is more expensive for asus' top p4 dog+ddr than the p4 +rambus 817ch? Actually as my research shows, this is completely false. Where the hell'd he get his info? I checked today's prices on pricewatch, finding the lowest price for that product. The p4t-e lists for $146. This board does not have audio. The p4b266-C retails for $112. This board does not have audio. The Asus P4TE-SWA retails for $165. That one has audio and usb 2.0. The Asus P4B266 retails for $147 and has onboard audio and usb2.0.
Okay, so why is the d00d(not) comparing the p4 rdram solution without audio and ammenities with a p4 solution with audio and usb2.0 built in? Why doesn't he compare them as equals? That puts his little arguement in a different light ($165 vs $146). Boner. Well, he was way off on that one.
AMD's solutions are much more attractive to the enthusiast and average consumer, which makes up most of the market. Sure, power users and professionals have their niche, but hey, my corporation here still has hundreds of PII's in use.
I find it quite CONVENIENT that the author of this article blatantly fails to mention that the p4 PROCESSOR is still ENORMOUSLY more expensive than a similarly rated Athlon XP. Thus, the whole system, similarly equipped in other regards will be much more expensive for the Intel platform. A quick check on pricewatch tells me:
$296.....Athlon XP 2000
$209.....Athlon XP 1900
$149.....Athlon XP 1800
$117.....Athlon XP 1700
$110.....Athlon XP 1600
$104.....Athlon XP 1500
$559.....Pentium 4 2.2GHz Sock 478
$355.....Pentium 4 2.0GHz Sock 478
$403.....Pentium 4 2.0GHz
$253.....Pentium 4 1.9GHz Sock 478
$239.....Pentium 4 1.9GHz
$200.....Pentium 4 1.8GHz Sock 478
$195.....Pentium 4 1.8GHz
$177.....Pentium 4 1.7GHz Sock 478
$174.....Pentium 4 1.7GHz
$158.....Pentium 4 1.6GHz Sock 478
$152.....Pentium 4 1.6GHz
$140.....Pentium 4 1.5GHz Sock 478
$137.....Pentium 4 1.5GHz
$137.....Pentium 4 1.4GHz Sock 478
$130.....Pentium 4 1.4GHz
Hmmmm...P4@ 2 GHzs478 costs $59 bucks more than an AthlonXP2000. It's always a nice side benefit when your cpu company sticks with 1 socket form factor for so long. Otherwise, the poor sobs who bought the 423 would have to pay $107 more for a similar rated speed. I didn't include the newest p42.2 since there isn't an equivalent AMD solution as of today. Comparing the newest intel to the newest amd is too uneven (in favor of amd for price comparison).
I'll subdivide this into chisets:
MSI K7T266A Pro2..$105
Soyo K7V Dragon+..$154
MSI K7 MASTER MS-6341....$83
ECS P4ITA socket 423.....$101
Asus P4T socket 423......$145
Asus P4T-E socket 478....$147
Intel D850GBC socket 423..$122
Intel D850MV socket 478..$147
MSI MS-850 Pro5..........$127
Epox EP-4T2A socket-423..$133
Abit TH7-RAID socket 423.$145
Abit TH7II socket 478....$147
Gigabyte 8ITX3 socket 423.$119
Gigabyte 8ITX-E Socket478.$136
I'll leave out the non-rimm P4 platforms, since the author wanted to show the viability of rambus paired up with the p4, not ddrram. I wish to show the much more attractive solution of AMD+ddr.
cpu.............mobo...2 256M mem.modules......$..
AMD AthXP2000+ A7V266-E 512(2100)(2*$57) =$557
Pentuim4 2Ghz TH7II 512pc800(2*$72) =$646
Hmmm...mobos cost the same...cpu's different...memory different.
I know, I could put higher grade ddr ram in place, but these chipsets were designed for a 266 fsb. Still want to see the price comparison? Okay.
For my ddr platform, the total with pc2400 comes to (2*68) $579. With pc2700 it comes to (2*71) $585. So, my ddr platform will kick ***, and still cost less. $61-$89 less. That $ will make the difference between a Geforce2mx400 and a Geforce3ti200. Or a classic Geforce3 and a Geforce3 ti500. Or a 20Gig and an 80Gig hard drive. Or adding a 24x10x40 burner. Or owning RETURN TO CASTLE WOLFENSTEIN. Shoot, I can think of a lot more things to do with $61-$89. And paying more for an equivalent(possibly under-) performing system isn't one of them. Oh yeah, give me the exact same amount of money, and I'll build you a more 1337 system. Oh yeah. Bring it on, baby!
Beeble Quix.....edited for peace...
Last edited by Beeblequix; 01-18-2002 at 01:03 PM.
"all animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others".
Geeze Beeblequix, your gunna flood the server if you keep posting like that :P
Why is Giga-byte always left out of the mobo section?
Personally I agree.When I bought my rambus 2-months ago I got syncmax 64mb at $20.It was $35- for 128mb per.This was less than the cost of the same in ddr and is getting cheaper.As rambus is loosing their royalty rites lawsuites left and rite in the U.S. and other nations it is allowing more vendors to produce this solution at a lower cost.The rambus market is busting through and Intel was right on top of where the legal aspects have been going with the co.The new rambus will rock too as other developers can now dabble with the teck and drop the latency time issue too.I know Intel is ready soon to release the P4 with 133mhz fsb x 4 effective 532 but they are rateing it as 533(go figure).My expensinve Asus P4T-E as it has been called is capable of this bus speed stable and with a simple inexpensive ram change I can flip her right over with lots lest in cost for upgrade.By the way all you Intel slammers out their have you seen the new P4 2.2 northwood against the XP2000+ in most tests the P4 is right their.Seems intel is putting things in perspective.Can't wait for the 3.5gig/533/P4T-E combo.That is going to be my next purchase,well after it has been out for 6 months for the CPU price to drop and it will prob. be another 12m's before it is engineered,thats like a year and a half-but I do have a link to a nitro cooled P4 2.2 nothwood hitting 3.6 gig if anyone wants to see it.Holy sh----------- is all I have to say.This just proves that the longer pipeline everyone was jokeing about is really a awsome concept in theory and real life practice.I see some eyebrows raiseing in the Intel performance situation real soon.Although AMD still unargueable has the price/perf. ratio at a ultime best.Gotta luv-em both.
Women gave us headaches,God gave us silicone(cpu's I mean)
".My expensinve Asus P4T-E as it has been called is capable..."
Hope you're not referring to my argument, since I never said that at all. I referred to the author comparing 2 P4 mobos which were completely different from each other. He tried to say that the ddr mobo was more expensive, but never said that he took the less expensive p4-te without onboard audio and usb2.0 with a ddr p4 solution WITH onboard audio and usb2.0. Point being, his argument was falicious, comparing two incomparable things. I further went on to compare the a7v266-e with the p4t-e, practically of equal price.
I personally own an Intel processor, which I love. I have no hatred toward Intel or AMD. Competition is the basis for capitalism, and is good for the consumer.
I do however have a problem dealing with Rambus Inc--a company that decides it owns the rights to ddr memory, an open standard developed at JDEC. Also, it's a company which a recent US judge stated that they were FRAUDULENT in their suit against another developer. They also originally claimed superiority over 'standard sdram' back in 1999, but never stated in their demonstrations that they were using pc66 at cas latency of 3! The handicapped their competition extensively in their haughty comparisons. PC133 sdram was on the market at the time, but didn't want to have real competition. Can I support their 'questionable'(oh,there are much better adjectives) ethics? Call it selfrighteousness, call it stubbornness. That's where I sit. This is all a long rant I don't wish to make here, but if you're interested, post back.
"By the way all you Intel slammers out their have you seen the new P4 2.2 northwood against the XP2000+ in most tests the P4 is right their."
The best reason for not comparing a 2.2GhzP4 with a pr2000+ is that the 2000+ is more on line with the P42Ghz. When the newer AthlonXP's come out which have a similar PR to the 2.2Ghz, then would be a better time to compare them.
I'm curious to know how future RDRAM will compare with DDRII(or mRAM). I might actually have gotten into the rdram thing if they didn't have exorbent original price tags, and they had not used such anti-business business practices. P4 architecture is still funny to me. I read a fantastic analysis the other day on it. If anyone wants to read it, post back.
2cents+grain of salt.
"all animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others".
You should keep in mind that the XP2000+ is also running 533MHz slower than your latest and greatest Northwood. To be beating the P4 in any tests would prove the AMD the victor in my opinion. And with the XP 2000+ at $296 and the P4 2.2 at $559, I would say that AMD wins price and performance.
By the way all you Intel slammers out their have you seen the new P4 2.2 northwood against the XP2000+ in most tests the P4 is right their
Just my opinion.
By the way, that's SILICON (doped for that amazing crystal-lattice structure)
This "speed" discussion is a little like what I heard in high school. Everyone was bragging about how fast his car was. The "elite" was a 627 horsepower Corvette Stingray, or maybe that's Sting Ray. The simple truth is that the actual difference in everyday performance is relatively insignificant since the Microsoft programming "speed limits" and the hard drive accessibility control the actual performance of the computer and is much like putting that 627 hp engine into a model "T." In spite of maxxing out on allowed memory for my system, I still find that hard drive activity is still way too slow to complement the 1.2 T-Bird in my computer.
Sorry about that!
Hey Beeblequix,I didnt try to argue with you ,I was just throwing in my thoughts on the subject.I see what you mean in the board comparison thing now,sorry about that-I misunderstood you.As far as the P4 being right up their in the new Northwood 2.2 tests,that wasnt directed at anyone either,I was just saying that the arguement of highest mhz AMD(though lower than P4) still beating the highest P4 out their is over.Thats all.I know this means that P4 has to run higher mhz but still its a leap from 2 months ago. It was new AMD Xp2000+ against new P4 Northwood 2.2 so I thought it was a relitively good comparison in this way,being they were both the newest,not at equal speeds.Not trying for a flame-up just saying Intel is doing better lately and deserves the credit for the effort.Yes AMD is still the most cost effective/performance solution their is,but then we all already new that.I agree about needing two great co.'s like AMD and Intel,cause without them both the prices would be out the roof and the competition is what is driveing the mhz up into the stellar zone.I'm sure that if we had only one,or the other,with no one to compete,that we wouldnt even be here talking about 2gig or higher.We would all be on $800 200mhz systems just bought yesterday.Can we say monopoly?Same with ram,I totally agree about rambus-they themselves as a company suck.I too think they are arses for what they are trying to do.But what I was saying is that if they keep loseing these law suits,we wont have to worry about their **** anymore with the whole royalty fee thing.As far as ddr is concerned I think your right their too.I just think rambus tech. could do better in some other co.'s hands in a enviroment like AMD and Intel where competition drives performance up and price down.The price of rambus is way down and that is a fact,even lower than ddr in most situations.That was my main point!BUt there is still more room for the performance part though. PEACE
Don't forget that if you want any kind of performance with RDRAM you will need to consider the dual memory BUS platforms.
In which case you need a minimum of two similar grade RDRAM modules everytime you do a memory upgrade. That does add to the cost.
My system vs. a friends
I am running a XP 1700+ w/ an ECS K7S5A mobo and 512MB RAM. Infineon if anyone is wondering. Just for the heck of it one day we decided to swap my Radeon between the computers and run normal benchmark results and 3D gaming results. He just got his P4 1.9 and thought it was faster because he paid more for it. Sorry to say that my computer came ahead in all but a couple categories for the benchmark tests. I think that AMD is the future, especially when the Hammer is available. If anyone is wondering exactly what system he was running, I will ask him and post it later.
Posty,if you go high quality like Asus-Dual Memory is about the only option due to it performing better this way(I think it is to help reduce the latency of rdram).But you are wrong about the cost and I will tell you why in 2 reasons.A-The Good mobo co.'s that are useing dual memory bus are also aware of this cost effective prob. so they came up with ram continuity modules(rcm)that you place after the first dimm in each bank as to complete the ciruit-since each bus has the ram modules connected in series.This means you only have to purchase to 2 same rdram of whatever MB you want.B-You shouldnt really mix brand/different mb of ram anyhow if you want a stable and best performing solution.I know of a lot of mobo's that will decrease speed or bug up after mixing certain brands of ram.I have personally found the most stable and easy way to go when buying ram is to decide on a good co. that will be easy to find more of same ram for upgrade later.So if you want say 1gig rdram but can only scratch up enough for 512mb you just buy 2 at 256 and use two dummy dimms.this scale works good at any level if you just consider where the ram needs are going lately on pc's it is easy to figure what you will need for 2 years or so. Sowhats the Prob. with buying two similar simms when you have four to use instead of 3?
I still think its cheaper if you just plan ahead.Who would be dumb enough to buy ram that often as for it to really matter?I dont have the dough to change my mind that often. PEACE
It is refreshing to see a post that is open minded and unbiased.The answer to your question is ram is on a price bounce so to speak.They went cheap for a while but are now going right back up(though not as high as original prices).Its due to stock and sh-t more than anything and once again the consumer is getting kicked in the bum.Rddram is low I think due to the bad rep it got from its previous release and now people are straying from it(well that and the royalty thing).So this will in part add to a price drop so that it will intice people to buy it.Funny thing-the market.When a product is in demand the price goes up.When it is'nt being sold well,it drops big time.For a while there werent many pc sales and upgraders as well as retail manufac.'s werent buying much of anything.That makes the market value of the product drop.Sucks but the stuff everybody wants will always drive price up.I say yes,drool drool to the dual ddr by the way. Cant wait to see the performance benches on those systems.Does anyone know if Asus will be one of the first 3rd party vendors to have this like the P4 and rambus.I hope,I might have to get one and run it with a northwood2.2I never use Intel Brand boards as they are to limited in bios settings. PEACE!
Try to read the article next time!
Hey, if you actually read the article you will see that the autor is not comparing mobo's or CPU's. He is simply pointing out that while DDR is on a price increase, RDRAM is droping in price.
Of couse DDR motherboards are cheaper, the market has geared itself to this, mainly due to DDR being the cheaper memory. And since the market over the last 2 years has become more competitve due to the decrease in sales and bargin shopping due to a softening economy. Mobo manufactures have released cheaper mobo's that use DDR since everything is cheaper this way. Now if RDRAM becomes a cheaper alternative, you will see a market swing again. This is the point the autor is making.
While I appreciate the www.Pricewatch.com copy and paste, you left out one important price comparison that goes to support what the autor was tring to state.
PC2700 @256 = $71 US
RDRAM 800 @256 =$70 US
Why all the bias against RDRAM? It's very good memory, 2 banks gives you 3200 MB/sec worth of bandwidth. While PC2700 use 8 banks to achieve 2664 MB/sec worth of bandwidth at 166 MHz DDR. The problems with RDRAM is that it was ahead of it's time, it's bottlenecked by the 266 MHz FSB on CPUs and it's too expensive to take advantage of it's superior performance.