DDR or SDram

[almo]

I have two computers that are basicly the same except one uses the newer ddr memory, yet it has ne processor. My question is this; is 256mbs of DDR better than 512mbs of pc133 SDram???

If so I intend to switch over the processor but if not I will just stay put.

Thanks!

[Lionheart]

I have two computers that are basicly the same except one uses the newer ddr memory, yet it has ne processor. My question is this; is 256mbs of DDR better than 512mbs of pc133 SDram???

If so I intend to switch over the processor but if not I will just stay put.

Thanks!

That's a little hard to answer. It's like comparing apples and oranges. Systems using DDR ram are generally faster systems to begin with than older boards running on PC133 SDRAM, so a system with 256 MB of DDR probably will outperform an older computer with PC 133 ram. It might help the analysis to know what processors and speeds are involved. DDR increases bandwith of memory by utilizing both sides of the clock cycle (hence DDR=double data rate) so all other things being equal, a DDR system should be faster. As I recall, the Pentium 3 and older systems ran on SDRAM, while the newer P4 systems and AMD processors have been running on DDR memory. Add to that the new DDR2 format and it starts getting confusing out there. This post probably didn't help you though, did it? Sorry, I'm not very good at explaining things. Maybe Flashram Peter can answer this one, or one of the other guys who are good at answering these things.

[almo]

I am running an 800mghz athlon thunderbird. I used to have a 1.6 palomino but it died and I only had enough cash to replace it with the thunderbird. The 800 is rated for DDR but not DDR2. Its all matters not anyway as I just found out that the DDR motherboad is dead.

Oh well.

[Peter_AUS]

Just so you know Almo. As Lionheart said, DDR is faster than SDram, but comparing 256meg to 512 meg isn't a fair test as more memory always means usually faster machines for memory usage. But the difference would be fairly negligable in comparison, unless using exactly the same machines and software and drivers loaded. In other words, the only difference would be the RAM. And as you said, the motherboards were different (newer technology), so again comparison wouldn't be the same.

Anyway it is all mute isn't it, seeing the board is dead.

[almo]

Just so you know Almo. As Lionheart said, DDR is faster than SDram, but comparing 256meg to 512 meg isn't a fair test as more memory always means usually faster machines for memory usage. But the difference would be fairly negligable in comparison, unless using exactly the same machines and software and drivers loaded. In other words, the only difference would be the RAM. And as you said, the motherboards were different (newer technology), so again comparison wouldn't be the same.

Anyway it is all mute isn't it, seeing the board is dead.

Yup it dead alright. I went ahead and changed out the cpu, which is rated for ddr, but I got nothing. I thought at first that it might be the memory, but it worked fine in another machine, so I guess I will just have to wait on my *New* Mac for a faster computer.

Thanks pete...

[Mathiau]

depends on your processor - Pentium 4 chips from the northwood and late williamette cores are better with DDR as DDR is "double" data rate - it can process information coming and going at the same time - where as SDRAM can only do one thing at a time. - often the advatage of DDR SDRAM over SDRAM is when you get into "dual channel" configurations on newer systems. Other wise unless you use alot of programs that are memory intensive, the difference will be hardly noticeble.

you can get a demo version of a program call SiSoft Sandar, which can run a test on yor system to show the performance to which you can then compare to other products