View Full Version : Pentium choices...
2003-02-21, 01:55 PM
Alright I've decided to order my computer (again) but this time I'm going with a Pentium 4 3.06 ghz. What I want to know is what motherboard/ram combo I should get.
Mobo: ASUS P4G8X Deluxe
Memory: 1024mb PC2100 DDR RAM
Mobo: ASUS P4T533-C
Memory: 1024mb 1066mhz RAMBUS RAM
The P4G8X is like the A7N8X deluxe equivalent for Pentiums. It's got the same Dual channel DIMM sockets like the A7N. The P4T533 supports RDRAM which I heard is supposed to be better with Pentiums. Anyone got any suggestions on which to choose?
2003-02-21, 02:19 PM
The P4T533-C is a great board. I couldn't decide between it and the Gigabyte board I ended up choosing. If I had to choose between those two, there's no question, I would go with the Choice #2.
2003-02-21, 02:29 PM
I have the same config.
3.34 Gigs/S bandwidth between processor and RAM. :)
RDRAM is MUCH BETTER for PENTIUM IV simply due to the fact that the PIV needs bandwidth and LOTS OF IT. DDR simply can't compete...yet.
Solid board too. ASUS is always a winner.
2003-02-21, 02:33 PM
Alright thanks :D
2003-02-21, 02:39 PM
Where are you ordering it?
2003-02-21, 02:50 PM
2003-02-21, 02:55 PM
2003-02-21, 04:29 PM
bout RDR ram... On the surface, this looks to be a very fast solution for system memory due to its fast operation (up to 800MHz). The reality is, however, that the design is only up to twice as fast as current SDRAM operation due to the smaller bus width (16 bits vs. 64 bits).
In addition, latency times are actually worse than currently available fast SDRAM. Since most of today’s applications do not actually utilize the full bandwidth of the memory bus even today, simply increasing the bandwidth while ignoring latency issues will likely not provide any real performance improvements.
In addition 2, processors operating with 800MHz bus speeds will certainly require more than double the current memory bandwidth.
RDR ram is overpriced and overrated, not to mention the fact that present day CPU's can't even use all the bandwith that DDR offers...
2003-02-21, 04:45 PM
When DDR II is released and able to be purchased by the mainstream, then I think RDRAM will have had its day. But until then show me any DDR solution that can achieve 3.34 GB/s bandwidth.
PIV's need bandwidth, latency is not an issue as much. DDR is a bottleneck for PIV. I also think Intel made a huge mistake making a processor only really successful with RDRAM. DDR is cheaper and more widely used. Intel lost alot of profits.
RDRAM may be overrated and overpriced, but in the numbers it beats any DDR out their today.
I think so.
2003-02-21, 04:46 PM
Theoretically, with PC1200 RDRAM I should be able to get 4.2 gb/s bandwidth.
That's not out yet though.
2003-02-21, 04:49 PM
Most of the articles that I've read concerning performance testing with P4's used RDRAM. I've read numerous times that P4 seems to perform noticeably better with RDR as opposed to SDRAM.
2003-02-21, 04:52 PM
They do. The pipeline is so long they need a bigger bandwidth. RDRAM supplies this. Hence, it's better. Much better.
2003-02-21, 04:57 PM
Sorry, but P4's cannot use all the bandwith that is supplied by the present day DDR technology....
the granitebay AKA E7205 has dual DDR capabilites, instead of the usual 2.1gb/sec you get from 266mhz you get double that. Bam bandwith that beats the RDR and its out now.
not to mention the fact that DDR ram is way cooler and run more stable.
2003-02-21, 05:07 PM
Let me supply you with some expert info since you seem to not think what I am saying is true even though it has been benchmarked.
The leader in technological news and computer electronics tomshardware.com tests every peice of new hardware that enters the market and puts the results on website. Here is what they have to say about your argument and the Granite Bay. I will then post the page reference for you to read the entire article if you wish.
"The launch of the first dual-channel platform for the Pentium 4 marks the first time that a chipset is able to hold a candle to the 850E together with PC1066 RDRAM. Our previous comparison test contains a large number of the latest benchmarks. In most of them, the 7205 IS NOT ABLE TO SURPASS the 850E, but it comes pretty darn close to its performance. However, Intel has officially specified the 7205 to become the successor to the 850E." [emphasis mine] - http://www6.tomshardware.com/mainboard/20030203/e7205-04.html#e7205_replacement_for_850e_and_rdram
2003-02-21, 05:23 PM
I've read the article, the price of RDR ram versus the performance you get from the price/performance of DDR clearly makes DDR the better the choice.
I've never stated the DDR beats RDR in tests (well cept in available bandwith whit the granitebay chipset)... however RDR isn't the super solution it's souped up to be.
And i don't belive i've said what you say is untrue, i have argued against your opionion and provided the facts and reasons for them.
Edit: there really is no valid reason to whit RDR RAM, now that even intel is abandoning it in favour for dual DDR. + taking the price of RDR into the picture.
2003-02-21, 05:34 PM
1 more thing, from the same article... he seems to be agreeing whit me:
Nevertheless, the E7205 is already the fundamentally better choice compared to the 850E, because there are a few arguments that speak against the RDRAM platform:
Overclocking a system with PC1066 RDRAM is very difficult. We attained a maximum of 145 MHz, which corresponds to a 10% increase.
PC1066 RDRAM gets really hot, thus compromising system stability in an environment without much air flow and necessitating the integration of powerful, and loud, fans.
RIMMs based on the PC1066 standard with 512 MB are rare and expensive. Memory capacities of over 1 GB are therefore more costly than with E7205, which can manage with PC266 SDRAM.
2GB RAM modules are no longer a rarity, especially for workstation systems.
850E only supports AGP 4X.
2003-02-22, 08:14 AM
I was only arguing from the point that RDRAM was faster and therefore better. The article proved that point. It also proves your point (I think we were not arguing on the same things) which was that DDR is better because it is more cost sensitive and leading up to take RDRAM's place.
For now, though, if you want to pay the price, RDRAM is king.
Check out rambus.com for some offical benchmarks.
See you on the battlefield.
2003-02-22, 08:24 AM
*shrug* It's up to the buyer, personally i don't see that purchasing a dying chipset type as a good idea.
2003-02-22, 08:27 AM
Yes; you could buy a DDR platform only to be outdone by RDR in the future or by DDRII (Which is and will be very very expensive).
In the world of technology every chipset is dead. It's only a matter of time.
2003-02-22, 08:31 AM
Granitebay is a new chipset.... who knows what kind of performance future tweaking can acheve whit it.
But we'll see, theres always something new right around the corner in tech but sometime you have to bite the bullet and go buy hehe.
edit: figured i'd add, the reason for why i think RDR is dying is A.) people who want to make RDR chipsets has to pay a roylaty to rambus and B.) they have no control over how RDR develops what so ever. and finaly C.) Intel is switching over to granitebay.
2003-02-22, 09:20 AM
Yes, we do both have our points.
2003-02-23, 10:35 PM
Well ahh well I decided to not go with the penitum in the end. Thanks for your help though. :D
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.