1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Intel Talks about DDR3

Discussion in 'News' started by malware, Oct 23, 2006.

  1. malware New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2004
    Messages:
    5,476 (1.42/day)
    Thanks Received:
    956
    Location:
    Bulgaria
    [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]

    Charles Chang, Intel’s supplier Manager, said during IDF Fall 06 that the company has received DDR3 samples from different manufacturers, and they are working fine on Intel Bearlake based platform. DDR3 is scheduled for mass production in Q107. However, Chalres Chang said the company estimates that DDR3 would become main technology in 2009. According to information from Samsung Electronics Corporation, DDR3 is going to be 25% faster than DDR2 modules. DDR3 will also double the bandwidth over DDR2.

    Source: HKEPC
     
  2. DaMulta

    DaMulta My stars went supernova

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2006
    Messages:
    16,135 (5.02/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,459
    Location:
    Oklahoma T-Town
    They need to skip DDR-3 and go DDR-4
     
  3. i_am_mustang_man New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2006
    Messages:
    1,854 (0.55/day)
    Thanks Received:
    11
    Location:
    Boston
    i wish they cared about progress and consumers that much :p
     
  4. Kasparz New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2006
    Messages:
    287 (0.09/day)
    Thanks Received:
    4
    If they wouldn't switch to DDR2, and stick with good old DDR, then it would be way faster. Just look at AM2, thats nothing more than s939 with DDR2 support. But AM2 is just trash, even slower than s939. But off course, customers need 1337 more digits, they need 6200TC with 512MB ram, and other useless trash. Its just useless way how to spend our money.
     
  5. Sasqui

    Sasqui

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2005
    Messages:
    7,958 (2.30/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,650
    Location:
    Manchester, NH
    Who the HELL has CL6 DDR2-800 RAM???
     
  6. Kasparz New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2006
    Messages:
    287 (0.09/day)
    Thanks Received:
    4
  7. qwo New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2006
    Messages:
    48 (0.02/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    my DDR2 800 is CL3, why intel dont compare with CL3?
     
  8. Sasqui

    Sasqui

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2005
    Messages:
    7,958 (2.30/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,650
    Location:
    Manchester, NH
  9. Dippyskoodlez

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2005
    Messages:
    5,096 (1.41/day)
    Thanks Received:
    238
    Location:
    Kansas City, KS
    Believe it or not, the bandwidth is... there.. ish...

    However, a 25% speed increase in performance with a 100% clock speed isnt exactly impressive. :banghead:

    Better than DDR2 atleast. DDR3 is what DDR2 should have been. :toast:
     
  10. Tory New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2005
    Messages:
    339 (0.09/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2
    ...nobody...
     
  11. lemonadesoda

    lemonadesoda

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Messages:
    6,315 (1.98/day)
    Thanks Received:
    976
    Anyone know of a Core2 mainboard with DDR slots? I got a hell of a lot of top Corsair DDR and I really dont see the reason to can it for DDR2 which isn't any faster.
     
  12. cdawall where the hell are my stars

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    20,691 (6.41/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,987
    Location:
    some AF base
    via has some (ecs boards) and the intel 865 series as well but they have agp to
     
  13. Dippyskoodlez

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2005
    Messages:
    5,096 (1.41/day)
    Thanks Received:
    238
    Location:
    Kansas City, KS
    Yep they sure do :) I'm really interested in seeing what the differences are with DDR Vs DDR2 with these...

    Anyone wanna loan me a core 2 duo to give it a shot? :D
     
  14. XooM New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2004
    Messages:
    479 (0.12/day)
    Thanks Received:
    7
    Location:
    Close to FrozenCPU.com
    yep, AM2 sure is a waste of time, just like 939 was :rolleyes:
     
  15. tvdang7 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2006
    Messages:
    318 (0.09/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1
    well will intel even take advantage of this high ram?
    even right now we only really need ddr667 or ddr800 if u were conroe.
     
  16. yogurt_21

    yogurt_21

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    4,472 (1.32/day)
    Thanks Received:
    603
    Location:
    AZ
    lol's people theyt said a 25% latency improvement not a 25% performance improvement, read the article.

    ddr3 will have much more than a 25% improvement over ddr2 for one thing it hase double the bandwidth as well as it being quad channeled.

    I mean hello have you paid any attention to the memory modules on your gpus? or have you all been twidling your thumbs?

    ddr4 hasn't even been released for gpu's yet and with all memory it has to first pass through the gpu sector before hitting the system mem sector.

    overall ddr3 will be leaps and bounds ahead of ddr2, as ddr2 clock for clock still can't match ddr performance (take a 533 MHZ 1gb set of ddr2 and compare it to a 533 pair of ddr the ddr will win every time and not just bya ltille by up to 20%) lol

    ddr2 was short lived in the gpu world due to it's low performance per clock (only 2 ati cards used it actually 9800 pro 256 and the 9800xt) one ddr3 came out, they found they didn't have to sacrifice performance to keep up with the markets clock speed demands.

    once ddr3 is out I'll definetly be buying a set and probably a quad core amd as well.
     
  17. b1lk1

    b1lk1 New Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2005
    Messages:
    688 (0.19/day)
    Thanks Received:
    17
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    I don't know what is funnier, the comment that CAS 6 ram is good or that S939 was no good. Wow, another thread full of speculation and opinions surrounded by no facts and proof. I guess noone has taken the time to read any of the benchmarks anywhere on the web about bandwidth and memory with higher bus speeds. DDR cannot run fast enough to keep up to DDR2 at all. THe latest crop of DDR2 is making DDR look stupid, and DDR3 will just be that much better. DDR2 doesn't have to match DDR performance since it can outclock it by a large margain and the bandwidth takes over for increased speed and versitility.
     
  18. Dippyskoodlez

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2005
    Messages:
    5,096 (1.41/day)
    Thanks Received:
    238
    Location:
    Kansas City, KS
    Yeah, but you have to look past the marketing there bud. If it was more than a 25% performance difference, who then &@%^@ cares about latency? You market that. Not the smaller latency improvements.

    Performance is obviously struggling... either due to latency, or the CPU's just cant show any differences.

    Don't just read the article, read between the marketing FUD.

    QFT.
     
  19. dmasta New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2006
    Messages:
    1 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    blah blah. its not even out yet to mature. i only see major improvements from now till 08'. by then, the real show down for performance between quads n ddr3 LL (cors/ocz). besides that its 128-bit = Dual Channel 256-bit. besides that, will be better then what we got now....
     
  20. kakazza New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2006
    Messages:
    470 (0.15/day)
    Thanks Received:
    7
  21. DanTheBanjoman Señor Moderator

    Joined:
    May 20, 2004
    Messages:
    10,553 (2.62/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,383
    I have CL4 ram, well waiting for replacement anyway.

    Higher frequency = CL5, it's not basic DDR2 though.
     

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page