A Newbie DDR/SDRAM Question

Ike

Screenwriter
Joined
Jan 14, 2000
Messages
1,672
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I have SDRAM (I think), but was told my motherboard (An Athlon 1.4 Gig something or other) could do DDR ram.
My first question, is DDR ram noticeably faster? What are the advantages.
And the second, can I have SDRAM and DDR, and have both read, or do I have to have only DDR or SDRAM?
Thanks.
 

Rob Gillespie

Producer
Joined
Aug 17, 1998
Messages
3,632
Reaction score
5
Points
0
DDR memory has much higher bandwidth compared to SDRAM, so yes, in theory it should be faster. You'll need to check with the motherboard manufacturer as to which speed of DDR memory you can use. This is affected by the front-side-bus speed of the mobo/processor, which for an Athlon will be 200 to 266.
You wont be able to mix DDR and SDRAM.
 

brentl

Cinematographer
Joined
May 7, 1999
Messages
2,921
Reaction score
2
Points
110
Make sure that your board can handle either type of RAM. Board that can handle both aren't that common.
Brent L
------------------
OK guys ..... The tour of the Paradigm
plant is now being planned. GO TO THE HOME THEaTER
MEETS PAGE and register.
 

Ike

Screenwriter
Joined
Jan 14, 2000
Messages
1,672
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Well, I was told it could do DDR, and I know I didn't buy DDR ram. I should really look at the box.
And a dumb question, but what is the maximum amount of ram that a 1.4 AMD Athlon could handle? I did know there was such a thing, but I was told that there is a maximum amount of ram that a processor can access before it begins to actually tax the system.
 

Rob Gillespie

Producer
Joined
Aug 17, 1998
Messages
3,632
Reaction score
5
Points
0
Any memory limitations are really at the mercy of the motherboard (i.e. how much you can physically use) and the operating system you're running.
If you're running Windows 95/98/Me, there is little point in using over 256mb because the OS just isn't designed to use those kinds of amounts. It will access it alright (512mb limitation in 98 without resorting to hacks) but it wont use it efficiently enough to make any appreciable difference.
However if you're running NT/2000/XP or even Linux then you can basically stick in as much as you like. You have to think about the kind of use you're going to be putting the machine to. 256mb is more than enough for general desktop work, web browsing and (most) games, but many people these days are going for 512mb simply because the cost of RAM has slumped so much. Over 512 is probably overkill unless you're into video editing or serious CAD work.
 

Ike

Screenwriter
Joined
Jan 14, 2000
Messages
1,672
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I'm into video editing-I really don't have any issues, but I'd just like to have it because it's cheap.
I'm running ME, unfortunately. So, to truly get the use out of 512 and above, I should upgrade to XP?
 

Steve Owen

Second Unit
Joined
Jan 7, 1999
Messages
416
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I was looking into whether it was worth it to go with a DDR solution vs standard SDRAM. Because of the price of the motherboard, I went with the SDRAM. In theory, the DDR should be faster, but I've seen a lot of benchmark reports (such as this one ) that seem to indicate that the practical difference is very small.
-Steve
[Edited last by Steve Owen on November 09, 2001 at 07:48 AM]
 

Tim Brewers

Agent
Joined
Jan 14, 2001
Messages
46
Reaction score
0
Points
10
Well Ike, your mobo might support both. It is quite possible especially if your comp is newer than a month or two old, it should say in the manual. IF it does, with memory prices this cheap I would say buy as much DDR as you can afford. Litterally. Memory was designed for people like you, (graphic people) I have some friends that are into video editing and the such and have their mobo's maxed. I'm talking 2 gig's of memory. You can not have enough. Period. I have never heard of anyone saying "Boy, I wish I had less memory in this thing"

Brew
 

Forum Sponsors

Forum statistics

Threads
343,735
Messages
4,688,469
Members
141,024
Latest member
degroof