I have 512mb SDRAM PC133, and i was wondering if it would be worth upgrading to DDR??? Im quite interested in gettin some DDR333! Is it worth upgrading??

Thanks

Do you have a board that supports both types?
If not an upgrade to DDR will require a new board, and without overclocking there are only a few boards and chipsets out that support 333 DDR...

It is the next logical choice for you. If you have everything, I'd go with it now. If you do need a board, it is cheaper to go with a new board and DDR then replacing everything, and its faster than the SDRAM

Got News? >
DDR400 out in April
http://www.3dspotlight.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=696

SiS jump on the DDR400 bandwagon
http://www.3dspotlight.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=639

Search Feature is Your Friend

Here's an article which compares SDRAM to DDRAM. Have a go:

http://www.vanshardware.com/articles/2001/november/011109_Upgrade/011109_Upgrade.htm

Good read lokum. thanks for the article

No probs. Just wondering if anyone knows whether I'll get any increase in speed when I'm doing some video compression with DDR compared to SDRAM.

TIA.

Going from SD to DDR isn't a quantum leap in peformance.
I would only go to DDR if I wanted other new features from a motherboard. Infact the only reason I am on a Asus A7M266 is because my old motherboard didn't support GF3, so when I was considering a new motherboard I picked a DDR solution. I now have stacks of PC100 and PC133 memory kicking around, should really put more than 64mb in my firewall machine

you should have a noticable increase, sdram on a p4 is a huge bottleneck, doubling the bandwidth(sdram to ddr) would let get more out of yoru p4

Feel free to send some of that over to me

I'd reccomend you upgrade to DDR, simply because it's faster. You will have to buy a new sysbo, but that's only about 120$ for a good one, plus the DDR costs. I have DDR333 and it was 70$ for 256 MB.

Cheers for that advice lads (keep it coming though), im interested in getting DDR333. Think i should see a good increase over my SDRAM, but i think i might wait until the new CLAWHAMMER CPU's from AMD and get a mobo which supports them! They look pretty *darn good!

Theres a good article on them here:

http://www.pc4d.com/hardware/enews/30/microprocessor_architecture_hammer.shtml

And some info on 64bit processors here:

http://www.hardwaremania.com/reviews_eng/hammer/hammer1.shtml[/URL]

(*edited by mod)

IC. But since DDR only increases the memory bandwidth, does it have anything to do in increasing performance since video compression stresses the CPU mostly.

I am waiting for either the AMD Thoroughbred (0.13 core) or the 64bit AMD Hammer series. I already have DDR and if you do upgrade you should be able to put a Thoroughbred in it as it should be the same package (kinda like the same change as Thunderbird to XP). You wouldn't be able to put a hammer in because of the change from 32 - 64bit and the pin increase on the CPU, socket and lots of chipset changes (AMD 8000 chipset).
If you are going from a 200fsb CPU to a 266fsb CPU and DDR you will see a reasonable increase in performance. I did when I went from a 200fsb Athlon 1Ghz to a DDR board with a 1.4Ghz 266fsb Athlon. Currently because 333DDR isn't that widely available the 333 boards aren't doing that much better than the KT266A based boards. I would at least wait until some benchmarks show the 333 boards doing significantly better.

Still I am going to put up with my 1.5Ghz overclocked Athlon and hold off for the (MC) Hammer!

"Can't touch this... Du Du du du DUU du" :haha:

Hello =) ,

512 SDRam is quite a lot for me to work with already . . .

If you find that everything is working out for you and everything is great . . . i don't see if there is a need to upgrade or change . . . unless you want to try new ways.

And again : thanks lokem for the site =) i too, liked it

other then that . . . i hope i helped . . . i have nothing else to say =)

GOOD LUCK,
TRUFFLES

dunno, i never knew/thought video compression was mainly dealt with by the CPU. i was figuring, since you have to go through data so much, it would be memory intense, but it makes sense to be cpu intense, based on the work it has to do. either way i don't see how more memory bandwidth wouldn't help.

True enough. Thanks for pointing the memory usage out. I guess it boils down to whether the codec used supports the different CPU extensions or not...

Here is another good read on DDR by Tweakers of Austrailia.

Tweakers DDR

Cheers for that Boeing, i could go and get some tommorow but i think ill stick with my PC133, until October (NEW AMD), and then get a new mobo with either DDR333 or DDR400!

Cheers for your help people :grinthumb

+Woo Hoo, im now a sergeant

Wow, My hat off to you Cuc, I don't know if I would wait that long. But it is a wise chioce especially since hammer is due out around then!

I took that step into the DDR world. I went with the IWill XP333-R mobo and a couple 256MB DDR 200 chips. The thing I like about the XP333 mobo is that the overclocking can be done right from with in the bios. Sence then, my system seems to be running quite abit faster and a lot more stable, using Win XP Pro.

The unfortunate part of all this is,...
DDR is generally more expencive than SDRAM, and you will need to buy a new mobo if you are going to make the move. Also there are not very many mobos out there that support both types of memory chips, and the ones that are out there have not been rated very high.

So basicly if you got the money then by all means, go for it. If not,
stick with what you got. 512 PC133 is not all that bad, and I bet it'll get that job done reguardless.