R.I.P. Rambus

uncleel · Feb 27, 2002

R.I.P. :dead: Rambus
Intel to drop support of Rambus
http://www.3dspotlight.com/

by Julio @ 12:44 PM - [Comments]
Intel Corp. in the second half of this year will drop its final Direct Rambus DRAMs support in new computer products, it was learned Tuesday at the Intel Developers Forum. The last RDRAMs used in Xeon workstations will be replaced by new chipsets supporting double data rate (DDR memory).

Intel will continue using Direct Rambus memory with its network processors. Also, although not new products, the next iterations of its 850 and 860 chipsets, supporting a 533MHz front-side, will support RDRAM when they arrive, probably in the second half of this year.

But when the next generation of workstation DDR chipsets arrive, it will mark the end of a long and torturous episode when Intel tried to mandate Direct Rambus as the next generation memory for the PC and workstation markets.

T-Shirt · Mar 4, 2002

And good riddance!!
Actually, it's too bad, RDRAM is a good technology, with lots of future potental, destroyed by the greed of the business side of RAMBUS.

svtcobra · Mar 5, 2002

AMD has been stated as using it for their new Hammer technology.

What a change..Intel goes to DDR with the 845 chipset and AMD goes to Rambus.

Was Rambus really that bad? The P4 performs much better with Rambus than it does with DDR. I guess with dual channel DDR on the horizon that may change.

Federelli · Mar 5, 2002

I bet Intel has something smart they haven't showed yet, and Drr is going the right way

OliverR87 · Mar 5, 2002

My thoughts on RDRAM are that it is the future technology. I just believe that it is too advanced for todays software, since most of the software developers don't really use the full bandwidth of RDRAM. Considering only multimedia software uses the most bandwidth, other than that all other software doesn't really depend on the memory subsystem. RDRAM was released way to early I believe, because it first was released in 1999, with incapable processors available to use all the bandwidth it offered. The only solution I believed that worked was to increase the FSB, which I have done on my i820 based motherboard. It is running at 156 MHZ, and the memory essentially at 900 mhz. It is still processor limited, but you definitely notice the speed when running or encoding videos, along with game loading etc. RDRAM is great technology, but the way it was introduced was I thought harsh.

Oliver

wizard · Mar 5, 2002

DDR2 will make RAMBUS useless since it has the ability to scale as high as RAMBUS. DDR2 will effectively kill any need for RAMBUS.

Rick · Mar 5, 2002

Rambus isn't all THAT bad. It is highly scalable, albeit many problems for the average user.

I'm glad to see Intel drop it though, because I never liked it.

Federelli · Mar 5, 2002

heh i was never a fan of it either, i just like ddr much more...
it's a "pitty" that i only have sdram pc133...
with the situatoin in my country it's amazing the pc i managed to get...

truffles · Mar 5, 2002

Ello ello,

Rambus ram was new to me at the time when pentium 4 was introduced . . . i really did not look at Rambus Ram . . . well the prices are more higher then compared to the other types . . .

Does Rambus run at 800mhz ?

really . . . i still think DDR SDRam seem best . . . because i believe the price and performance . . . well good feedback from what i have read . . .

I would like to see in the future . . . on how Intel would do . . . supporting different types of ram . . .

If you look at the economy business today on RAM sales . . . its pretty good . . . im not sure but when i upgraded it was very cheap . . . recently i find that the prices are going up . . . and i asked many people about : "which ram to go with" and i had different feedback . . . saying SDR and DDR . . . same votes . . . 7/7
no one said anything about Rambus Ram . . .

TRUFFLES

Rick · Mar 5, 2002

Originally posted by truffles
Does Rambus run at 800mhz ?

Yes, but it does not mean it is 8 times faster. You see, RAMBUS is only 16 bits wide, where SDRAM is 64 bits wide.

RDRAM: 800Mhz x 16bits = 1.6gb/sec
SDRAM: 100Mhz x 64bits = 800mb/sec

Because the datapath is wider for SDRAM, it gets more work done at once. RDRAM has a much smaller data patch, which makes it harder to keep up with SDRAM.. Fortunately for RDRAM, it has more than enough speed to make up for it. So, while SDRAM gets 4 times the data sent per cycle, RDRAM gets 8x the cycles SDRAM does, making it twice as fast.

You'll notice DDR is about as fast as RDRAM when it comes to bandwidth, because DDR is twice as fast as SDRAM.

Federelli · Mar 5, 2002

Rick, if you had to add DRR to that post, how would it be?

OliverR87 · Mar 5, 2002

RDRAM runs at 300, 350, 400, and 533 MHZ respectively. The only way you get 600, 700, 800, and 1066 MHZ is how RDRAM multiplies the clock speed by 2. Its like DDR memory, double data rate.

Oliver

Rick · Mar 5, 2002

Originally posted by Federelli
Rick, if you had to add DRR to that post, how would it be?

Just as fast as DDR.. Twice as fast as SDRAM, basically.

Federelli · Mar 5, 2002

huh? i didn't understand

Vehementi · Mar 6, 2002

DDR is SDRAM double clocked, which means for every one command per clock cycle SDRAM does, DDR does 2. Thus speeds up to 266 are enabled between memory and CPU. RDRAM is quad pumped, which means it executed 4 times the regular commands per clock cycle, which is why Pentium 4's with Rambus always have FSB's of 400.

Federelli · Mar 6, 2002

so...

RDRAM: 800Mhz x 16bits = 1.6gb/sec
DDRRAM: 266Mhz+ x xx bits = xxgb/sec...
SDRAM: 100Mhz x 64bits = 800mb/sec

Th3M1ghtyD8 · Mar 6, 2002

What is wrong with RD-RAM, it is the only way to get any performance out of a P4.

And the only benchmark P4's are any good at is Quake 3 - me thinks Intel play Q3.

hyjacked · Mar 6, 2002

RDRAM: 800Mhz x 16bits = 1.6gb/sec
DDRRAM: 266Mhz+ x xx bits = xxgb/sec...
SDRAM: 100Mhz x 64bits = 800mb/sec

just to clear this up a bit

RDRAM: 800Mhz x 16bits x 2(dual channel) = 3.2gb/sec
DDRRAM: 266Mhz+ x 64(?) bits = 1.6gb/sec...
SDRAM: 100Mhz x 64bits = 800mb/sec

and that's why current rdram outperforms ddr

and the reason i left the forums a couple months back, too many narrow minded people, have things changed at all? i don't see the same faces..

Phantasm66 · Mar 6, 2002

i bring sutekh's gift of death to all humans.....

Rambus virtually dead on desktop - Intel

Dynamite explodes
By Mike Magee, 16/11/2001 15:56:53 BST

A SENIOR EXECUTIVE AT INTEL has dared to say that DDR will supplant Rambus by 2003, confirming suspicions that RDRAM won't be long for the Santa Clara roadmaps.
Nico Ernst, writing on Tec Channel, got the confirmation from Anand Chandrasekher, who has been outspoken in the past about Intel technology.

The report quotes Chandrasekher as saying that by 2002 DDR based PCs will hog the performance desktop memory space.

He said that it was unclear whether DDR would make it into the "Celeron" space, which would be down to pricing between the different memory types.

Rambus, he said will get "niched into the very performance intensive applications, largely workstations".

Further, unless the economies of scale changed at Rambus, DDR will be the winner in workstations too.

DDR-II, he said, would further cause the Rambus market to decline.

If Chandrasekher - who described the INQUIRER as being like the National Enquirer* at the last Intel Developer Forum (IDF) - is "on message", that means that it's likely to be 2003 before any of this happens. The latest roadmaps we saw in early November indicate Rambus still hogging the performance sector through 2002. Earlier in the week, SiS reported that it had signed a licence with Rambus so it could build a Pentium 4/533FSB chipset next year.

http://www.theinquirer.org/16110111.htm

Rambus is dead, says Gartner
By Jo Ticehurst at Gartner Symposium Europe in Cannes [07-11-2000]
Analyst Gartner believes that Rambus, the Intel-backed memory technology that was expected to replace SDRam, will be dead in six to eight months.
Analyst Gartner believes that Rambus, the Intel-backed memory technology that was expected to replace SDRam (Synchronous Dynamic Random Access Memory), will be dead in six to eight months.
Intel had been planning to design its future semiconductor technology exclusively around Rambus memory, and about 18 months ago analysts predicted that it was the future for PC memory, tagged to replace SDRam.

At the Gartner Symposium/ITXpo in Cannes this week, senior analyst Kevin Knox said Rambus will not survive the next six to eight months.

"Rambus is pretty much dead. It only made it into some areas such as high-end workstations, but it is dead for the mainstream PC. It is probably not a wise decision to carry on supporting this technology," he said.

Persistent reports of problems with the manufacture of Rambus, its speeds and high cost, have resulted in a split in the market, with many memory manufacturers backing both Rambus and a faster alternative - Double Data Rate (DDR) memory technology. DDR improves PC performance substantially and does not cost more to produce than the older SDRam technology.

"DDR is very good, and AMD has just announced a chipset based on this technology for its Athlon processors," said Knox.

In addition, earlier this year Intel was forced to withdraw motherboards supporting the new Rambus memory following reports of bugs.

PC vendors have spent millions preparing to launch systems using the boards, based on Intel's 820 chipset, that were designed specifically to talk to Rambus.

Although Intel had originally said it would only support Rambus in the Pentium 4 processor, the company is also believed to be launching a chipset for the processor designed to work with SDRam.

http://www.vnunet.com/News/1113551

hyjacked · Mar 6, 2002

a familiar face, long time no see....

http://www.ebnews.com/story/OEG20020304S0043

“We're leaving it up to the market to determine the fate of each memory type,” said Pete MacWilliams, an Intel fellow and the company's director of platform architecture, in an interview last week at the Intel Developer Forum.

“We're convinced that DDR333 isn't ready yet,” MacWilliams told EBN. “We want to make sure that modules, chipsets, and motherboards with the new memory have all been validated and work together. Until you go through all these steps, a new technology is not ready for the market.” MacWilliams added that DDR-II at 400MHz “will be an even bigger challenge.”

need i find more??

eddy05 · Mar 6, 2002

MG...

Now that I've been opened up to the computer world, I realised that I'm beggining to hate my new computer. My new computer uses 423-pin CPU socket and Rambus RAM. Both which intel cease to continue. What's going to be the future of my upgrading life? Should I hate my computer or Intel?

hyjacked · Mar 6, 2002

your running a p4 1.8 and your looking to upgrade? i'd say stay with that till it's really too slow, then jump to whatever is current at the time, thigns change too fast.

shame that you jumped on the 423 bandwagon though

i would say the only related upgrade you might want to consider is an increase in memory, 256 isn't really a lot anymore, but it's enough to get teh job done.

Phantasm66 · Mar 6, 2002

usually i find that a processor upgrade tends to mean a motherboard upgrade as well, and you will still be able to get hold of more RAM for some time to come. All of the world's supply of RAMBUS isn't going to vanish overnight.

eddy05 · Mar 6, 2002

I didn't know much at the time I bought it (It was on 29/12/01) I talked about an upgrade just in case my 1.8ghz gets outdated fast... and what do you know, I opened my casing and voila! All RIMM slots are full. I feel like taking a hammer out.

hyjacked · Mar 6, 2002

you could always replace the existing ones with larger ones, just remember, you have to replace 2 at a time with rdram

R.I.P. Rambus

Posts: 977 +0

Posts: 289 +0

Posts: 722 +0

Posts: 362 +4

Posts: 6 +0

Posts: 4,512 +66

Posts: 362 +4

Posts: 33 +0

Posts: 4,512 +66

Posts: 362 +4

Posts: 4,512 +66

Posts: 362 +4

Posts: 2,644 +2

Posts: 362 +4

Posts: 660 +0

Posts: 4,909 +8

Posts: 147 +0

Posts: 4,909 +8

Posts: 147 +0

Similar threads