Upgrading now to DDR-400 for future usage

[Snowy Commando]

my AXP1800+ (palimino core) uses a ddr-266 bus hence i have ddr-266 (pc2100) memory to run in "sync" with.

next cpu upgrade is likely to be the AXP2500+ or higher (barton core) running on a ddr-333 bus hence to run in "sync" with new pc2700 memory would be most beneficial as the ddr-266 memory would be lagging behind.

now here's the question, i'm essentially thinking 2 upgrades ahead by wondering if it would be a good idea to buy 512mb of PC3200 (ddr-400) soon for a few reasons:
1. backward compatiable with ddr-266/333 bus speeds
2. higher spec ram capable of more aggressive settings
3. will last me through to the eventual upgrade to a 400mhz bus when the athlon 64 goes mainstream
4. it's only ~£80-90 for 512mb which is cheap imho.

Anyone agree it would be a good idea to stock up now for the future whilst mobo and cpu catch up in the mean time?

 

[Th3M1ghtyD8]

The price difference between 333 and 400 DDR is very small now anyway, so it makes no sense to go for Ram which is already becoming obsolete. However, I would recommend running 400Mhz DDR at 333Mhz but with more aggressive settings (i.e. 400Mhz Cas2.5 should run at 333Mhz Cas2), as running 400Mhz DDR with a 333Mhz CPU is currently slower on most boards (except NForce 2) than running 333Mhz RAM, since they are not running in sync.

 

[Arris]

I agree with Th3M1ghtyD8. Also incase Dual Channel memory systems become the norm you may also be better investing in two 256mb DIMMs so you can use this feature, or if you want get 512mb now and 512mb later

 

[Snowy Commando]

it's like my current Twinmos pc2100 which can only use mostly conservative settings i.e. i don't get the full 2100mb/s bandwidth theoretically possible, i get arond 1800mb/s i think.

Yep you right in saying, underclocking, over-spec ram using most agressive settings will just be a good thing for a higher bandwidth efficiency when using at ddr-333.

ps. i already use 2x 256mb so i naturally would like 2x256 of pc3200 instead of 1 stick. the benefit that no one has mentioned is the "what if 1 stick goes faulty" question and the answer is simple, wait for replacement and still have a working computer with 1 stick - something i'm doing atm :grinthumb

 

[agissi]

If I were you, I'd wait out DDR2, not only will DDR(1) become cheep, but you may want DDR2.

 

[Justin]

Originally posted by Th3M1ghtyD8
The price difference between 333 and 400 DDR is very small now anyway, so it makes no sense to go for Ram which is already becoming obsolete. However, I would recommend running 400Mhz DDR at 333Mhz but with more aggressive settings (i.e. 400Mhz Cas2.5 should run at 333Mhz Cas2), as running 400Mhz DDR with a 333Mhz CPU is currently slower on most boards (except NForce 2) than running 333Mhz RAM, since they are not running in sync.

Obsolete? You need to check your definition of "obsolete"

 

[Th3M1ghtyD8]

Originally posted by Soul Harvester
Obsolete? You need to check your definition of "obsolete"

Why?

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=obsolete

Obsolete, adj. , 2, Outmoded in design, style, or construction: an obsolete locomotive


What is wrong with that?

so it makes no sense to go for Ram which is already becoming obsolete

 

[mrslippyfist]

I'm using ddr 266, and i don't consider that obsolete yet, i'd consider it to be more mid range, surely obsolete is technology that isn't supported anymore?

 

[Th3M1ghtyD8]

I did not say it was obsolete, i said it was Becoming Obsolete. DDR 333 is not obsolete, neither is 266, but they are becoming obsolete as new technology such as DDR400 and DDR II are released. That is the point I was trying to make.

 

[Justin]

Originally posted by Th3M1ghtyD8
Why?

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=obsolete

Obsolete, adj. , 2, Outmoded in design, style, or construction: an obsolete locomotive


What is wrong with that?

so it makes no sense to go for Ram which is already becoming obsolete

Because I am sick of the blanket-sheep thought pattern of so many people today that because it is not new that it is "outmoded". Something obsolete is something not feasible for practical solutions in its particular field. DDR 333 is years and years from being obsolete.

 

[Snowy Commando]

Enough petty squabbling and back to the topic.

The faster then needed RAM however can be bought now as it is as almost as cheap as the PC2700 and that means it will last through to the next CPU after the Barton-333 bus, the Athlon64 which will require a 200*2 bus (DDR-400) hence require the faster RAM.

As SDRAM is like the stock market, it’s best to stock up now whilst it is cheapish and take immediate benefit of running the RAM at aggressive settings for full memory performance on existing 266 & 333 buses.

The DDR-RAM will therefore be in place for future CPU upgrade and be fully capable of utilising DDR-266/333/400 bus in sync with CPU and provide full performance. The RAM is already ‘above spec’ for my current needs hence it will be more future proofed and provide a more stable system.

 

[Vehementi]

Originally posted by Soul Harvester
Because I am sick of the blanket-sheep thought pattern of so many people today that because it is not new that it is "outmoded". Something obsolete is something not feasible for practical solutions in its particular field. DDR 333 is years and years from being obsolete.

I would have to agree. Right now, the only RAM becoming obsolete is SDRAM.

 

[Snowy Commando]

This isn't a topic about things becoming obsolete, anyone can say that everything has an age and eventually dies or becomes obsolete so it's irrelevant.

"The Time is NOW!", so i'm talking about future proofing, buying now for the future and will be discussing this same topic for DDR-800 or whatever when DDR-400 becomes the slowest RAM.

 

[Nick]

these little 33 mhz increpments are nothing... wait for ddr 2 to come out and stop wasting your money on little tiny 33 mhz improvements that you could never ever ever ever notice... maybe a few points on a benchmark like 3dmark2001

 

[Snowy Commando]

oh really, so you obviously didn't realise that an increased FSB providing more bandwidth gives increased system performance.

eg. running my 1800+ unlocked on a 200*2 mhz bus is equivalent to running a 2500+ on a 133*2 bus