DDR2 vs DDR1

7 Jul, 2004 at 10:27am ET Article published in Tech

Comments

1. 
   7 Jul 2004 ~ 12:27pm Thrax Conclusion:
   
   1. DDR2 runs hot
   2. DDR2 uses more voltage than JEDEC had ever wanted
   3. DDR2 runs unacceptably high timings
   4. DDR2-667 is only 59MB/s faster than DDR500.
   5. DDR2-533 is NOT faster than DDR400.
   6. DDR1 is better than DDR2 with a 133-167MHz deficit.
   7. DDR2 sucks.
2. 
   7 Jul 2004 ~ 8:21pm MJO

   Thrax wrote:

   Conclusion:
   
   1. DDR2 runs hot
   2. DDR2 uses more voltage than JEDEC had ever wanted
   3. DDR2 runs unacceptably high timings
   4. DDR2-667 is only 59MB/s faster than DDR500.
   5. DDR2-533 is NOT faster than DDR400.
   6. DDR1 is better than DDR2 with a 133-167MHz deficit.
   7. DDR2 sucks.

   
   You forgot one.
   8. DDR2 is twice the price compared to DDR1.
   At least in the beginning, prices will drop eventually.
3. 
   7 Jul 2004 ~ 8:23pm Thrax Oh, good #8!
4. 
   8 Jul 2004 ~ 9:24am edcentric DDR2 is at the begining of its learing curve.
   
   DDR1 at 1000 (2.5-3-4) on a 875P mobo will give you this http://www.anandtech.com/memory/showdoc.aspx?i=2098&p=9
   DDR2 at 1000 (4-4-4) on a 925X mobo will give you this http://www.anandtech.com/memory/showdoc.aspx?i=2112&p=17
   Not too bad.
   There are still a bunch of unanswered questions, but look how far DDR1 has come.
   
   No, I don't like the price.
   The slow timings and async operation bother me also.
   But this is the horse to watch.