Advertisment

RDRAM vs SDRAM

author-image
PCQ Bureau
New Update

It’s been quiet a while since Rambus released RDRAM.

However, adoption of this new technology has been somewhat slow, despite support

from Intel in its 820 chipset-based motherboards. One of the reasons for this

has been the much higher cost of RDRAM compared to SDRAM.

Advertisment

The

major difference between RDRAM and other kinds of memory is the clock speed.

Whereas the memory used in most computers today runs at 100 MHz or 133 MHz,

RDRAM has the capability to scale up to 800 MHz. It’s available in three

different speeds–600 MHz, 700 MHz, and the fastest and costliest version at

800 MHz. It may seem like 800 MHz RDRAM would be six times faster than 133 MHz

SDRAM, but this is not true, since the true measure of the capabilities of RAM

is not just its frequency, but also factors like bandwidth, latency, etc. These

are some vital areas where RDRAM doesn’t outperform SDRAM as much as one would

expect.

Memory bandwidth

To understand how data is transferred from the memory using a

bus, imagine a highway with multiple lanes. Each lane has the capability to

accommodate one car. Depending on the number of lanes, a highway will have the

capacity to handle more and more traffic. This is exactly how a bus works as

well. In our case, these "cars" are nothing but single bits coming

from memory. The frequency of the memory decides how quickly traffic exits the

highway. The number of "lanes" differs between different memories.

SDRAM has a 64-bit bus width. This means that at 133 MHz, its bandwidth stands

at 1.064 GB/sec (64x133/8). In contrast, RDRAM has a 16-bit bus width but runs

at 800 MHz giving it a theoretical bandwidth of 1.6 GB/sec (16x800/8). Thus,

these figures show that RDRAM will not work all that fast compared to SDRAM.

Advertisment

To say that RDRAM has 800 MHz clock is not entirely accurate

as well. Actually, it’s fed with a 400 MHz clock, but transfers data on the

rising as well as falling edge of the clock pulse, thus effectively making it

work at 800 MHz. Though this works out well in the case of PC800 RAM, it creates

problems in slower versions. For example, in the case of PC600 RDRAM, the

external clock speed is actually a measly 266 MHz, with effective clock speed at

532 MHz. A little mathematics, and the bandwidth for PC600 RDRAM comes out to be

1.064 GB/sec, which happens to be exactly the same as PC133 SDRAM.

Memory organization

SDRAM

is usually mounted on a small PCB (printed circuit board) that’s called a DIMM

(Dual Inline Memory Module). RDRAM, on the other hand, is mounted on a different

slot called RIMM (Rambus Inline Memory Module). The number of SDRAM or RDRAM

chips in a module differ, depending on the bus width supported by individual RAM

chips. For example, one SDRAM module –which has a 64-bit data bus–could have

sixteen 4-bit wide or eight 8-bit wide SDRAM chips.

Advertisment

SDRAM is parallel in nature. This means that all memory chips

in a module of SDRAM are connected in parallel to the data bus that’s used to

read and write data. On the other hand, RDRAM has a serial nature in that

individual chips are connected in serial to the data bus. So, it’s arranged

logically as a single strip of RDRAMs through which the common 16-bit bus runs.

As a result of this, no RIMM slot on a motherboard can be left empty and must be

filled up by a special kind of PCB, called a continuity module.

Latency

All memories take some time to process a request for data and

transfer the same. This is called latency. Due to the serial nature of RDRAM,

the chips closest to the memory controller take much less time to respond to the

controller, compared to those that are located further away. This difference in

time can be quite a lot, since the farthest RDRAM chip can be about a foot away

from the memory controller. Hence, the controller must find a way to manage all

these different latencies. To do this, the controller finds out the highest

latency value in all the RDRAM chips during the boot phase, and then programs

the rest to work at that latency. Thus, even though the actual latency for RDRAM

may be very low, more often that not, the RIMM ends up working at a much higher

latency value.

Advertisment

Both the latest SDRAM as well as RDRAM have 20 nanoseconds

latency. But because of the reasons given above, RDRAM always has latency

greater than published figures.

To the benchmarks

We decided to see for ourselves how the two technologies

performed in comparison to each other. Our test setup included 128 MB of PC800

RDRAM on an Intel VC820 motherboard and 128 MB of PC100 SDRAM on an Asus CUBX

motherboard. All testing was done using a GeForce display adapter, PIII/700 MHz

CPU and 5,400 rpm Seagate hard drives.

Advertisment

First up, Business Winstone 99. This benchmark is a popular

suite of tests used for evaluating performance in business applications like MS

Office, Lotus SmartSuite, etc. This is an area where the primary advantage of

RDRAM–its bandwidth–is not stressed very much. The results favored SDRAM

slightly, as it managed to score 29.6 in comparison to RDRAM’s 28.8.

Next came Quake III Arena. Games are known to be very heavy

applications and quickly saturate whatever bandwidth and processing power you

throw at them. However, with the continued development of more and more advanced

AGP cards, the focus has been shifting away from the RAM and processor to the

display card. Our results showed as much, as both our test systems consistently

gave us the same frame rates. So, we thought we’d use CAD applications for

testing, thinking that we might be able to find some difference. For this, we

used the Indy3D benchmark to stress the PC. The benchmark has highly

customizable tests to stress your PC to the limit. No luck here either.

Everywhere we would get the same scores, no matter what we’d try.

The verdict

RDRAM has certainly been a step in the right direction. All

indicators in the current-day scenario point towards a future where more and

more bandwidth will be required. SDRAM simply cannot satisfy this insatiable

appetite. However, one has to think whether RDRAM is the right solution. The

most prohibitive factor in the whole RDRAM affair is its exorbitant cost. One

simply cannot be expected to pay the same amount for RAM, as for a whole new

computer. Then there are performance issues as well. A new memory called DDR

SDRAM is just around the corner. Expected to cost a little more than the current

SDRAM, DDR (Double Data Rate) memory will have even higher bandwidth than the

best RDRAM available today. Hence, for now, RDRAM seems to be a waste of money.

Advertisment