DDR3 vs GDDR3..which is better?

[µCOM-4]

http://www.elpida.com/en/news/2005/08-23.html

TOKYO, JAPAN, August 23, 2005 - Elpida Memory, Inc. (Elpida), Japan's leading global supplier of Dynamic Random Access Memory (DRAM), today announced the development of 512 Megabit DDR3 SDRAM — the next-generation memory for computing applications such as notebooks, desktop PCs and servers. The new DDR3 architecture will feature high-speed data transfer of up to 1333 Megabits per second (Mbps), double the speed of the DDR2 architecture currently in volume production.

To achieve simultaneous high-speed operation with low-power consumption, Elpida has incorporated "dual-gate" transistor technology. This technology suppresses the leakage current in the DRAM device — an unwanted side effect that occurs when pursuing low-voltage operation while maintaining or improving transistor performance. The "dual-gate" transistor has recently been used for high-performance processors; however, this is its first use within a DRAM device.

Anyone know how DDR3 compares to GDDR3 with respect to heat and performance? Would this be a good alternative to XDR or GDDR3 for a console?

 

[Powderkeg]

http://www.elpida.com/en/news/2005/08-23.html



Anyone know how DDR3 compares to GDDR3 with respect to heat and performance? Would this be a good alternative to XDR or GDDR3 for a console?

DDR = System RAM (What's plugged into your motherboard on a PC)
GDDR = Graphics RAM (The G means Graphics)

And 1333 mbits per second is way too slow for graphics work.

 

[Colourless]

Is that 1333 MBit/s per pin?

[Edited]

No obviously not from reading the PR

 

[Guden Oden]

And 1333 mbits per second is way too slow for graphics work.

They always measure this per pin. Typically there are 16 data pins per memory IC, ie 8 chips in parallel for 128-bit dual channel processor memory bus = 21-ish GB/s. Not bad.

Of course, no CPU allows this kind of bandwidth yet, so we won't see this tech introduced tomorrow, that's for sure.

 

[Powderkeg]

They always measure this per pin. Typically there are 16 data pins per memory IC, ie 8 chips in parallel for 128-bit dual channel processor memory bus = 21-ish GB/s. Not bad.

Not bad in 2002.

But it's just a little over half the bandwidth of current high end PC cards. (Nvidia is pushing 35+ GB/sec and ATI is at 37+ GB/sec with current cards)

It's fantastic for system RAM but too slow for current graphics cards.

 

[Guden Oden]

Comparing apples and oranges!

But it's just a little over half the bandwidth of current high end PC cards. (Nvidia is pushing 35+ GB/sec and ATI is at 37+ GB/sec with current cards)

...On twice as wide buses, yes. Ie, 256-bit of this DDR3 would do nearly 43GB/s.

Only thing currently faster per pin than this memory seems to be XDR.

 

[Xenus]

Oh but XDR2 has been announced and is 2.5 times as fast as as XDR and has a few new nifty features. I hope it gets used as on a 128 bit bus it would potentially have 125 Gigybytes per second of bandwith say goodbye to bandwith a bottleneck.

 

[Powderkeg]

...On twice as wide buses, yes. Ie, 256-bit of this DDR3 would do nearly 43GB/s.

And 512Mbit GDDR3 can hit 51+ GB/sec.

 

[Guden Oden]

...Yet that speed isn't something we've seen, despite GDDR's been out for 1.5+ years now. The latest and greatest NV vidcards use 1300MHz memory I believe (could be slower grades overclocked), which is a little short of hitting 1600 speed.

 

[MfA]

I wouldnt be surprised if by the time XDR2 is actually available a GDDR-X standard is also present with similar performance (they only need 4 GHz for the same bandwith per data pin).