DDR2 or DDR3

[SIK1]

What memory would you recomend for a comp that is going to have too last at least four years with the only likely upgrade being a new vid card in a couple of years. The price differance at this time is significant between the two.

Or would you recomend a mobo that can use either DDR2, or DDR3.

From what I have heard, the performance gain over DDR2 is not all that great, although the slowest DDR3 is suppose to be faster than the fastest DDR2.

What I am really looking for is something that is going to be a strong performer in AH like I said for the next four or more years.

I plan on using a Intel cpu, xp pro, 4g of memory(I know it will only see 3 or so),if that has any bearing.

[Skuzzy]

Memory has gotten to be more about marketing than performance.

Example:  You can get DDR2-800 RAM that is faster than DDR2-1067 RAM.  How?  Latencies.  Some of the RAM companies (most actually) seem to be adding enough latency to the DDR2-800 RAM to be able to qualify it as DDR2-1067 RAM.  The RAM is not actually any faster at all.

DDR3 is looking a lot to be the same.  The slowest DDR3 RAM is rated faster than the fastest DDR2 RAM, but in real life use the performance is almost a wash.  Why?  Latency again.

However, DDR3 RAM should run cooler than DDR2 does.  That is theoritical as well.

For the cost, I do not see the benefit to DDR3 RAM, unless bragging about RAM that is marketed to be extra-zing-zing fast is the goal.  Careful though.  That bragging in a forum where people know what's up will get you laughed at quite a bit.

[SIK1]

Thanks Skuzzy that was the kind of response I was looking for.

I don't care about being able to brag about it. I just want it to work well for an eternity in computer time.
 
If DDR2 will still be viable performer after four years then I will go with DDR2 and put the money saved to better uses.

[Skuzzy]

DDR2 will disappear, but it will be a while.  Until DDR3 prices drop to push DDR2 out of the market, DDR2 will remain viable.

[lambo31]

I got the DDR3 and would recommend going with what Skuzzy said. It's not worth the extra cost right now. Infact I know the low latency ddr2 out performs my ddr3, and I sort of feel like the reviews I read stating at how grand the ddr3 was is misleading  .


Lambo

[Spatula]

sorry, this may be a slight hijack, but while we're on topic of RAM - i run some generic cheap-o DDR2-800 RAM. Does the whizbang uber-brands with their tighter timings really make that much difference??

[Charge]

Observed with test programs (e.g. SiSoft Sandra) it does but I don't really know, although it has some effect on 3DMark too so it depends. You may not see a difference in every day use anyway so just adding memory usually has more benefit that buying "faster" memory.

I have usually tried to purchase memory with as low latencies as possible but I'm not willing to pay too much extra for it. I just decide the investment frames and see what is best memory fitting to that frame and I buy it.

-C+

[Skuzzy]

Generally speaking, lower CAS values make for faster access and it can make a difference.  It depends on the application.  If you are I/O bound, such as in a real-time video editing application, then it might not be worth it.  If you are a developer publishing large applications, then it can make a world of difference.

Basically, anything memory bound and not requiring a lot of I/O stands to benefit from lower latency memory.

Iti s quite possible to get DDR2-800 memory that outperforms DDR2-1067 memory.  Those are just funny numbers without much meaning on their own any more.