Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Hardware - Troubleshooting and Discussion > Mac Notebooks > If the Powerboook is really getting DDR2...

If the Powerboook is really getting DDR2...
Thread Tools
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2005, 12:01 PM
 
If the rumors are true, and the next Powerbook update includes DDR2-533 but no new CPUs, I have one very simple question: Why? The current G4s have a databus that is maxed out at 166 MHz. Regular DDR-400 has more than twice that bandwidth - why increase it further? Does Apple really expect the HD and graphics board to use more than twice the bandwidth that the CPU does? DDR2 had a higher latency than DDR last I saw - whay pay that price if you can't use the extra bandwidth?
     
Moderator
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2005, 12:16 PM
 
1) The 7448 is taking the G4 to 200MHz FSB. Which doesn't warrant DDR2 either, but...
2) DDR2 RAM is already cheaper than DDR and is only getting cheaper.
I like chicken
I like liver
Meow Mix, Meow Mix
Please de-liv-er
     
P  (op)
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 17, 2005, 05:07 AM
 
Right, so it's in practice a cost-saving measure.. I'll be expecting a price cut from Apple, then...
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 17, 2005, 10:50 AM
 
DDR2 also consumes less power (runs at 1.8V instead of 2.6V).
     
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Jose, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 17, 2005, 11:49 AM
 
Originally Posted by mduell
DDR2 also consumes less power (runs at 1.8V instead of 2.6V).
DDR is 2.5V actually, not 2.6V. Guessing this is a typo.

Steve
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 17, 2005, 12:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by ibook_steve
DDR is 2.5V actually, not 2.6V. Guessing this is a typo.
Crucial says 2.5V at PC2100/2700, 2.6V at PC3200, and 2.8V at PC4000.
But of course the PBs use PC2700, so it would be 2.5V.
     
   
Thread Tools
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:10 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2011 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.7 © 2000-2011, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2