Talk:GDDR3 SDRAM

From the article
From the article (emphasis mine):

DDR3 memory for systems is not expected to reach the market until 2006 or thereabouts, said Dean McCarron, principal analyst at Mercury Research, in an interview earlier this week.

No link has been provided, to corroborate the assertion, and a date for this quote isn't included.

A quick search revealed this.

Faster?
Why does the one line say, "To improve bandwidth, GDDR3 memory transfers 4 bits of data per pin in 2 clock cycles."? Doesn't DDR1 memory also do this via the double data rate? Geekosaurus
 * If I remember the GDDR3 specifications correctly, it's something a bit different than what the article intends; a "DDR" interface, also known as a "double-pumped" interface, uses a technique to send data twice in the same clock signal. Meanwhile, GDDR3 ALSO sends out two signals per internal clock cycle; hence, it works out to four data segments per clock cycle. Nottheking (talk) 01:35, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

"Upcoming" Playstation 3?
PS3 is already out, someone should update this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.121.252.138 (talk) 18:42, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Designed by ATI?
I don't know that much on this subject, but the first time I ever saw GDDR3 RAM it was on an nVidia product. Is the first line of this article a mistake or did ATI actually share its technology with its chief competitor? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.38.174.232 (talk) 06:19, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
 * To clarify, it's not an outright "technology;" unlike the GPU, it wasn't as if ATi specifically designed a chip; rather, it was a standard, that one of the cited sources stated ATi promoted the use of. As it happened, yes, nVidia was the first company to actually use it for graphics cards. (specifically, the GeForce FX 5700, I believe) So no, the first line was NOT a mistake, and it wasn't that ATi "shared" it, so much as that it really wasn't theirs to hold. Nottheking (talk) 01:35, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Why a separate page ?
Why does GDDR3 rate a separate page when GDDR2 is redirected to the DDR2 topic ? 24.17.110.63 (talk) 17:48, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
 * This is because there actually is no such memory as GDDR2; it's a misnomer; any time it's spoken of, the writer is actually referring to DDR2. However, GDDR3 is a separate type of memory that is NOT the same as DDR3, and should never be confused with it.


 * On the same subject, a more recent edit has made a good-faith mistake and included the term "GDDR2" in the article, which I will promptly correct. Nottheking (talk) 01:35, 6 April 2010 (UTC)


 * I reverted your GDDR2 to DDR2 change, GDDR2 was actually a variant of DDR used on a very limited amount of graphics cards (FX5800, FX5700U rev 1, Radeon 9800 GDDR2-edition). The current usage of GDDR is a misnomer though but not all manufacturers use it. --Denniss (talk) 07:11, 6 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Is it possible for you to cite this? Actually, looking over some of the articles, I'm seeing a LOT that suddenly needs citations badly. There is no article (or sub-section of DDR SDRAM) to mention even the existence of "GDDR2," let alone any cited links; my own searching for the cards you mention do not name GDDR2; according to the articles I can find, the 9800 series uses plain DDR, the non-GDDR3 version of the FX 5700 Ultra uses DDR2, and the FX 5800 Ultra uses DDR2, as well. The links provided are merely an example of the number of ones I was able to readily dig up with Google; on them, I couldn't find any reference to a "GDDR2." In fact, the on a Google search for "GDDR2," with the exception of the #1 search result, (which is Wikipedia's own [DDR2 SDRAM] page) every single result I find... Was an example of the aforementioned misnomer. So if you have asource to cite, please put it, otherwise all the references will be liable for a lot of tags. Nottheking (talk) 15:50, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

The wii also has GDDR3 memory.
As per all available sources. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.211.40.150 (talk) 22:29, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

sDDR3 versus gDDR3
I've come across mention of something called sddr3. "S" appears to mean standard or system. This is essentially chips of DDR3 ram meant for use in motherboards but are used instead on video card. The net result is a cheaper but slightly slower video card. Maybe we should include this in the article. Vmaldia (talk) 13:40, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * There's nothingl like sDDR3, newer low end cards use either standard DDR3 chips (or slower standard DDR2-chips) while medium range cards often use GDDR3 (DDR2-based, optimized for use on Graphics cards) and high-end cards use GDDR5. --Denniss (talk) 17:04, 25 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Perhaps 'sDDR3' is being used as a retronym for what is properly simply called 'DDR3'. As far as I know, like what Denniss says, no video card manufacturer has ever used this term. If you can find an example where you saw this (be it a tech site, company site, online store, etc.) please provide a link. Historically, since the first introduction of DDR-SDRAM for use in video cards, they've used six different types of memory from three "families;" DDR being the first, with DDR2, GDDR3, and GDDR4 all being one "family" (in that GDDR3/4 are variants of DDR2) and finally DDR3 and GDDR5 as a third "family." (with the last being a variant/modification of DDR3) Each progressive increment in performance costs more than the grade below, (on a per-cell basis) so even as of 2010, some manufacturers still produce new cards that use even ordinary DDR, where reduced production (and hence sale) prices are more important than performance. There have been a few cases of DDR3 showing up in ATI Radeon cards, as evidenced by Anandtech discussing this change, as well as AMD's own specifications. To date, I've found no verifiable cases of 'ordinary' DDR3 showing up in NVIDIA GeForce cards. Nottheking (talk) 11:12, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Synchronous dynamic random-access memory which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 19:15, 14 February 2019 (UTC)