On Wed, 5 Dec 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Yes. SDRAM are cheaper. RDRAM are the latest and more expensive.
> Right! Maybe his desk space is not fitted for 17" monitor. That's a good
> idea.:) Viewsonic brand of monitors are also OK. Their resolution are good
> but they're are costly than AOC. I prefer Viewsonic, Mag or Philips
> monitor. If he will watch VCDs then 17" monitor is better.
>
only intel is promoting RDRAM. the rest of the motherboard chipset giants
make use of DDR RAM. that means if you go for a packaged cpu set with an
intel pentium4 chip, it's most likely the vendor placed in a RDRAM-only
motherboard. what i fear is that you may not be able to add in
extra RAM in the future in case RDRAM dies in favor of DDR. the solution
is to have the vendor replace it with a DDR capable motherboard but
i dont know what chipset to use. maybe the Via Apollo P4X266A chipset for
intel pentium4s will do. this is the brother of the KT266A chipset for
athlons.
anyway, dont cut costs on ram. dont opt for SDRAM anymore since you now
have better choices above. on a side note, DDR is comparable to RDRAM
except that DDR is less expensive. being more expensive doesnt always
equate to better performance.
pong
_
Philippine Linux Users Group. Web site and archives at http://plug.linux.org.ph
To leave: send "unsubscribe" in the body to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To subscribe to the Linux Newbies' List: send "subscribe" in the body to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
