This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Double data rate article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
|
This page desperately needs a rewrite - I've corrected content, but don't have the time available currently to produce material up to the wikipedia standard. -- Odii 11:14, August 1, 2005 (UTC)
I disagree with this bit:
therefore there is justification for saying that e.g. 200 MHz DDR memory has a "400 MHz bus speed" -- it actually does have, for the data lines.
The author seems to have missed the point of why it's inaccurate to use Hertz to refer to the data rate. It's not because only the data lines are operating at this speed; it's because Hertz is cycles per second and the data lines don't cycle, they transfer arbitrary data. Therefore MT/s or sometimes Mbit/s should be used. In fact this line pretty much contradicts what's written earlier in the article about careful usage of units. -- 80.189.138.93 ( talk) 11:16, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
effectively doubling the data transmission rate without having to deal with the additional problems of timing skew that increasing the number of data lines would introduce
Isn't the more-direct alternative increasing the actual clock rate? What's the reason for doubling the data rate but using the same clock? -- Dtcdthingy 11:22, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Bus Size's Effect on DDR-xxx PC-xxxx Designation
The article gave an example that DDR memory clocked at 100MHz would transfer data at 200MHz (DDR-200) and would be designated PC-1600. How is the 1600 derived from the 100MHz? Is this assuming a 16-bit word size?
So the data is sent on both rising and falling edges. How about the addresses? Are they accepted at the same double (two-edge) rate, or is only one address accepted and two bits (or words) of data accessed from, say, successive memory locations for each address accepted? - R. S. Shaw 06:42, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
I suggest we move the contents of this article and the one on QDR into Pumping (computer systems). This will tidy up by reducing duplication (e.g. how SDR, DDR and QDR relate to each other) and allow us to easily add newer DR techniques such as ODR. If there are good reasons to keep pumping, DDR and QDR as separate articles please put them forward. Guffydrawers ( talk) 12:19, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Double data rate article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
|
This page desperately needs a rewrite - I've corrected content, but don't have the time available currently to produce material up to the wikipedia standard. -- Odii 11:14, August 1, 2005 (UTC)
I disagree with this bit:
therefore there is justification for saying that e.g. 200 MHz DDR memory has a "400 MHz bus speed" -- it actually does have, for the data lines.
The author seems to have missed the point of why it's inaccurate to use Hertz to refer to the data rate. It's not because only the data lines are operating at this speed; it's because Hertz is cycles per second and the data lines don't cycle, they transfer arbitrary data. Therefore MT/s or sometimes Mbit/s should be used. In fact this line pretty much contradicts what's written earlier in the article about careful usage of units. -- 80.189.138.93 ( talk) 11:16, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
effectively doubling the data transmission rate without having to deal with the additional problems of timing skew that increasing the number of data lines would introduce
Isn't the more-direct alternative increasing the actual clock rate? What's the reason for doubling the data rate but using the same clock? -- Dtcdthingy 11:22, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Bus Size's Effect on DDR-xxx PC-xxxx Designation
The article gave an example that DDR memory clocked at 100MHz would transfer data at 200MHz (DDR-200) and would be designated PC-1600. How is the 1600 derived from the 100MHz? Is this assuming a 16-bit word size?
So the data is sent on both rising and falling edges. How about the addresses? Are they accepted at the same double (two-edge) rate, or is only one address accepted and two bits (or words) of data accessed from, say, successive memory locations for each address accepted? - R. S. Shaw 06:42, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
I suggest we move the contents of this article and the one on QDR into Pumping (computer systems). This will tidy up by reducing duplication (e.g. how SDR, DDR and QDR relate to each other) and allow us to easily add newer DR techniques such as ODR. If there are good reasons to keep pumping, DDR and QDR as separate articles please put them forward. Guffydrawers ( talk) 12:19, 9 November 2015 (UTC)