AMD to Enter RAM Market with Radeon-branded DDR3
by Kristian Vättö on August 8, 2011 4:25 AM ESTAMD's website suggests that the company will be entering the RAM market soon with their own RAM modules. The modules will be branded as Radeon, just like AMD's GPUs. At first, AMD will launch three series: Entertainment, ULTRA PRO Gaming and Enterprise. All three will have the same density of 2GB and are based on the DDR3 standard, but the speeds will vary. The Entertainment series is 1333MHz and the ULTRA PRO Gaming series is 1600MHz. Timings are 9-9-9 and 11-11-11 respectively. All three series also share the voltage of 1.5V. The speeds of the Enterprise series are to be announced. Obviously, AMD claims that their memory is the most ideal for their APU and CPU systems but at least the specifications are no different from other manufacturers' RAM.
The more interesting fact is that the actual DRAM chips are also made by AMD. AMD hasn't been into the DRAM business before (or if they have, they have been very quiet about it), so this is a surprise. However, it is possible that the chips have just been rebranded and thus been manufactured by another company, but unfortunately we don't know any details at this point.
Update: Back in 2010, we did see MSI GeForce 210 with ATI DDR2, but we never found out why.
Pricing and availability are unknown, but the Entertainment series modules are already on sale in Japan (hence the pictures).
Update 2: NCIX is selling the 2GB Entertainment series modules for 9.99CAD (~$10.11) each, which actually makes them the most inexpensive 1333MHz 2GB modules in NCIX. However, this is with 10CAD rebate so the retail price might be closer to 20CAD per 2GB. NCIXUS doesn't seem to sell these yet though, hence US availability is still uncertain.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
22 Comments
View All Comments
Ryan Smith - Monday, August 8, 2011 - link
Just to throw some more fuel on the fire, this isn't the first time we've seen this happen. Back in early 2010 we saw a video card with ATI branded DDR2 - we never did find out why.http://www.anandtech.com/show/2939
Kristian Vättö - Monday, August 8, 2011 - link
Thanks Ryan! I updated the article :)MartinT - Monday, August 8, 2011 - link
What a strange market to enter, and with such uninspiring products to boot. I hope they just licensed their trademarks and logo to a enterprising OEM, cause I don't see how a memory division could help their bottom line.jabber - Monday, August 8, 2011 - link
Yes certainly doesnt look anything special.Wont match any of my motherboards looking like that either.
bigboxes - Monday, August 8, 2011 - link
Yeah, if they don't have a heatspreader the size of an anvil they won't get a dime of my money. :eyerollTargon - Monday, August 8, 2011 - link
If it's decent quality memory and has a competitive price/performance, why not though? OEMs would probably go for it if AMD sells it cheaper as a part of a package deal.MonkeyPaw - Monday, August 8, 2011 - link
That's the thing, memory is cheap. Then again, not all memory in the same class is priced the same. I guess there's room for an easy markup.Lifted - Monday, August 8, 2011 - link
But it's such a tiny fraction of people who would spend any more than the bare minimum on RAM. Must be a licensing thing. Perhaps there will be more products such as motherboards, cases, heatsinks, etc., that will use the Radeon brand.BikeHelmet - Tuesday, August 9, 2011 - link
Do any of us really know what the cost is to make RAM?Who's to say they aren't making a profit at $9.99/stick? If Chinese motherboard manufacturers can sell high end boards for $30 USD, that's the signal to me that typical North American pricing is set as high as it is not to cover manufacturing costs, but rather to cover R&D and provide a healthy profit.
But if the R&D is already done, and you're a chip fabrication company, there'd be a pretty low barrier to entire?
Maybe AMD hopes to get some of the next-gen console pie? (Or do those have everything stuck straight to the motherboard?)
BikeHelmet - Tuesday, August 9, 2011 - link
That should be "entry" - not "entire". My first post here, and I make a flub like that. =P