penguinrusty
New Member
Is it true that if you have an AMD processor and four 512mb sticks of ram (all the same, running in dual channel) that it slows it down? That's what my friend told me...
AMD + 4 512mb sticks = BAD
- Thread starter penguinrusty
- Start date
ItlanChode
New Member
I don't see why that would be true.. unless it's cheap RAM.
The_Other_One
VIP Member
I'm not exactly sure what it is, but you have 1T and 2T(and even 0T I beleive but not many machines can run at this. If you have one stick, or two in duel channel, you'll normally be running at 1T. Any more, you'll be running at 2T... Maybe someone can elaborate on this, but it's suppose to be less performace...
jancz3rt
<b>VIP Member</b>
hey
Well I have come across the fact that when you have an older revision A64 such as the Manchester core, you could run into speed problems when filling up all the RAM slots (4). That's due to the memory controller on die of the processor. The never Venice revisions have an improved memory controller which should allow the RAM to remain running at 400Mhz if that was its intended speed. With the older core, you could be forced to run at 333Mhz. That's the problem that I have been made aware of. I myself am running at 450Mhz in dual channel with two 512MB sticks. I am going to get another 2 x 512MB and wonder if I will be forced to lower the speed of the RAM.
JAN
Well I have come across the fact that when you have an older revision A64 such as the Manchester core, you could run into speed problems when filling up all the RAM slots (4). That's due to the memory controller on die of the processor. The never Venice revisions have an improved memory controller which should allow the RAM to remain running at 400Mhz if that was its intended speed. With the older core, you could be forced to run at 333Mhz. That's the problem that I have been made aware of. I myself am running at 450Mhz in dual channel with two 512MB sticks. I am going to get another 2 x 512MB and wonder if I will be forced to lower the speed of the RAM.
JAN
fade2green514
Active Member
hmm thats interesting... i would assume the X2's got rid of this problem correct?
Mr.Suave
New Member
I'm not exactly sure if you have to lower speed if you have 4 sticks, but I kno that you wouldn't notice any difference in performance. I kno this becuase bitech did a test on different number of ram. like 4x512mb , 2x1gb, etc.
I'd give a link but I'm on my phone so ill get the link once I'm home
edit: here's the link http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2006/02/15/memory_-_is_more_always_better/1.html
I'd give a link but I'm on my phone so ill get the link once I'm home
edit: here's the link http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2006/02/15/memory_-_is_more_always_better/1.html
Last edited:
34erd
New Member
AMD hasnt perfected its memory controller yet. For socket 754, running 4 DS DIMMS will reduce the speed to 333 Mhz, running at the 2T command rate. For socket 939 running 4 DS DIMMS will keep speed at DDR400, but the command rate will still be 2T. 2T slows your RAM down alot, more then the higher timings of 2 X 1 Gb do. You also (generely) wont be able to clock your RAM as high when it runs 4 X 512. Their are some exceptions though.
Boards like the DFI Lanparty nForce 4 SLI-DR eXpert and DFI Lanparty RDX-200 corssfire have been designed to "do the imposible" and can run 4 DS DIMMS 1T, DDR400. You still cant clock very high with them at 1T though, you can get to maybe DDR405 before having to switch back to 2T.
Boards like the DFI Lanparty nForce 4 SLI-DR eXpert and DFI Lanparty RDX-200 corssfire have been designed to "do the imposible" and can run 4 DS DIMMS 1T, DDR400. You still cant clock very high with them at 1T though, you can get to maybe DDR405 before having to switch back to 2T.
Charles_Lee
New Member
well its cheeaper to get 4x 512mb than to get 2x 1gb ram,,,
unless the brand of that ram is like "ultra" its can't harm you by putting 4 of them...
i heard 4x 1 gb is not good though.
cuz window xp doesn't support 4gb yet.
i gatta wait untill window vista comes out which supports all 4gb dual channel.
unless the brand of that ram is like "ultra" its can't harm you by putting 4 of them...
i heard 4x 1 gb is not good though.
cuz window xp doesn't support 4gb yet.
i gatta wait untill window vista comes out which supports all 4gb dual channel.
Last edited:
Which ones can?
There's about a 5% penalty for running 2T comapred to 1T however this depends on the board .. for instance, the ASUS A8R-MVP which runs 2T default will often outperform or at least match other motherboards running 1T. Furthermore, IMO, 2GB 2T is better than 1GB 1T any day of the week.
Manchester ... old? What core are you running? Furthermore Venice.Manchester/SanDiego/Toledo all use the same memory controller, I think you've got your codenames a bit mixed up?
Indeed although id argue you might as well run 2T and jack the clock
That should not be the case: the only difference between two and four sticks as far as memory access is concerned is that you need to use a command rate of 2T instead of 1T (IIRC the DFI RX200 board can pull of 1T but thats an anomaly), you should still be using DDR400.
penguinrusty
New Member
So with my A64 3500+ Venice core w/ four 512 sticks would or wouldn't be slowed down?
penguinrusty
New Member
So I can set it to DDR400?