Simple RAM question

G

GamerMan2.0

New Member
I just read the RAM 101 section in the forum. I didnt quite know what to think about it. I was wondering if its better to fill up all 4 ram slots, (4x512) or the way Im running now (2x1gb). I took the advice I got in here and bought me the 5200+ (very nice). Its tax time so I have a little extra $$$ so I'm thinking about some ram. If I do change the ram I'm going with ddr2 800.

Thanks.
 
Last edited:
Two larger dimms in dual channel mode always seem to run better since there is no jump over from one dimm to the next once the first becomes filled. Things actually run smoother without the tendency for memory holes or gaps in data. For the ultimate boost for CAD and other large software development applications you would go with 4 not two 1gb dimms. Some boards now run the 2gb dimms. You generally don't need that much but... that was also said about 128 256mb, and 512mb at one time.
 
It's better to run 2x1GB, that lets you run at 1T command rate (better performance, not a ton better but better none-the-less).
 
He didn't mention if he was in dual channel now did he? 4 x 512 dual channel would be faster than 2 x 1gb not dual channel, wouldn't it... with 2 x 1gb dual channel being the optimum? Or 1 x 2gb?
 
He didn't mention if he was in dual channel now did he? 4 x 512 dual channel would be faster than 2 x 1gb not dual channel
Click to expand...
Yes, but if 4x 512MB can be run dual channel, 2x 1GB can be run dual channel as well, so I'm not seeing your point.
 
PohTayToez said:
He didn't mention if he was in dual channel now did he? 4 x 512 dual channel would be faster than 2 x 1gb not dual channel, wouldn't it... with 2 x 1gb dual channel being the optimum? Or 1 x 2gb?
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? why would he not run in dual channel with two 1gb sticks!
 
He was asking which would be faster, which completely relies on which, if any, of his RAM is dual channel. People were giving him answers making possible false assumptions.
 
No, there were no false assumptions. With 4 or 2 sticks of RAM, if your board supports dual channel you will run it. 2 sticks can run at a faster command rate (1T vs 2T for 4). In every case 2 sticks is better is better than 4 (assuming timings & speed is the same for the RAM in question).
 
PC eye said:
Two larger dimms in dual channel mode always seem to run better since there is no jump over from one dimm to the next once the first becomes filled. Things actually run smoother without the tendency for memory holes or gaps in data. For the ultimate boost for CAD and other large software development applications you would go with 4 not two 1gb dimms. Some boards now run the 2gb dimms. You generally don't need that much but... that was also said about 128 256mb, and 512mb at one time.
Click to expand...


FALSE ASSUMPTION.

In the first post, nowhere does he say anything about dual channel. It's up in the air whether his RAM runs it or not.

Second post, PC Eye, no offense against him, makes a post that clearly shoes that he is assuming that GM2.0 is running dual channel.
 
He has a dual channel board, he was asking if four 512s would be better than two 1gbs sticks he already has! Why would it not be running in dual channel unless he got two completely different sticks?
 
That's true he was. Although he was also assuming using 4x512 would be in dual channel. So I still don't see how 2 dimms can be seen as worse than 4.
 
That adds a little more credability, but he still never mentioned dual channel.

Also, his motherboard supports 4GB at the very least, so the best route would be to add a gig or two instead.
 
I apologize. I had been previously misinformed about how dual channel worked. You are completely right.

Still, wouldn't another gig or two work better? :p
 
He already has two 1gb sticks, he was just wondering if 512s would be faster. I have 2gbs on one of my setups and its enough for right now but in the near future 4gbs will be coming on!
 
Right, he said he had a little extra money, and was planning to spend it on 4 x 512, but wouldn't that money be better invested in another gig or two?
 
I dont know if any performance gain going from 2gbs to 4gbs, not anything hardly eats up more than 2gbs. But that might change with Vista!
 
The only things you would see eating up more then 2gb of ram is CAD or some super large applications even some used specifically for graphics and game design. This could also included large scientific applications using advanced math for enormous calculations. But these would generally been in corporate or scientific communities and not in general use for pc games or tv tuners, WMP, or just about any other home user application.

Vista being the latest Windows should be seeing support for more memory, larger hard drive potentials, and go further then XP in many ways. With the older versions like 98SE 512mb of ram was the limit without a special edit of one of the main dos files found at the root of the hard drive. I believe that was the autoexec.bat file there in order to see 1gb of ram installed on a 98 machine without Windows stalling. XP support over 2terabyte of drive space over 98's limit there. The updated fdisk made it to 48-55gb max.

Following the Socket 754 model boards which were strictly single channel all newer AMD boards along with Intel P4, D, and now Core 2 are dual channel capable. To run one of these models in single mode you would have to install all memory(two dimms) in the first channel's slots. That would see the secondary channel's slots empty. Who would do such a thing? :eek:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top