Memory question

[DiscoCam]

Hi All

I recently bought 2Gb of DDR2 ram to replace the 1Gb I currently have. Does anyone know if I'm better off running 2Gb dual channel or plug it all in and run 3Gb without dual channel?

Just running XP pro and do a bit of video & image editing.

Thanks

[HangOver]

Hi All

I recently bought 2Gb of DDR2 ram to replace the 1Gb I currently have. Does anyone know if I'm better off running 2Gb dual channel or plug it all in and run 3Gb without dual channel?

Just running XP pro and do a bit of video & image editing.

Thanks

Hmmmmmmmmm now there's an interesting question..................

In general dual channel gives faster through put which is what you want for memory intensive tasks BUT...... capacity is also important especially if you are editing large files.
Large as in say 1-2GB plus.

I would suggest one of two options :

1. put in the 2GB in dual mode and use a swap file, (virtual memory) of around the 1-2GB mark. Make sure that the minimum and maximum figures are the same. This will give you the through put you need and the extra memory if you use larger files.

2. If you generally use smaller files <1GB go for the full 3GB and a small swap file say 200mb this way you can store the whole file in ram giving you faster access and less seek time on your drive which tends to slow things down.

So maybe you are thinking why not put in the 3GB plus a 1-2GB swap file, best of both worlds, well not really. The larger swap file compensates for the smaller capacity of memory and the dual channel makes up in speed the slight drop you will get in extra disk access and visa-versa

If you do more editing than encoding go for the 2gb the CPU is more the deciding factor in encoding than ram, in XP over 2GB won't make that much difference.

It is quite late and I hope this semi-drunken babble makes sense, if so GREAT !
If not ooops

[DiscoCam]

Thanks Hang Over. I'd forgotten about the effect memory has on the size of the swap file and had better clean some more crap off the partition that Windows is on. Think I might bung it all in, reduce the swap file right down and see what happens.:spudnikbeanie:

Thanks again

Cameron

[lro11]

32bit operating system won't recognize any more than about 2.5gig of ram

[Pedro_The_Swift]

32bit operating system won't recognize any more than about 2.5gig of ram

isnt that just Vista?

[lro11]

isnt that just Vista?

no both vista and xp have 32 and 64 bit versions I run vista 64 bit with 4 gig of ram and a 32 bit xp machine with 4 gig of ram and it will only recognize 2.81gig of ram

[Pedro_The_Swift]

thats what I meant--
32bit vista will only load 2gb

[lro11]

32 bit XP too quite stupid really as the drivers for 64bit are a bit thin that is why I run two machines. but to stick to the question at hand put the three sticks in and enjoy it

[HangOver]

maximum physical memory limits:

XP 32bit 4GB
XP 64bit 128GB

Vista 32bit 4GB (except the budget "starter" edition)
Vista 64bit 8-128GB depending on version



You will be fine with the 3GB

[HangOver]

sigh.....

I really must update one day.....

Don't laugh now but my trusty steed is running a whole 376mb RAM :eek:

I wouldn't laugh, 376 will run windows 98/2000 quite OK
Struggles a bit with XP but ok if you are just doing internet and email.

If it works don't fix it !

Just because you CAN get a vista pc with XXX ram and XXX CPU doesn't mean you need to if your current one does the job. Some people feel they have to upgrade just because it's available.

Saying that I just upgraded my PC ;)

[feral]

sigh.....

I really must update one day.....

Don't laugh now but my trusty steed is running a whole 376mb RAM :eek:




Stick with me NM and you'll be wearing diamonds :D

I have just completed my cpu upgrade....500 to 800. It really flies now :p

These other kids don't know what their missing dealing in 10 year old junk. They just think the solution is to buy another part or software and the jobs done.

There's no fun in that :wallbash: and my computer runs quicker than my brothers geewiz wizbag I've paid thousands for it ....

[Bushie]

Headache!!!!!!!


You want to see a 600mb machine with 128mb running XP with msmessanger firefox, windows media player, and limewire all running at the same time. My daughter wonders why its sloooooow.

and I wonder why I get capped :mad::mad:



Martyn

[RonMcGr]

My flash 2800 with 1.5gb of ram cr*pped it self two days ago.
The motherboard fried. My Son, a puter IT, said it was the cr*ppy AMD thingy I had.

He is putting together an Intel 2.4 with 2Gb of RAM at the moment, with latest motherboard and HDD.

I'm currently using the wifes puter, which appears to be better than the thing I had. Down side is I have no access to all my e-mail addresses, programs and files.:(

[Pedro_The_Swift]

The world should be thankfull there are/were crappy AMD things around,,,

[HangOver]

until about 5-6 years ago I used to laugh at Intel why would you buy one when AMD where cheaper faster and just as reliable !

Now they are much of a much-ness, one year Intel is faster one year AMD is faster. I never buy cutting edge anyhow just too much of a difference.
Now I just shrug and see which one at that moment in time gives best bang-for-buck.

[DiscoCam]

If it works don't fix it !

Just because you CAN get a vista pc with XXX ram and XXX CPU doesn't mean you need to if your current one does the job. Some people feel they have to upgrade just because it's available.

I was quite surprised when I upgraded from a P3 450mhz to an AMD2100 just how much faster internet pages & my email client loaded. Now with broadband and all of the extra content (flash etc) on web pages I think it is a worthwhile exercise for the average user to upgrade periodically.

Cheers

[Pedro_The_Swift]

The world should be thankfull there are/were crappy AMD things around,,,


until about 5-6 years ago I used to laugh at Intel why would you buy one when AMD where cheaper faster and just as reliable !

Now they are much of a much-ness, one year Intel is faster one year AMD is faster. I never buy cutting edge anyhow just too much of a difference.
Now I just shrug and see which one at that moment in time gives best bang-for-buck.


imagine where we'd be if AMD hadnt been kicking Intels **** every couple of years,,,,

talk about competition being good for business,,,,

its been good for the world as we know it,,,;)

[HangOver]

I think it is a worthwhile exercise for the average user to upgrade periodically.
Cheers

Yes your right to a certain extent if say you are running a slow PIII etc but if you have a 512K ADSL or 56k dial up it doesn't matter if you have a 1.8 with 512mb or a quad Xeon with 100GB you wont be making your connection any quicker and lets face it I would suggest that 70%+ of what an average user does is internet n email.
But computer really it's horses for courses it depends on what you need it for. My home laptop is an M1.7 & 1GB of ram. I also have a reasonable DCore desktop decent video card and loads of disk space which I hardly ever even turn on. I just prefer the notebook and it does what I want.

What I'm trying to say is if your computer runs real slow and it annoys you upgrade, else keep your money for your Landy.
You don't need to keep up with the Jones's !


imagine where we'd be if AMD hadnt been kicking Intels **** every couple of years
x2

[RonMcGr]

until about 5-6 years ago I used to laugh at Intel why would you buy one when AMD where cheaper faster and just as reliable !

Now they are much of a much-ness, one year Intel is faster one year AMD is faster. I never buy cutting edge anyhow just too much of a difference.
Now I just shrug and see which one at that moment in time gives best bang-for-buck.

According to my Son, the computer guru, AMD runs hotter than Intel. My last two boards (in 4 years) had AMD (cheaper), both died from heat, fan failure...

I'm hoping the so called flash intel will last longer than 2 years!

[HangOver]

According to my Son, the computer guru, AMD runs hotter than Intel. My last two boards (in 4 years) had AMD (cheaper), both died from heat, fan failure...

I'm hoping the so called flash intel will last longer than 2 years!

I have never really looked at actual temp per cpu but if your fans died you can't really blame AMD for that, can you ?

Either way on your new board ensure you enable fan monitoring.
It beeps it's head off if your fan dies.
Your mobo should also be set to shut down if your CPU reaches more than X degrees. X being user specified.

[Pedro_The_Swift]

this has been pretty standard for a while now,,,
and last gen (90nm)Intels ran MUCH hotter than amds

[RonMcGr]

I have never really looked at actual temp per cpu but if your fans died you can't really blame AMD for that, can you ?

Either way on your new board ensure you enable fan monitoring.
It beeps it's head off if your fan dies.
Your mobo should also be set to shut down if your CPU reaches more than X degrees. X being user specified.

It did beep and shut down, and , the fans were all working.
You get what you pay for :)