Memory question 17 replies

  • 1
  • 2

Please wait...

Giz

Massivis Effectivous

116,112 XP

8th May 2002

0 Uploads

9,297 Posts

922 Threads

#1 10 years ago

I'm currently running two 512MB @ 5300. I ordered 2 1GB @ 6400. Question is: Is it better to run all 4 of the sticks and gain 3GB of RAM or take out the 2 512MB and just run the 2 1GB?

I've read the following: 1: If I run all of them the speeds will hold at the lowest RAM available which will be 5300. 2: If I take out the 2 512MB the RAM speed will run off the 6400.

But which is better?: 1: Capacity -- 3GB? 2: Speed -- 2GB @6400?

And finally, what is faster even?: 1: 3GB @ 5300? 2: 2GB @ 6400?

More information about my PC:

Crucial Scan * Maximum Memory Capacity: 8192MB * Currently Installed Memory: 1GB * Available Memory Slots: 2 * Number of Banks: 4 * Dual Channel Support: No * CPU Manufacturer: GenuineIntel * CPU Family: Intel(R) Core(TM)2 CPU 6300 @ 1.86GHz Model 15, Stepping 2 * CPU Speed: 1867 MHz * Maximum memory is 8192MB using ECC modules, if using Non-ECC modules the maximum is 2048MB

Cheers. :beer:




Jeff Über Admin

I am a mean boss ⬆️⬆️⬇️⬇️⬅️➡️⬅️➡️??

184,643 XP

6th April 2000

0 Uploads

14,592 Posts

1,534 Threads

#2 10 years ago

What OS would you be running? 32bit or 64bit?


Product Manager | GameFront.com




Giz

Massivis Effectivous

116,112 XP

8th May 2002

0 Uploads

9,297 Posts

922 Threads

#3 10 years ago

32bit Vista Ultimate edition.




Jeff Über Admin

I am a mean boss ⬆️⬆️⬇️⬇️⬅️➡️⬅️➡️??

184,643 XP

6th April 2000

0 Uploads

14,592 Posts

1,534 Threads

#4 10 years ago

In this case, I would suggest the slower 3gig. Vista is such a memory whore it's beyond belief. While the memory will be a little slower, you'll probably have a bit better performance than if you went with the 2 gigs of faster memory.


Product Manager | GameFront.com




Hfx-Rebel VIP Member

AzH owns my ass

50 XP

15th March 2004

0 Uploads

10,426 Posts

0 Threads

#5 10 years ago

I've always heard that after a certain amount of ram (2 gigs?) it makes no difference, so based on this, I would go with speed. I am curious to find out if this is still true though....




Jeff Über Admin

I am a mean boss ⬆️⬆️⬇️⬇️⬅️➡️⬅️➡️??

184,643 XP

6th April 2000

0 Uploads

14,592 Posts

1,534 Threads

#6 10 years ago

2gigs on XP is about right, however Vista is a little more bloated and the more memory you have, the better.


Product Manager | GameFront.com




Giz

Massivis Effectivous

116,112 XP

8th May 2002

0 Uploads

9,297 Posts

922 Threads

#7 10 years ago

Is there a big difference (noticeable) in speed between using 2GB of 6400 or 3GB with the 5300?




arcadeplayer987

Revenge was here.

50 XP

25th April 2007

0 Uploads

1,819 Posts

0 Threads

#8 10 years ago
Giz;4183571Is there a big difference (noticeable) in speed between using 2GB of 6400 or 3GB with the 5300?

No is not noticeable. In games 3Gb 5300 is better but in other stuff 2Gb 6400 is faster. Depends of your CPU FSB and memory ratio also.




Bs|Archaon

I would die without GF

50 XP

15th March 2006

0 Uploads

5,910 Posts

0 Threads

#9 10 years ago

3GB will be faster if you're using it more than 2GB. By the time you've got Vista and a game (or any other app that uses a lot of memory) you will be. On the flip side, there is cock all difference between 5300 and 6400. A benchmark will show a difference, but it's not something you will notice.

Go for 3GB.




*The.Doctor

Trust me, I'm a Doctor

102,440 XP

25th November 2003

0 Uploads

9,964 Posts

0 Threads

#10 10 years ago

3GB is the new recommended amount for Vista. 3GB for Vista is like 2GB was for XP.




  • 1
  • 2