RAM single/dual channel question 7 replies

Please wait...

Keirgo

Formerly -Sirius-

50 XP

30th June 2003

0 Uploads

2,379 Posts

0 Threads

#1 15 years ago

Is there really that much of a difference when the RAM is working in single channel or dual channel mode?

For example, if you have 1GB of RAM, how much of a difference in performance would that 1GB have when running in one mode or the other?




Agentlaidlaw

Pie

50 XP

21st February 2005

0 Uploads

3,801 Posts

0 Threads

#2 15 years ago

When you have dual channel that means your having like 2 road lanes in stead of one. So instead of having your info go through 1 line and be slow it has 2 lanes and can move faster. So 1gb of ram in dual channel would process more info faster than one in single channel. There would be a big increase in speed. Its almost like having 2 prcessors. It brakes the stuff in half for it can go faster. Half of it goes in 1 lane and the other half goes in the other lane. Moves more data faster.




Revenge Advanced Member

Shizzle my nizzle

117,165 XP

28th July 2004

0 Uploads

10,354 Posts

0 Threads

#3 15 years ago

For the electronic wizz-kids out there, think of it as two resistors in parallel - overall, there is much less resistance than the two resistors placed one after the other in series. It's the same with RAM, and as Agent explained above, the signals going through the memory have two routes they could take, meaning twice as much data can flow through the memory compared to single channel.




Keirgo

Formerly -Sirius-

50 XP

30th June 2003

0 Uploads

2,379 Posts

0 Threads

#4 15 years ago

Ah, so I assumed, but just had to make sure, thanks both. :)

PS: So when playing a game is there a noticable difference?, like maybe better loading times?




Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#5 15 years ago

-Sirius-Ah, so I assumed, but just had to make sure, thanks both. :)

PS: So when playing a game is there a noticable difference?, like maybe better loading times?

some better loading times. most is noticable. windows will also boot quicker.




svfdf10

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

19th March 2004

0 Uploads

2,120 Posts

0 Threads

#6 15 years ago

Don't forget that what to you looks like a game, at computer system level is just a whole bunch of data & operations on that data.

For detailed 3D worlds there happens to be quite alot of data that must be loaded & then a continual set of large operations per unit of data must be carried out by the processor & by your graphics co-processor found on your graphics card.

Initially this data is on your hard disk. The bottle neck is the hard drives mechanical speed when it comes down to loading. Loading takes place because the operations that need to be carried out on the data would be slowed considerably by the mechanical limitations of the hard drive. That is if the system had to wait for data to come off (read from a particular area where it is 'recorded' on) the hard disk & then be written back to it then your modern game would run at crawling pace. So the answer is to have all the data required in the games essential cycle in your computer's RAM(random access memory) & in the graphics card's RAM (random access memory).

When reading & writing data (something which takes place all the time when running ANY computer program since after all this is all a computer program does is change data or process data as I said right at the start), from RAM / memory (same thing) the bottlenecks to going as fast as possible are the bus speed of the connections between RAM, the memory controller & the CPU.

Note that I said the speed of the connections & not the CPU itself. Dual channel was a cunning way of reducing some of this bottleneck or latency by essentially introducing potentially another read/write cycle in each of the systems unique operational cycles. That is the theory though... what are the real world results?

Well this will depend somewhat on what system you are running - (what chipset & memory controller etc.) - but I remember seeing for an NForce 2 system the difference between running RAM configured as single channel & dual channel was around 10%.

So if your frame rates are currently around 30fps (frames per second) then they are not going to go much higher than 33 fps (3 is one tenth or 10% of 30 for all who couldn't see where I got that number from).

Whenever you see mega performance boosting technologies that manufacturers love to charge alot extra for - always try & find some numerical real world results so you can ask - is the extra expense really worth the increase. In this case only you will know if the extra 10% will really make a difference to the games or apps you run.




Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#7 15 years ago

nameChangedDon't forget that what to you looks like a game, at computer system level is just a whole bunch of data & operations on that data. [/quote] ya, heh, i tried tellin my dad that once....

[quote=nameChanged] So if your frame rates are currently around 30fps (frames per second) then they are not going to go much higher than 33 fps (3 is one tenth or 10% of 30 for all who couldn't see where I got that number from).

i want to know where you get this fuzzy math from.




svfdf10

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

19th March 2004

0 Uploads

2,120 Posts

0 Threads

#8 15 years ago
1337cshacker i want to know where you get this fuzzy math from.

A bold comment from someone at a disadvantage in both years & qualifications :|

I'm not your average 'fanboy' 1337cshacker. I have years of experience with PC architectures from the PIII EB upwards & have a Comp Sci degree. :p

It was a direct comparison of a system with 512MB as a single Dimm PC2700 & as 2 x 256MB PC2700 (same mem chips & spec. as the 512MB Dimm) modules in Dual Channel on an NForce2 chipset system carried out by one of the myriad tech review sites.

I would like to know what data you base your conclusions on. We may even find we learn something :lookaround: