For my upcoming computer, I was planning on getting 1 GB (2 pcs 512) OCZ Technology Gold VX 1GB PC4000 DDR DIMM Memory or the same in DDR (500) PC-4000 Mushkin Redline, and overclocking them to 3.5V (I'll have the DFI lanparty motherboard).
From reviews, it seems the OCZ Gold is the best stuff, but sadly both that and Mushkin Redline comes in 512mb sticks. Which means I wouldn't be able to have more than 2gb in the future. Since I'm planning on lots of 3D modelling/rendering work, I guess 4gb one day would be nice.
It seems everyone has trouble finding reviews of 1gb sticks though. From a few forum topics it seems these are recommended:
It seems these are what people linked to: (looking at them I guess the OCZ would be the best choice?)
Corsair xms 2gb (2x1Gb) Twinx2048-3200c2pt (2-3-3-6) (rumoured might not go well with the DFI Lanparty Motherboard)
OCZ 2 GB DDR (2 pcs 1GB) PC-3200 (400) Dual Channel Platinum (2-3-2-5)
Patriot 2 GB (2 pcs 1GB) DDR (400) PC-3200 (2-3-2-5)
I wonder is that the fastest, and any thoughts on all this is welcome. I imagine in the end more Ram will win the performance battle against faster but less ram?
Thanks!
So go for faster 1gb (2x512mb) or slower 2gb (1x1gb)?
Moderators: NeilBlanchard, Ralf Hutter, sthayashi, Lawrence Lee
I personally would go for 1GB of faster ram, but I don't do any heavy modeling or rendering.
AFAIK, on that mobo, running 4 DIMMs will reset the memory controller to 333MHz with a 2t command rate, which will give you a pretty big hit in performance.
That being said, that hit is probably less than the hit you'll take when you max out your ram while rendering...
Sorry if I didn't help much. Maybe there are some 3D pros lurking here that can say better than I.
AFAIK, on that mobo, running 4 DIMMs will reset the memory controller to 333MHz with a 2t command rate, which will give you a pretty big hit in performance.
That being said, that hit is probably less than the hit you'll take when you max out your ram while rendering...
Sorry if I didn't help much. Maybe there are some 3D pros lurking here that can say better than I.
-
ddrueding1
- Posts: 419
- Joined: Sun Sep 19, 2004 1:05 pm
- Location: Palo Alto, CA
I recently went from 2GB (Geil 2x 1GB DDR400) to 1GB (Corsair XMS 2x 512MB DDR550) becuase I realised I was NEVER using the extra GB of RAM. This enabled me to up my FSB to 250Mhz (a 25% OC) and took my CPU to 2.75Ghz. Very worth it for me, but if there was any chance that my system would page during normal use, I'd switch right back.
Oh, on the DFI LanParty UT NF4 SLI-DR?
The overclocking Ram was the reason I picked that motherboard though, so if that's the case, I could swap.
Interesting you prefer 1gb faster so far... I suppose memory is not hard to resell on Ebay if I found I wasn't using the full gb... is there any particular good memory monitoring programs for that or can you just use the Ctrl/Alt/Delete Windows thinge for an accurate reading?
I imagine I would need 2GB though, in particular next year when Longhorn comes out. But the I could just get another set of 2 512mb sticks. I suppose the question is would I ever need 4gb... or would I have changed my computer by then. Hmm.
Are we talking about single digit speed differences do you think, or something larger? I find it hard to tell what real world differences parts make sometimes.
What sort of rendering do you do? Often I have multiple 5 megapixel images open in Photoshop though, with many undo levels. I just have a feeling it's easily going to top 1gb. Hmm.
The overclocking Ram was the reason I picked that motherboard though, so if that's the case, I could swap.
Interesting you prefer 1gb faster so far... I suppose memory is not hard to resell on Ebay if I found I wasn't using the full gb... is there any particular good memory monitoring programs for that or can you just use the Ctrl/Alt/Delete Windows thinge for an accurate reading?
I imagine I would need 2GB though, in particular next year when Longhorn comes out. But the I could just get another set of 2 512mb sticks. I suppose the question is would I ever need 4gb... or would I have changed my computer by then. Hmm.
Are we talking about single digit speed differences do you think, or something larger? I find it hard to tell what real world differences parts make sometimes.
What sort of rendering do you do? Often I have multiple 5 megapixel images open in Photoshop though, with many undo levels. I just have a feeling it's easily going to top 1gb. Hmm.
In most cases, a gig of faster RAM will probably benefit more than 2 gigs of slow RAM, assuming you are fully utilizing the RAM's speed. Rarely will your software need more than 1GB.
Modeling and rendering, though, will probably need more memory, so I say go for the 2GB. Don't take too much stock in that, though, I'm by no means a RAM expert.
Modeling and rendering, though, will probably need more memory, so I say go for the 2GB. Don't take too much stock in that, though, I'm by no means a RAM expert.
Out of control multitasking, though... things can get hairy. I've actually seen my memory usage climb past 3GB - between the apparent memory leaks in Azureus and FireFox, and some inconsistency on Windows' part in handling it all, especially if you decide to activate the NoPagingExecutive registry entry in an attempt to "improve" performance (as I had done).
The main benefit I see to a 2-GB machine is that it's more likely to live out a full 4-year life without as many performance problems... That was important to me, since my next 4 years is college, and I'd rather not need to rebuild in that time. (Of course, that's no prohibition on upgrading - but I don't see any major/important platform upgrades coming down the AMD pipeline that don't involve a move to DDR2 anyway).
But regardless, despite the decision I made on my own machine (2 GB [2x1 GB] of CAS2 RAM) - in general, everyone's probably right, and faster RAM will help more. Keep in mind, however, that faster RAM probably means overclocking - timings can be as good on the higher-end 1GB sticks as on the best 512MB sticks - and overclocking's a decision in and of itself, between increased heat and the potential loss of stability/component-life (though this can be minimized by proper work).
Full warning, though: I haven't tried overclocking my memory yet, I don't know what I could get out of my Corsair 1GB PC3200 sticks.
The main benefit I see to a 2-GB machine is that it's more likely to live out a full 4-year life without as many performance problems... That was important to me, since my next 4 years is college, and I'd rather not need to rebuild in that time. (Of course, that's no prohibition on upgrading - but I don't see any major/important platform upgrades coming down the AMD pipeline that don't involve a move to DDR2 anyway).
But regardless, despite the decision I made on my own machine (2 GB [2x1 GB] of CAS2 RAM) - in general, everyone's probably right, and faster RAM will help more. Keep in mind, however, that faster RAM probably means overclocking - timings can be as good on the higher-end 1GB sticks as on the best 512MB sticks - and overclocking's a decision in and of itself, between increased heat and the potential loss of stability/component-life (though this can be minimized by proper work).
Full warning, though: I haven't tried overclocking my memory yet, I don't know what I could get out of my Corsair 1GB PC3200 sticks.
--- About slowing memory on 4 dimms, I see just most (if not all?) nForce4 motherboards do that. Hmm, but the speed is apparently decided by the memory controller on the CPU, and I have a Toledo (X2 4400+), which will run at 400mhz. So if this is right, the mhz is ok with 4 dimms, but the timing will be 2T. How much of an effect does that have? Do you know of any good pages for reading on memory timings?
Yeah and since I'm going dual core, I may render on one, model on the other... if Windows XP Pro, some virus scanner, Sharezara, FireFox, Outlook 2003 etc... all take up their share running in the background also, I think it'd top a gig.
Oh, what's the NoPagingExecutive?
Yeah I hope to keep this PC for a long time also, and make an attempt at saving. I would have thought even slightly slower ram is faster than the page file though, right? Even though my pagefile will be on the 10,000rpm WD Raptor.
Yeah and since I'm going dual core, I may render on one, model on the other... if Windows XP Pro, some virus scanner, Sharezara, FireFox, Outlook 2003 etc... all take up their share running in the background also, I think it'd top a gig.
Oh, what's the NoPagingExecutive?
Yeah I hope to keep this PC for a long time also, and make an attempt at saving. I would have thought even slightly slower ram is faster than the page file though, right? Even though my pagefile will be on the 10,000rpm WD Raptor.
Ah I'm having trouble finding those sticks, do you know the names of any with timings as good as the best 512's? Thanks!timings can be as good on the higher-end 1GB sticks as on the best 512MB sticks
The most recent article I have seen on memory timings.
http://www.cooltechzone.com/index.php?o ... mitstart=1
http://www.cooltechzone.com/index.php?o ... mitstart=1
Thanks, that was a good (if very technical, haha) read. I'm not sure what tRAS/CMD mean though, between 1t and 2t. I take it say the 512mb stick would run at 1t, but the 1gb at 2t (because of all the extra banks in a 1gb stick?). Is the performance difference 50% on 2t instead of 1t, or is it not that simple?
For the other numbers, comparing a 512mb stick with a 1gb stick, the speeds are:
2-2-2-5 - OCZ Gold VX PC-4000 512mb
2-3-2-5 - OCZ 2GB (2 x 1GB) 184-Pin DDR SDRAM Dual Channel Platinum
It's the second timing that's different, and about the second number, "the performance impact of this setting is often neglible, as memory tries to store data from programs in sequential order. It tries to keep the same row for a single program, and ordered columns to reduce the time for tRCD." So there doesn't seem to be a lot of difference, but then I'm missing the last two numbers of the timing.
I also made a note that if you run a bus side speed of 500mhz instead of 400, you get a 25% increase in speed there. I wonder if that's something easily done on the DFI Lanparty... I guess so since it's reffered to as an overclockers dream so often. Or at the very least my Toledo X2 4400+ should keep it at 400mhz instead of dropping to 333mhz if I understand correctly.
For the other numbers, comparing a 512mb stick with a 1gb stick, the speeds are:
2-2-2-5 - OCZ Gold VX PC-4000 512mb
2-3-2-5 - OCZ 2GB (2 x 1GB) 184-Pin DDR SDRAM Dual Channel Platinum
It's the second timing that's different, and about the second number, "the performance impact of this setting is often neglible, as memory tries to store data from programs in sequential order. It tries to keep the same row for a single program, and ordered columns to reduce the time for tRCD." So there doesn't seem to be a lot of difference, but then I'm missing the last two numbers of the timing.
I also made a note that if you run a bus side speed of 500mhz instead of 400, you get a 25% increase in speed there. I wonder if that's something easily done on the DFI Lanparty... I guess so since it's reffered to as an overclockers dream so often. Or at the very least my Toledo X2 4400+ should keep it at 400mhz instead of dropping to 333mhz if I understand correctly.
This might help you a little more. I'm not sure I buy all of what the article states, but it's at least food for thought on the mobo and ram.
http://www.tweakguides.com/Hardcon_1.html
Also note the link to Anandtech on page 5 that will further explain the command rate impact on current AMD systems.
I hope that helps.
http://www.tweakguides.com/Hardcon_1.html
Also note the link to Anandtech on page 5 that will further explain the command rate impact on current AMD systems.
I hope that helps.
Ah thank you, that's an excellent article. Most of his choices for hardware are the same as mine too, which makes it even more relevant. His combining of 2 74gb 10,000rpm WD Raptors with Raid 0 seems very interesting... I sorta wish I hadn't already bought my 300gb Seagate in New Zealand, but oh well no worries, and maybe on the first upgrade to this PC I'd add change it for a 2nd WD 74gb.
His success with 2 x 1gb sticks, and mentioning how Command Rate between 1T and 2T is only a few % difference in real life, is good to know. So even if I upgrade later to 4gb it's all good
His success with 2 x 1gb sticks, and mentioning how Command Rate between 1T and 2T is only a few % difference in real life, is good to know. So even if I upgrade later to 4gb it's all good
-
ddrueding1
- Posts: 419
- Joined: Sun Sep 19, 2004 1:05 pm
- Location: Palo Alto, CA
-
~El~Jefe~
- Friend of SPCR
- Posts: 2887
- Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:21 pm
- Location: New York City zzzz
- Contact:
I duno if it's too late to put my 2 pennies in...
but 2 gigs is needed on a dual core system. Rather, 1 gig dimms are.
why on earth would such a mature purchase of a dual core over say, an fx-55 or whatever single core be doing with l33t 512 ram chips? really, youd want that system to be set for win64 and future things. My friend went from using 1 gig of corsair spread over 2 chips to now 1.5 gigs. his comp sped up even loading windows. who knows right? well, he has a 2.2ghz winchester on a at200 MSI board. the whole machine moves better now. Only thing is, he cant ever upgrade to 2 gigs without filling up all the ram spots which might have problems being that it isnt an E revision system. he already cant use the corsair in dim 1 slot he has to move to 2nd bank with thm, only the 2x256 chips work there for some odd reason.
I just dont see the point of 512 chips unless you are either:
a: trying to market your l33t 2 2 2 timings (notice how they dont market their 1 gig chips, Centon value ram has 3 3 3 at a gig with standard voltage and spd and is cheap btw)
b: overclocking and need ddr500+ ram that wont require huge voltages for its speed increase.
1 gig is fully used when i play half-life 2, there are more programs written, and being written that do much better with more ram. Take BF2, increasing a gig on my 754 system decreased load times yet again.
but 2 gigs is needed on a dual core system. Rather, 1 gig dimms are.
why on earth would such a mature purchase of a dual core over say, an fx-55 or whatever single core be doing with l33t 512 ram chips? really, youd want that system to be set for win64 and future things. My friend went from using 1 gig of corsair spread over 2 chips to now 1.5 gigs. his comp sped up even loading windows. who knows right? well, he has a 2.2ghz winchester on a at200 MSI board. the whole machine moves better now. Only thing is, he cant ever upgrade to 2 gigs without filling up all the ram spots which might have problems being that it isnt an E revision system. he already cant use the corsair in dim 1 slot he has to move to 2nd bank with thm, only the 2x256 chips work there for some odd reason.
I just dont see the point of 512 chips unless you are either:
a: trying to market your l33t 2 2 2 timings (notice how they dont market their 1 gig chips, Centon value ram has 3 3 3 at a gig with standard voltage and spd and is cheap btw)
b: overclocking and need ddr500+ ram that wont require huge voltages for its speed increase.
1 gig is fully used when i play half-life 2, there are more programs written, and being written that do much better with more ram. Take BF2, increasing a gig on my 754 system decreased load times yet again.
-
PositiveSpin
- Posts: 137
- Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2004 5:03 am
It's not easy finding 1Gb DIMMs, but it can be done.
I'd strongly recommend buying DIMMs in pairs, though - it sounded like you were comparing 2x512Mb with 1x1Gb - I'd urge you to get 2x1Gb, or to stick with the 2x512Mb. This is because Dual Channel makes quite a difference to performance, where the chipset supports it - I don't know if your chipset does.
BTW: I recently went to the trouble of installing 4 x 1Gb DIMMs in a motherboard using the Intel 925XE chipset. The motherboard manual noted that some of the RAM would not be visible - I imagined it might be 3.8Gb instead of 4Gb, perhaps - imagine how I felt when I booted the machine and it reported 3.2Gb! I'm seriously considering dropping it back to 3Gb (2 x 1Gb + 2 x 512Mb) and redeploying the surplus 2 x 1Gb to anoher machine.
I'd strongly recommend buying DIMMs in pairs, though - it sounded like you were comparing 2x512Mb with 1x1Gb - I'd urge you to get 2x1Gb, or to stick with the 2x512Mb. This is because Dual Channel makes quite a difference to performance, where the chipset supports it - I don't know if your chipset does.
BTW: I recently went to the trouble of installing 4 x 1Gb DIMMs in a motherboard using the Intel 925XE chipset. The motherboard manual noted that some of the RAM would not be visible - I imagined it might be 3.8Gb instead of 4Gb, perhaps - imagine how I felt when I booted the machine and it reported 3.2Gb! I'm seriously considering dropping it back to 3Gb (2 x 1Gb + 2 x 512Mb) and redeploying the surplus 2 x 1Gb to anoher machine.
-
~El~Jefe~
- Friend of SPCR
- Posts: 2887
- Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:21 pm
- Location: New York City zzzz
- Contact:
holy crapola
id be mega pissed if it didnt say 4x1024 !!!
wow yeah thats why i say for now, go 2 gigs, 2x1 gig dims, just buy thtem with same SKU numbers from same company and no worries if name brand normally. its when you hav 4 dims id be nervous at the 1 gig size.
however, Rev E is supposedly awesome with slight dim problems.
id be mega pissed if it didnt say 4x1024 !!!
wow yeah thats why i say for now, go 2 gigs, 2x1 gig dims, just buy thtem with same SKU numbers from same company and no worries if name brand normally. its when you hav 4 dims id be nervous at the 1 gig size.
however, Rev E is supposedly awesome with slight dim problems.
You have anything to support this? I mean, it may be true for Intel systems, but every "real-world" benchmark score I've ever seen on the issue suggests that for AMD systems, the difference is too small to really notice.PositiveSpin wrote:It's not easy finding 1Gb DIMMs, but it can be done.
I'd strongly recommend buying DIMMs in pairs, though - it sounded like you were comparing 2x512Mb with 1x1Gb - I'd urge you to get 2x1Gb, or to stick with the 2x512Mb. This is because Dual Channel makes quite a difference to performance, where the chipset supports it - I don't know if your chipset does.
BTW: I recently went to the trouble of installing 4 x 1Gb DIMMs in a motherboard using the Intel 925XE chipset. The motherboard manual noted that some of the RAM would not be visible - I imagined it might be 3.8Gb instead of 4Gb, perhaps - imagine how I felt when I booted the machine and it reported 3.2Gb! I'm seriously considering dropping it back to 3Gb (2 x 1Gb + 2 x 512Mb) and redeploying the surplus 2 x 1Gb to anoher machine.
Still, there's no real reason NOT to go dual-channel...
Get 2 x 1GB sticks (identical ideally).
I dont use any heavy apps excepts games, and I have noticed a difference from 2 x 512MB, mostly due to not paging anything at all ever, I dissabled my page file totally.
When I bought my RAM, my thinking was that even if I used lower timings I would loose maybe 3% at the most, I would gain that back immediatly by having more RAM, however my "Budget GEIL" RAM, overclockas a little at lower timings, so I got the best of everything.
Some research would need to be done on the "Real-World" impact of faster RAM, and lower latency times i.e. DDR500 2-2-2-1T and a dual core CPU, Sisoft Sandra says absolutley nothing in the real world.
Andy
I dont use any heavy apps excepts games, and I have noticed a difference from 2 x 512MB, mostly due to not paging anything at all ever, I dissabled my page file totally.
When I bought my RAM, my thinking was that even if I used lower timings I would loose maybe 3% at the most, I would gain that back immediatly by having more RAM, however my "Budget GEIL" RAM, overclockas a little at lower timings, so I got the best of everything.
Some research would need to be done on the "Real-World" impact of faster RAM, and lower latency times i.e. DDR500 2-2-2-1T and a dual core CPU, Sisoft Sandra says absolutley nothing in the real world.
Andy