Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Computer Information > Memory performance question

Reply
Thread Tools

Memory performance question

 
 
Trey
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-26-2004
I am working on building a new computer and when I was looking at the ram, I
was hit with a question. What would be faster? 2x DDR2-400 @ 512 MB. or 4x
DDR2-400 @ 256MB??? Both give me the desired one Gig, but is there any
performance gain to having more modules, at a lower capacity instead of
fewer modules at a higher capacity?
The boards I'm looking at had eight ram slots, so there will still be room
for expansion later if I do take the 4x route.

Thanks in advance!


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Thor
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-26-2004
negligible difference performance-wise, however, multiple modules can be
good if you suffer a bad module down the road. You have one to keep you
running until you get the replacement. Downside is if you want to upgrade
you may have to toss a module to make room for the upgrade depending on the
number of slots you have.

...
"Trey" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:lmFzd.54182$(E-Mail Removed)...
>I am working on building a new computer and when I was looking at the ram,
>I
> was hit with a question. What would be faster? 2x DDR2-400 @ 512 MB. or 4x
> DDR2-400 @ 256MB??? Both give me the desired one Gig, but is there any
> performance gain to having more modules, at a lower capacity instead of
> fewer modules at a higher capacity?
> The boards I'm looking at had eight ram slots, so there will still be room
> for expansion later if I do take the 4x route.
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
derek / nul
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-27-2004
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 20:41:53 GMT, "Trey" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>I am working on building a new computer and when I was looking at the ram, I
>was hit with a question. What would be faster? 2x DDR2-400 @ 512 MB. or 4x
>DDR2-400 @ 256MB??? Both give me the desired one Gig, but is there any
>performance gain to having more modules, at a lower capacity instead of
>fewer modules at a higher capacity?


There will be no difference, get the 2 x 512Mb, allows for expansion
 
Reply With Quote
 
Michael-NC
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-28-2004
IMO, go with whatever's cheaper. I wouldn't worry about upgrading too much
unless you do something really memory intensive with the machine. By the
time you need more than a GB of ram, DDR2 and your motherboard will be
obsolete.

"Trey" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:lmFzd.54182$(E-Mail Removed)...
>I am working on building a new computer and when I was looking at the ram,
>I
> was hit with a question. What would be faster? 2x DDR2-400 @ 512 MB. or 4x
> DDR2-400 @ 256MB??? Both give me the desired one Gig, but is there any
> performance gain to having more modules, at a lower capacity instead of
> fewer modules at a higher capacity?
> The boards I'm looking at had eight ram slots, so there will still be room
> for expansion later if I do take the 4x route.
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
>


 
Reply With Quote
 
Trey
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-28-2004
Michael-NC wrote:
> IMO, go with whatever's cheaper. I wouldn't worry about upgrading too
> much unless you do something really memory intensive with the
> machine. By the time you need more than a GB of ram, DDR2 and your
> motherboard will be obsolete.



True.. The machine I have now is an AMD T-bird 900, with pc133 ram. Its
about four years old now, so I would expect to get about four years out of
my next one as well.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Michael-NC
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-28-2004

"Trey" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:CphAd.54790$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Michael-NC wrote:
>> IMO, go with whatever's cheaper. I wouldn't worry about upgrading too
>> much unless you do something really memory intensive with the
>> machine. By the time you need more than a GB of ram, DDR2 and your
>> motherboard will be obsolete.

>
>
> True.. The machine I have now is an AMD T-bird 900, with pc133 ram. Its
> about four years old now, so I would expect to get about four years out of
> my next one as well.


Yep. And after 4 years you probably wouldn't want to spend more money on it
to upgrade. I built all the machines in my house and now, whenever I upgrade
a machine, I try to keep the motherboard, CPU, memory and power supply as
one unit. It's getting harder and harder to swap out parts. For instance,
when I need to upgrade this 2800XP Barton Core with 1 GB DDR, I'm just going
to get a new MB with an Athlon 64, another 1 GB of memory and a new power
supply and pass this "unit" on. At least I know those core components work
together and the power supply was rated for that particular "unit."

Funny that they are already specing DDR3 and DDR2 never really seemed to
reach critical mass. DDR is already deemed obsolete but everyone still needs
it...

 
Reply With Quote
 
Trey
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-29-2004

> Yep. And after 4 years you probably wouldn't want to spend more money
> on it to upgrade. I built all the machines in my house and now,
> whenever I upgrade a machine, I try to keep the motherboard, CPU,
> memory and power supply as one unit. It's getting harder and harder
> to swap out parts. For instance, when I need to upgrade this 2800XP
> Barton Core with 1 GB DDR, I'm just going to get a new MB with an
> Athlon 64, another 1 GB of memory and a new power supply and pass
> this "unit" on. At least I know those core components work together
> and the power supply was rated for that particular "unit."
>
> Funny that they are already specing DDR3 and DDR2 never really seemed
> to reach critical mass. DDR is already deemed obsolete but everyone
> still needs it...


Will there be a DDR3? Mathmatically, it would jump to DDR4 with the doubling
of the memory banks.
The problem with DDR2 is the Latency. It would be nice if they were able to
get the Latency down to what it should be.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Michael-NC
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-29-2004

"Trey" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:1WnAd.40784$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
>> Yep. And after 4 years you probably wouldn't want to spend more money
>> on it to upgrade. I built all the machines in my house and now,
>> whenever I upgrade a machine, I try to keep the motherboard, CPU,
>> memory and power supply as one unit. It's getting harder and harder
>> to swap out parts. For instance, when I need to upgrade this 2800XP
>> Barton Core with 1 GB DDR, I'm just going to get a new MB with an
>> Athlon 64, another 1 GB of memory and a new power supply and pass
>> this "unit" on. At least I know those core components work together
>> and the power supply was rated for that particular "unit."
>>
>> Funny that they are already specing DDR3 and DDR2 never really seemed
>> to reach critical mass. DDR is already deemed obsolete but everyone
>> still needs it...

>
> Will there be a DDR3? Mathmatically, it would jump to DDR4 with the
> doubling
> of the memory banks.
> The problem with DDR2 is the Latency. It would be nice if they were able
> to
> get the Latency down to what it should be.


Sure, it's in use on graphics cards now. Google DDR3 and you'll get plenty
of hits.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Performance Tutorials Services - Boosting Performance by DisablingUnnecessary Services on Windows XP Home Edition Software Engineer Javascript 0 06-10-2011 02:18 AM
OCZ Rally High Performance USB2 (Dual Channel) Flash Memory Silverstrand Front Page News 0 09-20-2005 03:35 AM
Memory and performance Danny ASP .Net 1 01-21-2005 12:11 PM
Differences between Sony Memory Stick & memory Stick Pro vs Memory Stick Duo? zxcvar Digital Photography 3 11-28-2004 10:48 PM
Web Form Performance Versus Single File Performance jm ASP .Net 1 12-12-2003 11:14 PM



Advertisments