Searching \ for '[OT] PC memory' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/mems.htm?key=memory
Search entire site for: 'PC memory'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[OT] PC memory'
2009\01\22@183356 by Jinx

face picon face
I rescued a pretty reasonable PC from the bin. A 3GHz desktop,
with a 4i65G m/b, 80GB HDD and 512MB of DDR266, XP Pro
SP2 installed. AFAICT so far it's all working OK

http://www.asrock.com/mb/overview.asp?Model=P4I65G

It would make a handy second machine, for doing time-intensive
things I'd rather the work (this 'un) machine not be doing. I'd like
to jazz it up as simply as possible, and top of the list would be to
add more memory. Board limit is 2GB

I've one 1GB DDR400 available (not here) and what I wonder is -
would the DDR266, being slower, drag down the performance of
the 1GB ?

IOW, would this work better with 1GB DDR400 + 512MB DDR266
or just the 1GB on its own ? I remember a tech friend of mine telling
me years ago not to mix memory, but that was way back when 64MB
was a big deal

TIA

2009\01\22@184048 by cdb

flavicon
face


:: IOW, would this work better with 1GB DDR400 + 512MB DDR266
:: or just the 1GB on its own ?

The memory will run at the lower speed, but you would see a slight
improvement purely because you have more RAM and slightly less need
for disk access.

DDR only gives you dual access if both sticks are the same size and in
the same bank. Even better if they are form the same manufacturer and
batch.

Colin
--
cdb, spam_OUTcolinTakeThisOuTspambtech-online.co.uk on 23/01/2009

Web presence: http://www.btech-online.co.uk  

Hosted by:  http://www.1and1.co.uk/?k_id=7988359







2009\01\22@184917 by solarwind

picon face
Yeah, the 400 MHz stick will run at the speed of the slowest stick.
But who cares? You probably wont notice the difference anyway. For a
PC that old, there are a lot more bottlenecks than the RAM.


--
solarwind

2009\01\22@190143 by peter green

flavicon
face

> I've one 1GB DDR400 available (not here) and what I wonder is -
> would the DDR266, being slower, drag down the performance of
> the 1GB ?
>  
Yes it would since boards generally run all modules at the speed of the
slowest one fitted.
> IOW, would this work better with 1GB DDR400 + 512MB DDR266
> or just the 1GB on its own ?
That depends entirely on the workload. Some workloads will benefit more
from the extra ram some more from the faster ram. Which is the case with
your workloads can only really be determined by testing.

>I remember a tech friend of mine telling me years ago not to mix
> memory, but that was way back when 64MB was a big deal
Well if you want to use the dual channel feature of the board you would
need two matched sticks of memory. So the best configuration would be
two 1GB sticks of DDR400 .



2009\01\22@190210 by Jinx

face picon face
> > IOW, would this work better with 1GB DDR400 + 512MB
> > DDR266 or just the 1GB on its own ?
>
> The memory will run at the lower speed, but you would see a slight
> improvement purely because you have more RAM and slightly less
> need for disk access.

Hmmm, don't like the sound of that "slight improvement". If the budget
allows and I can find a deal somewhere (DDR is getting oldish so that
might not be too hard) then 2 x 1GB DDR400 would be best. Or any
matched DDR for that matter

> DDR only gives you dual access if both sticks are the same size and
> in the same bank. Even better if they are from the same manufacturer
> and batch

I did a little Googling and found reference to brand-name manufacturer
certified sticks for example, but not the size and bank

Thanks




2009\01\22@191648 by cdb

flavicon
face


:: but not the size and bank

The RAM connectors are normally colour coded as far as keeping DDR(2)
etc in the same bank.

I think but am not sure, that DDR can happily run the two banks at
different speeds, just within the bank RAM will run at the slowest
stick speed. Of course if the MB only has two slots, this si all
academic.

Colin
--
cdb, .....colinKILLspamspam@spam@btech-online.co.uk on 23/01/2009

Web presence: http://www.btech-online.co.uk  

Hosted by:  http://www.1and1.co.uk/?k_id=7988359







2009\01\22@193022 by Carl Denk

flavicon
face
If the memory is banked, 2 sticks will be faster than 1 double size, at
least my Intel motherboards have all been that way.

solarwind wrote:
> Yeah, the 400 MHz stick will run at the speed of the slowest stick.
> But who cares? You probably wont notice the difference anyway. For a
> PC that old, there are a lot more bottlenecks than the RAM.
>
>
>  

2009\01\22@194537 by Jinx

face picon face
> If the memory is banked, 2 sticks will be faster than 1 double size,
> at least my Intel motherboards have all been that way

Interesting. The PC has an Intel processor and graphics chipset which,
with this limited memory, is rather slow, compared with a slower machine
that has a separate AGP video and capture card. My hunch is that a
single 1GB stick coupled with a video card (I have a spare AGP) to take
the strain off the mobo, would improve performance markedly. Even
just adding the video card, but I don't want only 512MB for the OS

2009\01\22@194607 by Funny NYPD

picon face
I have same speed but different size DDR400 memmory runing on Asus and Shuttle Montherboard. The Shuttle can only support DDR266, apparently both desktop machine run ok.
 Funny N.
Au Group Electronics, http://www.AuElectronics.com




________________________________
From: cdb <colinspamKILLspambtech-online.co.uk>
To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. <.....piclistKILLspamspam.....mit.edu>
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2009 7:16:15 PM
Subject: Re: [OT] PC memory



:: but not the size and bank

The RAM connectors are normally colour coded as far as keeping DDR(2)
etc in the same bank.

I think but am not sure, that DDR can happily run the two banks at
different speeds, just within the bank RAM will run at the slowest
stick speed. Of course if the MB only has two slots, this si all
academic.

Colin
--
cdb, EraseMEcolinspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTbtech-online.co.uk on 23/01/2009

Web presence: http://www.btech-online.co.uk 

Hosted by:  http://www.1and1.co.uk/?k_id=7988359






2009\01\22@200657 by Tamas Rudnai

face picon face
Memory speed highly depends on the motherboard you have. If you have a dual
channel system then two equal size of memory module is faster than the same
size of single module. But the two modules has to be eqivalent otherwise the
memory is 'inbalanced'.

I think this is a fairly good documentation on this subject:
http://www.kingston.com/newtech/MKF_520DDRWhitepaper.pdf

Tamas





On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 12:32 AM, Jinx <joecolquittspamspam_OUTclear.net.nz> wrote:

{Quote hidden}

> -

2009\01\22@211148 by Funny NYPD

picon face
anything really bad for un-balanced memory?
I got two 1G DDR400 and two 256M DDR 400, and I also got two desktop need these memory, intead of put 2G memory in one machine, 512M in another machine, I put 1.25G on each machine with un-balanced configuration to get the best performance from both desktop. Is this a bad idea?

Not sure this is a good idea though.
 Funny N.
Au Group Electronics, http://www.AuElectronics.com




________________________________
From: Tamas Rudnai <@spam@tamas.rudnaiKILLspamspamgmail.com>
To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. <KILLspampiclistKILLspamspammit.edu>
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2009 8:06:52 PM
Subject: Re: [OT] PC memory

Memory speed highly depends on the motherboard you have. If you have a dual
channel system then two equal size of memory module is faster than the same
size of single module. But the two modules has to be eqivalent otherwise the
memory is 'inbalanced'.

I think this is a fairly good documentation on this subject:
http://www.kingston.com/newtech/MKF_520DDRWhitepaper.pdf

Tamas





On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 12:32 AM, Jinx <RemoveMEjoecolquittTakeThisOuTspamclear.net.nz> wrote:

{Quote hidden}

>

2009\01\22@223438 by William \Chops\ Westfield

face picon face

On Jan 22, 2009, at 4:16 PM, cdb wrote:

> Of course if the MB only has two slots, this is all academic.

Or if the MB/chipset only supports a max speed of 266.

The "slight improvement" is for going from "more than enough memory"  
to "much more than enough memory."  If you're going from "not enough  
memory" to "more than enough memory", which might be the case if you  
only have 512M and are running a modern app mix, I'd expect more  
dramatic improvements.

Thee visible improvement going from 266MHz to 400MHz memory is likely  
to be a lot less, what with caches and all.

Certainly the first thing I'd do would be to throw in the DIMM you  
have and see how the system behaves...

BillW

2009\01\23@052613 by Tamas Rudnai

face picon face
> anything really bad for un-balanced memory?

It is not 'bad', it just means your memory throughput is not that great.
They say it double channel doubles the throughput, however, in reality
application does not always use the RAM heavily. Also on your CPU you may
have a huge cache that can speed up the processing (2-6 MByte) so again,
depending on your application you would not notice significant difference.
However, if you use memory hungry applications like picture or video editing
and some games, that's another story, you would not compromise with a single
channel or un-balanced system.

My laptop has an un-balanced setup right now, 1 and 2GByte modules giving a
total of 3GBytes and I am ok with that, but I rarely use video editors and
such. My friend who's a very good IT guy advised me to buy a second 2GByte
module for balancing - where the total RAM size will be 4GByte, while the
operating system still will be able to handle only 3G from it (unless if I
have the PAE on my laptop which I doubt or switching to 64bit OS), but
anyway, the RAM modues will be balanced so the performance will be
increased. Might do that sometime in the future

Tamas


On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 2:11 AM, Funny NYPD <spamBeGonefunnynypdspamBeGonespamyahoo.com> wrote:

{Quote hidden}

2009\01\23@060106 by Jinx

face picon face
> However, if you use memory hungry applications like picture or
> video editing and some games, that's another story, you would
> not compromise with a single channel or un-balanced system

Tamas, thanks for the insights

Video creation and editing is one of the jobs I want to flick off
onto the second machine. Already I can tell it's going to be a big
time-saver. Format conversion on a 50 minute, 7GB .avi takes
~ 14 minutes on this machine (1.4GHz, 768MB) and only 4 minutes
on the other (3GHz, 512MB). That's a pretty typical task and so
some speed tests with 1GB vs 1GB + 512MB vs 2 x 1GB will
show if there's a significant difference. Will have a wee think about
what the minimum purchase would be to balance both machines
with at least 1GB each, given the memory I already have and what
would be left over

2009\01\23@094921 by Michael Rigby-Jones

picon face


> -----Original Message-----
> From: EraseMEpiclist-bouncesspammit.edu [RemoveMEpiclist-bouncesEraseMEspamEraseMEmit.edu] On
Behalf
> Of solarwind
> Sent: 22 January 2009 23:49
> To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public.
> Subject: Re: [OT] PC memory
>
> Yeah, the 400 MHz stick will run at the speed of the slowest stick.
> But who cares? You probably wont notice the difference anyway. For a
> PC that old, there are a lot more bottlenecks than the RAM.

IIRC the 3.0GHz P4 ran with an 800MHz front side bus, so a 266MHz DDR
memory bus is going to be a significant performance bottleneck for any
memory intensive applications, being both considerably slower and
asynchronous.  If he's not going to run memory intensive stuff, why
upgrade the RAM?

Personally I've had mixed luck mixing memory modules with different
speeds, sometimes it's worked fine, other times the system was very
unstable or wouldn't even boot.

Regards

Mike

=======================================================================
This e-mail is intended for the person it is addressed to only. The
information contained in it may be confidential and/or protected by
law. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, you must
not make any use of this information, or copy or show it to any
person. Please contact us immediately to tell us that you have
received this e-mail, and return the original to us. Any use,
forwarding, printing or copying of this message is strictly prohibited.
No part of this message can be considered a request for goods or
services.
=======================================================================

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2009 , 2010 only
- Today
- New search...