128 PC133 VS 256 PC100 in W2k?

[CoolTechie]

ok... ive got one stick of 128mb PC133 7.5ns cas3 and one stick of 256mb PC100 8ns in front of me... which one do I stick in my W2K system? running a K7 750...

 

[AaronP]

BOTH of em, but if that causes problems, DEFINATLY go with the 256 mb. It's a no brainer

 

[riftwalker]

Well People say that most pc100 memory can run at 133 with no problem, I don't know about that, but if you don't want to risk ruining your memory. You can run your bus at 100, and put both in, which should work. If you want to be more risky you can run it at 133 and try to see if both works. In W2k 256 is useful and 128 is minimal. Another tradeoff, is that if you have to run your bus at 100 you see you are losing 33 percent speed on it. I would start with the least risky first, if you don't realize perfomance problems, stick with it. Then if you really want to feel the need of the power try the riskier situation. If you have to go with just one, the 256 is the better deal

 

[CoolTechie]

yeah i dont intend to use both of them.. im going to sell which ever one i dont use.. i need the money to finish buidling the system actually..

 

[Thorn]

then go with the 256

 

[Noriaki]

Sell the PC133 128MB

Just so you know, 8ns is 125Mhz.
It's PC100 but it's rated at 125Mhz, 133 is only like an 8Mhz overclock. I'm sure it can take it. If it was extremely cheap crappy ram it would be rated at 10ns (100Mhz), not 8.

Take the 256MB, even if for some strange reason it won't make 133Mhz, it's still better to have 256MB in Win2000.