• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Can more memory (>1GB) degrade your PC?

W

webmal

Banned
I didn't read any of the links or see any of the benchmarks but I would imagine so, since usually if you use more than one gb you have 2x sticks of 1gb apiece, and bigger ram = lower FSBs and looser timings.
 
Duh not really fair comparisons. Course it's going to be slower your latency and speed isn't the same. I don't see 1GB vs 2GB using the same latency and clock speeds. They didn't have any 1GB dimms.
Seemed they used 4x512 for the P4 setup. Instead of 2x1024.
 
I have 4x512MB in my system. My timing are not slower, neither is my mem speed. My computer runs the same. So FS.com are full of $H!t on this one, but they do have plenty of good content.
 
From the tests in the article it seems pretty clear that the amount of memory is not the problem. It is the number of DIMMs that is key. Some of the statements they make early on in the article and this thread title are a bit misleading IMHO.

-KeithP
 
Originally posted by: webmal
It would appear that more than 1GB RAM will degrade your desktop PC (non server). It's documented here: http://firingsquad.com/hardwar..._2003_Part2/page14.asp

FYI on the above link, click on the 'next' pages to view benchmarks - e.g.:

* http://firingsquad.com/hardwar..._2003_Part2/page16.asp

* http://firingsquad.com/hardwar..._2003_Part2/page17.asp

* http://firingsquad.com/hardwar..._2003_Part2/page18.asp

Who would've thought that 1GB is faster that 2GB of RAM?
Click to expand...

A machine that never needs more than 1GB of RAM can't use 2GB (a tautology, I guess). They should run tests on a program that regularly sucks up a gig and a half-- then compare the 1GB machine to the 2GB machine. But hey, you can always mount the bigass page file in machine #1 on RAID 0 Raptors... woo. :disgust:

You also should expect that in the next few years games will come out that need more than a gig.
 
Originally posted by: ELopes580
I have 4x512MB in my system. My timing are not slower, neither is my mem speed. My computer runs the same. So FS.com are full of $H!t on this one, but they do have plenty of good content.
Click to expand...

Ditto, except for the part where you say they have good content
 
Originally posted by: RadiclDreamer
Originally posted by: ELopes580
I have 4x512MB in my system. My timing are not slower, neither is my mem speed. My computer runs the same. So FS.com are full of $H!t on this one, but they do have plenty of good content.
Click to expand...

Ditto, except for the part where you say they have good content
Click to expand...

LOL, true. I was trying to be nice. 😀
 
This was talked about a long time ago when the article was released, it's basicly totaly wrong due to a bug in some of the software they used for benchmarking, and in many cases the bios's of the boards they were using lowered the speed of the memory when all 4 or 3 dimm slots were populated so it wasn't an apples to apples comapison
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top