Differences in performance?

[WolverineX]

I know this question probably has been asked to death, but I found nothing in a search. I tried purchasing anther stick of memory (512) which was the exact same as the stick I have in there now. The computer would boot but restart before getting to the windows xp loading screen.

This was probably due to bad memory but I have no idea. So instead of going through that event again I was thinking of getting just 1 gig. My question, is one setup better than the other or are performance differences negligible? Keep in mind, I'm not one to strive for optimal performance.

Thanks

 

[oznerol]

First off, I'd check the 2nd stick with memtest. Do a search for it on google, dl the boot cd, and test the "defective" stick by itself.

If it passes without any errors, you probably just need to re-configure your bios to work with the two sticks.

To your main question, since you already have 2x512 sticks, I'd say that is your best option. It also works faster than 1 gig stick as it will run in dual-channel mode. Will it be insanely noticable? No.

1 single stick is better if you want to be able to easily expand to 2 gigs and run in dual channel with that, or if you want to free up some room on your motherboard.

So:
2x512 = "faster", though not noticiable (to me, anyway)
1 gig = good for future expansion

 

[Ike0069]

I'd just stick with 2x512, unless you plan on going to 2GB in the near future.

 

[BOLt]

Originally posted by: ducci
First off, I'd check the 2nd stick with memtest. Do a search for it on google, dl the boot cd, and test the "defective" stick by itself.

If it passes without any errors, you probably just need to re-configure your bios to work with the two sticks.

To your main question, since you already have 2x512 sticks, I'd say that is your best option. It also works faster than 1 gig stick as it will run in dual-channel mode. Will it be insanely noticable? No.

1 single stick is better if you want to be able to easily expand to 2 gigs and run in dual channel with that, or if you want to free up some room on your motherboard.

So:
2x512 = "faster", though not noticiable (to me, anyway)
1 gig = good for future expansion

Yes.

 

[WolverineX]

Well, in my haste I rma'd the memory without thinking first. I have an Asus K8N socket 754 motherboard, I'm not sure if it supports dual channel since I never really bothered to look since I was only using 1 stick. I doubt I would really need 2 gigs of ram since my multi-tasking is about as minimal as it gets.

For switching that bios setting, does it have a specific name or a really obvious one ... enable all DDR slots ...?

Thanks for the help

 

[pibb]

754 doesn't support dualchannel, but 2 sticks should have works, If it caused your windows to restart with both sticks in i'd say the new one was bad.. You could buy a matching 512x2 package of memory, but myself I think i'd stick with 1GB modules as they are better for expansion and I just can't see the point in buying the same ammount of memory in 2 that you could as 1 (unless your plan to run dual channel,which you cant)

 

[NuroMancer]

Well,
512 x 2 vs 1024 x1?
Performance should be the same. They are both double sided dims and should thus handle the initial data burst the same.

FYI, if you have a socket 754 board with 3 dims. If you put ram into the last one Eg, 3 512's it seems to quite often bump the speed of the ram down to 333.

SO, go 1 1024 stick ddr400

 

[WolverineX]

Thanks pibb, I think that settles it then. 1 gig stick now and another one when I upgrade to 939. Thanks again guys ...