Dilemma: more memory or bigger hard drive?

[Red Irish]

I have credit on an online pc shop, my rig is an i7 920 with 3gb of OCZ 1333 mHz, a 250gb hard drive and 2 hd 4850's, with Vista 64. What would you update, the memory or the hard drive?

 

[rcpratt]

Would you be looking for more capacity, or a faster hard drive?

 

[Red Irish]

More capacity.

 

[rcpratt]

I guess it depends on how much you need more capacity then! If your drive is starting to fill, or you have things you would like to put on it but don't have room, grab another drive.

Both RAM and drive capacity are dirt cheap right now. I guess my opinion would be to get more capacity.

 

[Red Irish]

Originally posted by: rcpratt
I guess it depends on how much you need more capacity then! If your drive is starting to fill, or you have things you would like to put on it but don't have room, grab another drive.

Both RAM and drive capacity are dirt cheap right now. I guess my opinion would be to get more capacity.

Cheers for your view.

If I went up to 6GB of ram, would I really notice it anywhere (computer is mainly used as an htpc with a good dose of gaming)?

 

[TemjinGold]

What SHOULDN'T you update? 4840s? (do those exist?)

 

[yh125d]

If it's primarily an HTPC, you'll probably want more storage. 250gb can't hold very much media, unless its all SD or you have a file server it's pulling from

 

[Red Irish]

Originally posted by: yh125d
If it's primarily an HTPC, you'll probably want more storage. 250gb can't hold very much media, unless its all SD or you have a file server it's pulling from

Yeah, that's what I was thinking, but I just wanted to hear people's take on the 3 v's 6 gb of RAM.

Cheers

 

[Red Irish]

Originally posted by: TemjinGold
What SHOULDN'T you update? 4840s? (do those exist?)

You got me.

 

[yh125d]

Originally posted by: Red Irish

Originally posted by: yh125d
If it's primarily an HTPC, you'll probably want more storage. 250gb can't hold very much media, unless its all SD or you have a file server it's pulling from

Yeah, that's what I was thinking, but I just wanted to hear people's take on the 3 v's 6 gb of RAM.

Cheers

More ram would definitely be used, but I gamed for a long time on vista 32 (basically limiting myself to ~3gb and it wasn't too bad. Unless gaming is real slow for you I'd opt for the HD first. A 1TB Samsung for $85 shipped or the new 1TB hitachi for ~$75 would be good

 

[TemjinGold]

Originally posted by: Red Irish

Originally posted by: TemjinGold
What SHOULDN'T you update? 4840s? (do those exist?)

You got me.

Sorry, that was a bit rude there. Had just woken up after a night of loud neighbors but that's no excuse.

I've gone from 4 to 8 ram on Vista 64 myself. I didn't notice any difference in performance until I had to take the additional 4 out (once I did, everything felt a good deal slower) so the performance difference is quite minor I imagine. I agree with the recommendation for a 1TB HD upgrade (depending on how old your 250 is, you should notice a much better speed improvement than with the ram upgrade.)

 

[Red Irish]

Originally posted by: TemjinGold

Originally posted by: Red Irish

Originally posted by: TemjinGold
What SHOULDN'T you update? 4840s? (do those exist?)

You got me.

Sorry, that was a bit rude there. Had just woken up after a night of loud neighbors but that's no excuse.

I've gone from 4 to 8 ram on Vista 64 myself. I didn't notice any difference in performance until I had to take the additional 4 out (once I did, everything felt a good deal slower) so the performance difference is quite minor I imagine. I agree with the recommendation for a 1TB HD upgrade (depending on how old your 250 is, you should notice a much better speed improvement than with the ram upgrade.)

No offence taken.

Thanks and thanks to all you other folks for your input, dilemma resolved.

 

[taltamir]

what do you actually DO with the system? it is hard to give out advice without knowing... for example if you play hardcore (full of eye candy) FPS games on a 30 inch display, I Would upgrade the video card. If you just do general computing the RAM... if it is a DVR I would get a bigger HDD to record more shows. And if you have the cash and use it primarily for office work, I'd get an intel X25 G2

 

[Red Irish]

Originally posted by: taltamir
what do you actually DO with the system? it is hard to give out advice without knowing... for example if you play hardcore (full of eye candy) FPS games on a 30 inch display, I Would upgrade the video card. If you just do general computing the RAM... if it is a DVR I would get a bigger HDD to record more shows. And if you have the cash and use it primarily for office work, I'd get an intel X25 G2

Gaming and videos primarily; however, I use a Samsung 32" TV that maxes out at 1366 x 768. I have no plans, or rather no money, to upgrade the TV and I am happy enough at that resolution anyway. I am also content with the performance of the 2 HD 4850's (factory overclocked to 675 Mhz), and in any event the size of the Silverstone LC 17 precludes a lot of the longer cards. I think I'll wait for the DX11 cards to be released and drop in price before I upgrade the graphics as I feel I would also need to upgrade the TV to notice any real difference.

My main concern was whether or not I would notice much of a difference by jumping from 3gb to 6gb of RAM. Moreover, the OCZ RAM is set to run at 1.65v and I have a sneaking suspicion that RAM set to run at 1.5v would drop the cpu temperature (currently idling in mid fifties - it is 42ºC in the street here).

In the end, I will probably go for the HDD.

 

[Blain]

Originally posted by: Red Irish
Moreover, the OCZ RAM is set to run at 1.65v and I have a sneaking suspicion that RAM set to run at 1.5v would drop the cpu temperature

Why would you think that?

 

[Red Irish]

Originally posted by: Blain

Originally posted by: Red Irish
Moreover, the OCZ RAM is set to run at 1.65v and I have a sneaking suspicion that RAM set to run at 1.5v would drop the cpu temperature

Why would you think that?

When I initially installed the RAM I was running at 1.5v and I noticed a slight temperature jump when I pushed it up to 1.64v in the bios.

I wrote to OCZ, enquiring whether or not 1.65v was the voltage ceiling or the required 24/7 operating voltage, here's the reply:


Description: OCZ DDR3 PC3-10666

-------------------------------------------------------

Please be advised that the status on your trouble ticket
has been changed from Acknowledged to In Progress
with the following comment:
-------------------------------------------------------
Comment: change it to 1.66 actually. the boards set the voltage a little lower than they actually say. so use 1.66v in the bios. that voltage rating is what the memory needs to run properly. think of it as the fuel to run the ram. that said, if you exceed 1.66v it may not hurt the ram, but intel warns it could kill the cpu.

so hope this clears everything up.
-jamie s


I concede that this is just a theory, so any feedback would be appreciated.

 

[Denithor]

What's your budget and are you in the US?

If budget allows I would do both - get a DDR3-1600 6GB kit (sell the 3GB kit) and grab either a 640GB or 1TB WD Caviar Black drive.

mushkin 3x2GB DDR3-1600 1.5-1.6V $108 - $10MIR

WD6401AALS $75
WD1001FALS $95

 

[Red Irish]

No, I'm in Spain. Budget is around 100 euros in Alternate, they stock just about everything.

Yeah both would be nice, we'll see.

Cheers

 

[Binky]

I don't think it matters what you do with that system - a larger and more modern hard drive is the better choice. The 250gb drive is probably an older generation drive, so it it hurting your user experience (perceived computer speed) more than any lack of memory. A modern 640GB-2TB drive would increase the system speed more than additional memory.

 

[Red Irish]

Originally posted by: Binky
I don't think it matters what you do with that system - a larger and more modern hard drive is the better choice. The 250gb drive is probably an older generation drive, so it it hurting your user experience (perceived computer speed) more than any lack of memory. A modern 640GB-2TB drive would increase the system speed more than additional memory.

Yes, I have come to the same conclusion. Thanks for the input.

I understand that I should probably open a new thread, but can anybody provide confirmation that memory at 1.5v shows slightly reduced cpu temps when compared to memory that runs at 1.65v?

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: Red Irish

Originally posted by: taltamir
what do you actually DO with the system? it is hard to give out advice without knowing... for example if you play hardcore (full of eye candy) FPS games on a 30 inch display, I Would upgrade the video card. If you just do general computing the RAM... if it is a DVR I would get a bigger HDD to record more shows. And if you have the cash and use it primarily for office work, I'd get an intel X25 G2

Gaming and videos primarily; however, I use a Samsung 32" TV that maxes out at 1366 x 768. I have no plans, or rather no money, to upgrade the TV and I am happy enough at that resolution anyway. I am also content with the performance of the 2 HD 4850's (factory overclocked to 675 Mhz), and in any event the size of the Silverstone LC 17 precludes a lot of the longer cards. I think I'll wait for the DX11 cards to be released and drop in price before I upgrade the graphics as I feel I would also need to upgrade the TV to notice any real difference.

My main concern was whether or not I would notice much of a difference by jumping from 3gb to 6gb of RAM. Moreover, the OCZ RAM is set to run at 1.65v and I have a sneaking suspicion that RAM set to run at 1.5v would drop the cpu temperature (currently idling in mid fifties - it is 42ºC in the street here).

In the end, I will probably go for the HDD.

when i said 30 inch display i meant a 30 inch monitor at 2600x1600 resolution... your resolution? you are maxed out with your current video card
whether you notice ram upgrade or not depends on you. there are certainly programs out there where you will.. there are also situations where you will not.

 

[Red Irish]

Originally posted by: taltamir

Originally posted by: Red Irish

Originally posted by: taltamir
what do you actually DO with the system? it is hard to give out advice without knowing... for example if you play hardcore (full of eye candy) FPS games on a 30 inch display, I Would upgrade the video card. If you just do general computing the RAM... if it is a DVR I would get a bigger HDD to record more shows. And if you have the cash and use it primarily for office work, I'd get an intel X25 G2

Gaming and videos primarily; however, I use a Samsung 32" TV that maxes out at 1366 x 768. I have no plans, or rather no money, to upgrade the TV and I am happy enough at that resolution anyway. I am also content with the performance of the 2 HD 4850's (factory overclocked to 675 Mhz), and in any event the size of the Silverstone LC 17 precludes a lot of the longer cards. I think I'll wait for the DX11 cards to be released and drop in price before I upgrade the graphics as I feel I would also need to upgrade the TV to notice any real difference.

My main concern was whether or not I would notice much of a difference by jumping from 3gb to 6gb of RAM. Moreover, the OCZ RAM is set to run at 1.65v and I have a sneaking suspicion that RAM set to run at 1.5v would drop the cpu temperature (currently idling in mid fifties - it is 42ºC in the street here).

In the end, I will probably go for the HDD.

when i said 30 inch display i meant a 30 inch monitor at 2600x1600 resolution... your resolution? you are maxed out with your current video card
whether you notice ram upgrade or not depends on you. there are certainly programs out there where you will.. there are also situations where you will not.

Yes, in a perfect world I would have a better display, but like I said, I'm happy enough with my current resolution and I am prepared to wait until the price of lcd TV's drops. I simply don't have the room for a separate 30" monitor in my studio apartment and between my girlfriend and my mortgage, any money I have is used for other purposes: welcome to adult life they said.

Any thoughts on the memory voltage issue?

Cheers

 

[Denithor]

Well, memory would be expected to run slightly cooler at 1.5V vs 1.65V. And the memory is physically close to the CPU on the motherboard so there may be some contributing effect or something. Overall though I doubt you'll really see much difference.

The reason 1.5V memory is prefered is more because it tends to have better compatibility with motherboards. Being able to boot right out of the box is a good thing.

 

[Blain]

Originally posted by: Denithor
The reason 1.5V memory is prefered is more because it tends to have better compatibility with motherboards.

And because 1.5v is the industry standard for DDR3

 

[Red Irish]

Originally posted by: Denithor
Well, memory would be expected to run slightly cooler at 1.5V vs 1.65V. And the memory is physically close to the CPU on the motherboard so there may be some contributing effect or something. Overall though I doubt you'll really see much difference.

The reason 1.5V memory is prefered is more because it tends to have better compatibility with motherboards. Being able to boot right out of the box is a good thing.

I had no problem booting right out of the box with the OCZ, but your observations back up my own views.

End of issue, thanks folks.