Memory Advice 3gigs or 2 gigs Vista

[Burnc4]

Hi All

I am going give my system a much needed memory upgrade in about 4 weeks...I am running Vista Home Premium 32bit. I want to do some gaming (UT3 and COD4) and I also do a good bit of photo editing in Photoshop.

Currently I have:
E6300 running @ 2.93Ghz,
Asus P5B
500 Watt PSU
512mb Gskill PKs PC 6400 ( I know I know I was on a slim budget when I built this system lol)

I wanted to OC higher than 3ghz but my system becomes unstable once I go over the 400 FSB. (I suspect the memory is the problem because Orthos gives memory errors when I run 3 Ghz or higher).

Performance wise would it be best to get a 4 gig Gskill kit (I know my computer will only recognize 3 about gigs of it) for $120 knowing I may not be able to OC higher? OR Should I get 2gig HZ for $130 and try to OC higher?

I understand the 32bit addressing limitation on 4 gigs of RAM using Vista 32bit. I want to know is would 3 gigs (2 x 2gb) @ 2.93Ghs give better system performance than 2gigs (2x1gb) at say 3.3Ghz (assuming the HZ allow me to break 3 ghz and remain stable)

 

[RavenGuard]

Chances are you won't need more than 2gb for a while. Everyone I know with new gaming rigs didn't see a need for more than 2gb, myself included.

There just isn't much that uses near that much memory.

 

[JustaGeek]

The only game I know that benefits from over 2GB of RAM is Quake 4 in Ultra Quality settings. Perhaps STALKER comes close to it, too.

Up to 72% memory use with 3GB of RAM and XP in Quake 4.

Perhaps 32-bit Vista could benefit from 3GB in games - my laptop uses between 33 - 55% in Vista HP, and that's just for everyday use, no gaming, with 2GB of RAM installed.

 

[taltamir]

For vista you would want 4 gigs on 64bit if you are a gamer.. If you are running 32bit and 2gigs then stick with XP.

Vista is the only option if you want to run 64bit. Which gives you huge performance boost on the handful of applications that are natively 64bit. As well as the ability to go beyond 3gb of ram.

So:
1. Get that 4GB kit.
2. Move to either XP or 64bit vista.

 

[nonameo]

supreme commander would benefit from 4 gigs on large maps and long games with 4 or more players

 

[toadeater]

Get 4GB, load Vista using the /PAE option for ~3.5GB to be recognized, then use 1GB as a RAMdisk.

http://www.softpedia.com/get/S...l-Hard-Drive-Pro.shtml

 

[Acanthus]

Supreme commander, Vanguard, and EQ2 can all run up over 2GB on high settings in vista.

Vista has about a 550MB footprint in itself.

 

[taltamir]

550MB? vista + all the drivers = 1.3GB of ram on my computer...

Heck XP was a hair under 700MB with nothing non essential running.

 

[Burnc4]

Originally posted by: RavenGuard
Chances are you won't need more than 2gb for a while. Everyone I know with new gaming rigs didn't see a need for more than 2gb, myself included.

There just isn't much that uses near that much memory.

The thing is I can get 3 gigs (4 gig kit) of usable RAM for cheaper than 2gigs of slightly higher performance RAM. Considering that, which configuration do you guys think would be faster?
I'd like to make my system as fast as possible cuz I don't plan on any major upgrades (new motherboard and or processor) for at least another 2 years or so.
If the performace between 3 gigs and 2 gig isn't significant. I'd just get 2 gigs of HZ and go for a higher OC.

 

[JustaGeek]

Originally posted by: Burnc4

Originally posted by: RavenGuard
Chances are you won't need more than 2gb for a while. Everyone I know with new gaming rigs didn't see a need for more than 2gb, myself included.

There just isn't much that uses near that much memory.

The thing is I can get 3 gigs (4 gig kit) of usable RAM for cheaper than 2gigs of slightly higher performance RAM. Considering that, which configuration do you guys think would be faster?
I'd like to make my system as fast as possible cuz I don't plan on any major upgrades (new motherboard and or processor) for at least another 2 years or so.
If the performace between 3 gigs and 2 gig isn't significant. I'd just get 2 gigs of HZ and go for a higher OC.

Bingo!

 

[Bradtechonline]

I ran 2 GB in Vista, and played BF2 for a while. I jumped up to 3 GB, and the performance was night and day in Battlefield 2. I went from 98-100% memory utilization down to the 50-60's. It seems Vista manages memory better when you go over 2 GB.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: taltamir
550MB? vista + all the drivers = 1.3GB of ram on my computer...

Heck XP was a hair under 700MB with nothing non essential running.

Thats superfetch, and if your memory usage gets high enough windows simply dumps the superfetched memory.

 

[Burnc4]

Originally posted by: Bradtechonline
I ran 2 GB in Vista, and played BF2 for a while. I jumped up to 3 GB, and the performance was night and day in Battlefield 2. I went from 98-100% memory utilization down to the 50-60's. It seems Vista manages memory better when you go over 2 GB.

lol just when I decided to go for 2 gigs of HZ...at this point I'm still not quite sure yet if I'll get the 4gigs or the 2gigs...I figured more is always better especially with Vista...But I'm leaning towards 2 gigs

 

[jonmcc33]

Originally posted by: RavenGuard
Chances are you won't need more than 2gb for a while. Everyone I know with new gaming rigs didn't see a need for more than 2gb, myself included.

There just isn't much that uses near that much memory.

I've used up as much as 1.5GB running Call of Duty 4. That's cutting it close. I advise 4GB for preparing for the future.

 

[jdkick]

I think you'll be fine with 2GB. I noticed some limitations with Battlefield 2 and only 1.2GB... going to 2GB smoothed out the game play with a little left to spare. If you like to run a lot of stuff in the background tho, 3GB could be useful.

 

[djspl]

Originally posted by: taltamir
550MB? vista + all the drivers = 1.3GB of ram on my computer...

Heck XP was a hair under 700MB with nothing non essential running.

1.3GB is what Vista uses on my machine.

A 700MB XP startup is a huge, beached blue whale of a startup for XP, IMO. I can't imagine the junk that runs with that. My trimmed and toned XP startup is 240MB with networking, anitvirus and some other stuff. My Protools machine starts with 98MB usage running XP.

 

[kenrippy]

get 4gb while it's so cheap.

 

[soonerproud]

If you are overclocking, go with the higher quality 2 gigs for now. You will get a better overclock and your system will be more stable. Overclocking will give you more of a benefit in most games than adding more RAM at 2 gigs. You can always buy more of the same memory later if you decide you need more than 2 gigs in the future.

 

[JustaGeek]

Originally posted by: Bradtechonline
I ran 2 GB in Vista, and played BF2 for a while. I jumped up to 3 GB, and the performance was night and day in Battlefield 2. I went from 98-100% memory utilization down to the 50-60's. It seems Vista manages memory better when you go over 2 GB.

66% of 3GB is 2GB - which is the same as you had before, with 2GB at 99%.

That's what I experienced with the XP and Quake 4 at Ultra Quality settings. 99% with 2GB - now it goes up to 72%, so even in XP the use will go beyond 2GB.

The performance difference is noticable - no "stuttering", very smooth.

 

[jjmIII]

You really have to decide for yourself......both camps make good points.

Even though I think 2gb is plenty, this one made a lot of sense (cents$)......

Originally posted by: kenrippy
get 4gb while it's so cheap.

 

[Nathelion]

DDR2 is only going to get cheaper, at least until DDR3 starts entering the mainstream and DDR2 production is phased out.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: soonerproud
If you are overclocking, go with the higher quality 2 gigs for now. You will get a better overclock and your system will be more stable. Overclocking will give you more of a benefit in most games than adding more RAM at 2 gigs. You can always buy more of the same memory later if you decide you need more than 2 gigs in the future.

Except that im using value ram and my overclock is just fine

 

[kenrippy]

Originally posted by: Nathelion
DDR2 is only going to get cheaper, at least until DDR3 starts entering the mainstream and DDR2 production is phased out.

it can't get much cheaper than $20 for a 2gb ddr800 kit can it?

 

[soonerproud]

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Except that im using value ram and my overclock is just fine

You may have heard the song from a 80's hair metal band that goes "You Just Got Lucky"?

 

[magreen]

Where did you see $20 for a 2gb ddr2-800 kit?? I'd jump on that myself.