memory: two sticks versus one

[stickybytes]

read ^^. will two sticks of lets say 256mb ram have better performance, worse, or same performance as one stick of 512mb ram in a non dual channel environment (ie 754 athlon 64)?

 

[StrangerGuy]

There will be no performance difference between 2 x 256MB and 1 x 512MB in a single channel setup.

 

[stickybytes]

would there be any difference technically for say because two sticks mean the cpu can split up the share of load among two memory chips vs one?

 

[Jiggz]

There's a difference when using one stick and two or even more sticks of ram. The more sticks you use the longer is the latency of the memroy. This is because there's more wiring to send the signal. Although, with two sticks, the difference is not noticeable even with memory test programs. But as soon as you hit the 3rd or 4th sticks, the difference will be detectable. That's why having more stick of rams is not necessarily faster compare to a single stick of ram considering everything is the same except for the density or size of the rams. Probably one of the reasons why densier rams (512 mb) cost more than 2 X 256 MB rams when more material was used in making the two unit rams.

 

[Kingofcomputer]

one stick is better, it uses higher density, newer chips than two sticks (assume both are same single side or double side).
you have the room to add another stick later.

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: stickybytes
would there be any difference technically for say because two sticks mean the cpu can split up the share of load among two memory chips vs one?

That's almost what dual channel does do - the chipset has two channels to the RAM. It's not load sharing; it's a way of talking to two channels of RAM at once. If you don't have a dual channel memory controller, you can't split it up, as you say.

 

[imported_Nacelle]

I don't remember where I read it. But, the person doing the tests got slightly better framerates in games from having 2 sticks vs 1.