Which is better or are they the same?

[hootpie]

I have 2x512 right now, but I'm starting to think that once I get BF2, I'm going to want to upgrade to 2gigs to make sure the game runs really smooth. I'm wondering whether I should just get another 2x512, or sell my 2x512 for a 2x1024.

If the performance is the same with both, I'll just get the 2x512's, because I don't see myself upgrading past 2gigs of ram anytime soon. Here are my system specs for ref:

AMD A64 3200+
Asus A8N-E
2x512 Corsair PC3200
BFG 7800GTX (whenever Dell decides to ship it to me)
74gb Raptor

 

[The Pentium Guy]

2x1024 is better because of dual channel. You'll take a performance hit with 4x512 because the memory will revert to DDR333 (if you're lucky that is, some people are having trouble posting at all).

 

[MobiusPizza]

Originally posted by: The Pentium Guy
2x1024 is better because of dual channel. You'll take a performance hit with 4x512 because the memory will revert to DDR333 (if you're lucky that is, some people are having trouble posting at all).

That only happens if he is using the older Newcastle CPU
That problem is non-existent with the new Reversion E Venice CPU

Generally, if you game a lot and have money to spare, you can get overclockerable low timing 4*512MB RAM so that 2-2-2-5 timing and 250Mhz memory speed (DDR500) is possible
Although populating 4 slots on a Venice CPU would mean a command timning of 2T instead of 1T, gaming performance is unhindered by no more than few fps. Plus the fact that running fast timing of 2225 and with a high fsb more than offset the performance loss of 2T, but instead give you much performance increase

Otherwise it might be cheaper to get 2*1GB Ram
The more expensive 1GB modules can run relatively high frequency of ~230Mhz while offering mid-range timing of 2.5-3-3-7
You don't get the top performance, but it's easy and convenient, and performance is good enough thanks to 1T command timing.
Another minor advantage is that you can expand your system to more than 2GB. But this scenario is unlikely (Performance hit and uneccessity of more than 2GB)

Reference Text

 

[Hacp]

Ya, It really depends. If you 64 is a newcastle or Winny, then you will downclock with 4 sticks. However, if you have a venice, then get 4 sticks of 512.

 

[dguy6789]

2X1024 is still better than 4X512 even if he has a venice. If you get 2X1024, you can upgrade to more ram later.

 

[ThroatPunch]

Originally posted by: dguy6789
2X1024 is still better than 4X512 even if he has a venice. If you get 2X1024, you can upgrade to more ram later.

So then it's a question of price (paying for 2gigs, or just 1 gig with the 512s) or upgradability.

 

[t3h l337 n3wb]

By the time you need more than 2GB, you'll probably have to upgrade your mobo anyways

 

[imported_rod]

2x1024 would probably be better, but if it involves selling your current RAM, it might not be worth it.

If you have a venice core, then I'd say just get another two sticks of 512. But if you have a winchester, Im not sure...

Originally posted by: t3h l337 n3wb
By the time you need more than 2GB, you'll probably have to upgrade your mobo anyways

YEAH, good point.

RoD

 

[hootpie]

I'll see how my computer does with 2x512, then if I need to upgrade I'll sell my 512's and go with 2x1024. Thanks for the replies

 

[Noriaki]

Older A64s will downgrade to DDR333 with 4 sticks.

RevE A64s (Venice, San Diego or any dual cores) can run at DDR400 with 4 sticks, although the motherboard might default to DDR333 with 4 sticks because of the older cores, it should run fine at DDR400 if you switch it back.


However, even RevEs will drop you to 2T command rate with 4 sticks.


So the ideal situation is 2x1024 with any. But how much you lose depends.

If I had a RevE chip and already had 2x512, I'd just grab 2 more 512s and live with the 2T, you've still got DDR400 speed.

If I had a non-RevE I'd get 2x1024, I wouldn't want to drop down to DDR333 and 2T command rate.

 

[dguy6789]

If I had 2X512, I would grab a 1GB stick stick it in there, and have full dual channel with 2GB, and STILL have a slot left over to upgrade.

 

[Noriaki]

Originally posted by: dguy6789
If I had 2X512, I would grab a 1GB stick stick it in there, and have full dual channel with 2GB, and STILL have a slot left over to upgrade.

The documentation for the S939 boards I've seen won't do dual channel with 3 DIMMs.

My Athlon XP board will do dual channel with whatever the hell I stick in there, the channels don't have to be the same number of DIMMs or the same total size or anything, but the Athlon64 boards seem to be a lot more picky (or at least it says it's in dual channel mode, right now I've a 256MB and a 512MB stick in there, but who can say for sure if it is actually running Dual Channel?)

Do you know if this information is incorrect? I've never actaully tried an A64 board with 3 DIMMs, just read the documentation that says it won't work.

 

[n7]

2x1024 for sure.

I have 4x512 MB with a Venice, & even at 2T, i have to run the RAM at very low speeds (i.e., 2:1 divider) for it to be even somewhat stable.

IOW, if you are OCing, get 2x0124 MB...& even if not, you'll be able to use 1T with only two dimms.

 

[MobiusPizza]

Originally posted by: n7
2x1024 for sure.

I have 4x512 MB with a Venice, & even at 2T, i have to run the RAM at very low speeds (i.e., 2:1 divider) for it to be even somewhat stable.

IOW, if you are OCing, get 2x0124 MB...& even if not, you'll be able to use 1T with only two dimms.

And you sure each DIMM can run at high speed on their own?
(So to prove it's the memory controller's the bottleneck)

Oops I planned to get 4*512MB high quaality RAM beliving that memory controller's not at fault

 

[dguy6789]

Originally posted by: Noriaki

Originally posted by: dguy6789
If I had 2X512, I would grab a 1GB stick stick it in there, and have full dual channel with 2GB, and STILL have a slot left over to upgrade.

The documentation for the S939 boards I've seen won't do dual channel with 3 DIMMs.

My Athlon XP board will do dual channel with whatever the hell I stick in there, the channels don't have to be the same number of DIMMs or the same total size or anything, but the Athlon64 boards seem to be a lot more picky (or at least it says it's in dual channel mode, right now I've a 256MB and a 512MB stick in there, but who can say for sure if it is actually running Dual Channel?)

Do you know if this information is incorrect? I've never actaully tried an A64 board with 3 DIMMs, just read the documentation that says it won't work.

Man oh man, I have explained how dual channel works probably 1 in 5 of all my posts

Dual channel means, having the same amount of ram in each channel. It has NOTHING to do with sticks at all. Your board has two channels for memory, two sticks can be on each channel.

Dual channel will work perfectly as long as the same amount of ram is in each channel reguardless of the number of sticks.

Suppose channel A has 2X512 and Channel B has 2X512. It would run 2GB in dual channel. Suppose A had 1X1024 and B had 1X1024. It would run 2GB in dual channel.

Suppose channel A had 2X512 and B had 1X1024. It would run with 2GB of dual channel just like the others, because each channel has the same amount of ram in it, but not the same number of sticks.

Dual channel memory has NOTHING to do with the amount of sticks you have. As long as the same amount of memory is in each channel, it will run perfectly in dual channel.

To find out which slot is which channel, RTFM.

 

[Noriaki]

Originally posted by: dguy6789
Dual channel will work perfectly as long as the same amount of ram is in each channel reguardless of the number of sticks.

My AthlonXP (nForce2 Ultra) board tells me that I am presently running in dual channel mode with 1x256 in channel A and 1x512 in channel B. Are you claiming it is lying to me?
(I find this claim of dual channel to be somewhat suspect, perhaps it is)

Dual channel memory has NOTHING to do with the amount of sticks you have. As long as the same amount of memory is in each channel, it will run perfectly in dual channel.

Doesn't it?

If I look here MSi K8N Neo2 Platinum it says very clearly dual channel DDR works only with DIMMS {1,2}, {3,4}, or {1,2,3,4} filled. Is this also wrong?

It also says very clearly not to install 3 DIMMs at all.

So if it has nothing to do with the number of DIMMs installed, and only the total size of the channels, why does it say these things?


Edit: I just looked up some random Asus nForce4 board and it says what you said, the channels simply have to match total size, and should match CAS ratings.

I also looked up a Gigabyte nForce3 board and it says the same thing the MSi does...how odd.

The Asus board is nForce4, not 3 (I did not see an immediately obvious Asus S939 nForce3 board), but since the memory controller is on the A64 that shouldn't matter....

How strange.

 

[dguy6789]

I would think that they tell you not to run 3 dimms because they wouldn't want you to make a mistake and have an unbalanced amount of memory in the channels and cause a problem. It is likely an idiot proofing thing. Dual channel spec is that there must be an equal amount of memory in each channel, having nothing to do with sticks. This is how it is on all Pentium 4 and Athlon XP boards that support dual channel, so I see no reason why Athlon 64s should be any different. Infact I believe it really IS an idiot proof thing being stated by MSI, as the mainboard manufacturer cannot say ANYTHING about memory settings as the entire memory controller and all that has to do with it(memory timings, dual channel ect...) is on die on the Athlon 64, and therefore should be the same on ALL boards reguardless of what the manufacturer of the board says.

Also, with Athlon XPs(maybe 64 and Pentium 4s, I have not done it on them) you can do a half dual channel setup. You can have 256 in one, and 512 in the other. 512MB of your ram will run in dual channel, but when it gets to the last 256MB part of the ram for an app, that part of the ram is only in single channel.

Dual channel works like this: It alternates in the data being read, going Left Right Left Right Left Right ect... There has to be an equal amount of ram in the left and an equal amount in the right for it to function in dual channel mode. In your case, 256MB of ram on the 256 and 256MB on the 512 stick are working together in dual channel. The last 256MB on the 512 stick has no "Left" side to alternate with(since the 256 on the other channel is working with the other 256MB on the 512 stick's channel) so that part of the ram is running by itself in regular channel mode.