Chuck_Waugh
n00b
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2007
- Messages
- 13
Definately go with 4gb.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
As someone who's gone from 2X1GB to 4X1GB without any other changes around that time, I can say that 32 bit WinXP Home did perform better in games with 4GB than 2GB. I don't know if it was any better than it would be with 3GB, but I assume if I installed 3GB then some of the address space would still be stolen by my two 512MB video cards and I would have less than the 3.1GB memory that My Computer shows now. The games I was playing around the time were Quake 4, Battlefield 2, Far Cry, Prey, Half-Life 2 Episode One, and a few others.
By the way I am gaming at 2560x1600 so maybe I benefit more from being above 2GB than most cats.
(I know 2 512MB cards doesn't equal 1GB of video RAM but I believe the 2nd card still takes up some extra address space from your system RAM.
I have a similar system to yours, just bought the FX-60 and Vista64-Ultimate bundle through TigerDirect ......I have read that 64bit helps to run a total of 4gb or anything above 2gb for that matter ?
I also game at 2560x1600 and was thinking of going out to get another 2gb to match my current Corsair XMS Platinum Series, would that help gaming at my high resolution and also smooth at Vista64 even more ?>
I bought another 2GB for my machine to reduce the trouble I have with using high quality (>48KHz) samples with DFH in Sonar. I'm waiting for it to arrive..should be Thurs.
Performance Monitor can help with this.Amenx said:I dont know if any of Vistas tools measure or write the pagefile activity to a log to study AFTER a session (perhaps you can direct me to which tool does that),
What other locations does the machine swap to? My best guess would be that pages that are not marked as `dirty' are re-read from their original location on the HDD.They're also reporting only part of the problem, as your machine swaps to other locations besides the page file.
I hope that helps; let me know if you have any other questions.
Thanks for the info Mike, and sorry if I appeared rude in any way earlier. As I mentioned my seeing less paging activity in the pagefile monitor app and your view that it may not be accurate, aside from the accuracy issue do you think that 4gb would still reduce pagefile activity on a practical level or that it may not be significant enough to matter?Performance Monitor can help with this.
The tool just monitors and reports WMI page file usage object. Practically any other WMI recording tool can do the same thing.
Problem is, those counters aren't exactly very accurate. They're also reporting only part of the problem, as your machine swaps to other locations besides the page file. While there aren't performance monitor counters that show only pagefile activity, it turns out you want to know about all paging activity when tuning your machine; not just what ends up in the page file.
I hope that helps; let me know if you have any other questions.
I would've appreciated it if you had just asked more information without the "BS" and "hogwash" comments. But it's no big deal.Thanks for the info Mike, and sorry if I appeared rude in any way earlier.
It'll depend on your applications, really. But I'd expect you to need the page file less with more physical usable memory, sure.aside from the accuracy issue do you think that 4gb would still reduce pagefile activity on a practical level or that it may not be significant enough to matter?
Let me know how it goes, I am interested in maybe getting another 2gb of Corsair XMS Platinum Series
I've got 2GB and 512MB on my card. I play a lot of new games, Oblivion, RB6: Vegas, etc. When I Alt-Tab and check my RAM usage, its never above 1.2GB.
What would be the best way to get 4Gb of RAM on a new system, as I am going to build one soon and would like 4Gb. I plan on getting a BadAxe2, E6700 and hopefully getting ~3GHz out of it.
Should I go for 4x1Gb with the fastest RAM I can afford? Or should I try for the best 2x2Gb modules? I haven't read of any issues, but I'm sure I haven't read every mobo/memory thread out there.
Thanks!
IMHO, since going to 8 Gb is useless before a few years, it's better to get 4 x 1 Gb.
Personnally, to avoid the limitations with 32-bits OS, I might order another set of 2 x 512 Mb of FireStix and fill all 4 banks to retain dual channel operations.
Thing is, used market prices are different than new market prices. If you buy now, 2 gig parts are more expensive. If you sell when 2 gig parts are getting popular, then the market is flooded with 1 gig parts and you might not get much money back.
Rather than worrying about timing it right, I usually end up buying the bigger parts. My next rig will have two 2 gig parts, then I'll just add two more when I've fully converted it to Win64.
Has anyone gotten 2GB sticks of DDR2 to work with a 650i motherboard yet?
I recommend 2 x 2 gig to get 4 gigs of ram for 2 reasons.
1) If you ever go 680i it seems to have a problem with 4 dimms. You have to lower the memory speed quite a bit to get stable operation. (Some other chipsets have this problem as well)
2) You CAN upgrade to 8gigs later if you ever want too..
I'm confused. Why can't you upgrade by just removing the 4x1G parts and replacing them by 4x2G parts?
If 1 is true, then 2 is false, isn't it?
Thanks, nray. Thing is, the limitation you describe isn't specifi to the 680i chipset. (Is it?)
This question has been addressesed many times in the OPerating Systems section of the fourm.Is it even worth to go with 64bit vista? Just like XP 64 bit not many application was supporting.
Is it even worth to go with 64bit vista? Just like XP 64 bit not many application was supporting.
But have they change that?