2GB vs 3GB

M

MrIgoe

n00b
Joined
Dec 1, 2004
Messages
51
I did a quick search for a topic like this and didn't see one, so if it all ready exists, I'm sorry.

So I'm running Vista with 2 GB of ram in dual channel, but some of the newer games hang a bit after you exit out, so I'm considering getting one more gig.

Would there be a noticeable speed decrease going from 2 1GB sticks in dual channel to having 2 in dual channel and an additional Gig? I'm only running 32-bit so having 4GB won't help me much.

Just wondering if I'll actually be detrimenting my performance by tacking on that extra gig out of dual channel.
 
I have 3 gig right now just because a friend of mine did not want 2x512 sticks he had so I threw them in my extra slots. I don't notice any difference to be honest, I suppose things may be loading a hair faster.

On a side note are you saying you want to run 2x1Gig sticks in one channel and then a single 1Gig stick in another channel without a friend (3 sticks total)? I am not 100% sure if that is what you were saying, but if it is I don't think that will work. When I did something like that it ignored my pair and only recognized the lone stick.
 
Just pick up a 2x512 set from the egg. I personally love the feeling of more RAM. I remember when I went to 2GB in XP and my computer flew after playing a game, and allowed me to have programs running when I gamed.
 
The extra gig should add a bit more performance because i often have my ram maxed out while running Firefox, photoshop, crysis or itunes and im using 2 gigs with a Q6600 on Vista UL
 
For most users, they're probably not going to see much benefit above 2 GB of RAM, even under Windows Vista.

For people who do a lot of higher end graphical work, that extra gig can come in handy under Vista.
 
Some games will show certain improvements with more than 2gb of memory. But, it's hard to say without knowing more about the OPs rig.
 
Mike Clements said:
Some games will show certain improvements with more than 2gb of memory. But, it's hard to say without knowing more about the OPs rig.
Click to expand...
Exactly, some games might benefit, but you will only notice a real difference in photoshop or especially when using vista with Aero and the damn sidebar.
 
As others have said it depends what your doing. I have 2gb and I'd like to get 4gb, but thats because I do alot of gaming and photoshop work.
 
Ram is a lot cheaper now, I can't see why you wouldn't go for it. I was reading that even 8 gbs is amazing with photoshop. it uses the ram as part of the scratch disk.
 
Ok.

My rig is pretty standard, C2D @2.8, 2 GB of corsair 6400, 640MB evga 8800GTS

I went with another gig as 2 512 sticks, 6400, to stick in dual channel.

So, I'll have 2 1GB sticks in one channel and 2 512s in the other.

The ram is identical to the stuff I all ready have in there, save for half as much, to maximize compatibility. (love me some corsair!)
 
Depending on what you are doing with the computer, the extra gig can come in handy. My laptop can only support 3 gigs of memory due to the chipset, and I'm just about ready to throw in the 3rd gig. My animation programs easily eat up my 2 gigs. I'll ften be running with about 10mb free, and for me, there's a noticeable slowdown.

Is there a memory monitor you can get to see how much memory you are actually using?

I have one in my taskbar.

-ST-
 
When I upgraded from 2GB to 4GB (on XP32), Crysis loaded a lot quicker and there was much less stuttering in game.

Running the Crysis benchmark, with 2GB ram, it took 4 runs for the average FPS to settle.
With 4GB Ram, its almost right first run and is settled at max on the second run.
 
Well, after I installed the extra gig Vista dropped my performance index from 5.5 to 4.8.

Don't know what thats about...

Noticed a much snappier exit from resource intensive games, and it's much better at multitasking with video stuff.
 
Well you found out the real life answer, its better, forget Vistas performance index.

On Intel chipsets the board will go into flex asymmetrical memory mode which means it will treat and access your original two sticks in full dual channel mode and then will split the 3rd stick logically in half to maintain a pseudo dual channel mode with almost no loss of performance and the extra memory in the machine will far outweigh any tiny penalty.
 
Get 4GB rather than 3GB even if Vista won't register the last stick. Why? It is a lot easier to sell Ram sticks in pairs if you wish to upgrade later.
 
MrIgoe said:
I did a quick search for a topic like this and didn't see one, so if it all ready exists, I'm sorry.

So I'm running Vista with 2 GB of ram in dual channel, but some of the newer games hang a bit after you exit out, so I'm considering getting one more gig.

Would there be a noticeable speed decrease going from 2 1GB sticks in dual channel to having 2 in dual channel and an additional Gig? I'm only running 32-bit so having 4GB won't help me much.

Just wondering if I'll actually be detrimenting my performance by tacking on that extra gig out of dual channel.
Click to expand...

IF i am reading this correctly, your configuration would be 2x1gb + 1x1gb so 3 slots. This means you're running in single channel mode as opposed to dual channel mode.

The more memory question has been answered ad nausium, but i'd like to know what real-world performance differences exist between single vs dual channel mode.
 
chrispycrunch said:
IF i am reading this correctly, your configuration would be 2x1gb + 1x1gb so 3 slots. This means you're running in single channel mode as opposed to dual channel mode.
Click to expand...


That was the ORIGINAL plan, but I opted to get 2x512 instead of 1x1GB to utilize the gig in dual channel as mentioned above. So my current config is 2x1GB in dual channel and 2x512MB in dual channel.

AND:

I fixed my problem. I changed the voltage slightly and BOOM, back to 5.5 where I was before.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top