1gb @ 333mhz or 2gb @ 400mhz ????

StevieP · 8 Jun 2006 at 13:48

I currently have 1gb (2 x 512mb sticks) of Geil Value 3200 DDR400 memory in my machine and want to upgrade to 2gb.

I have had a look at my current memory (running in dual channel) and its double sided and my motherboard specs say that if I add another 2 sticks of the same, they will only run at 333mhz and not the 400mhz the 2 sticks are running at currently.

My question is, will I see much of a difference between these 2 speeds coz I dont want to have to replace my current 1gb with 2 x 1gb sticks just to get a small performance increase if I can get away with shoving 2 more 512mb sticks into the remaining 2 slots!!

Any help will be appreciated....

SteveP

Street · 8 Jun 2006 at 14:08

As well as running at 333MHz, they will also have to run at 2T giving you another performance drop. 4 sticks puts more stress on the memory controller and might also hamper any overclocking. I would personally sell the 2 512 sticks and put the money towards 2x1gig sticks.

Dutch Guy · 8 Jun 2006 at 16:02

Only run with four sticks if you absolutely cannot afford 2x1Gb sticks, it can lead to instability, even at stock speeds and with a older CPU like a Venice the chance of problems is even bigger.

You would be better off selling your current RAM and buying (budget) 2x1Gb sticks.

Minstadave · 8 Jun 2006 at 20:49

Your Venice will run at 400Mhz 2T with 4x512mb, if you're playing BF2 or anything that else that can use over a gig of RAM then I'd go for it.

2x1Gb is better, but only 2-3% boost is seen running at 1T rather than 2T.

Minstadave · 8 Jun 2006 at 20:50

Dutch Guy said:
Only run with four sticks if you absolutely cannot afford 2x1Gb sticks, it can lead to instability, even at stock speeds and with a older CPU like a Venice the chance of problems is even bigger.

I've not heard or seem that, I ran 4x512mb with an old Winchester clocked at DDR500 2T. Venice isn't an old core? :confused:

Its more than capable of 4x512mb at its stock 400Mhz 2T.

Dutch Guy · 8 Jun 2006 at 23:03

Sorry peeps, I mixed up the Venice and Newcastle

Looks like four sticks is go, just make sure o buy the same as you already have.

str · 8 Jun 2006 at 23:19

It looks like memory prices are falling fast (based on second hand market) so there's some bargains to be had if you're willing to use 4 x 512MB of quality ram.

StevieP · 9 Jun 2006 at 09:19

Minstadave said:
2x1Gb is better, but only 2-3% boost is seen running at 1T rather than 2T.

According to the mobo specs the memory can only run at 333mhz if I have 4 x 512mb sticks (as the Geil chips are double sided) - but what is 1T & 2T though?? Is it something to do with dual channel???

StevieP

Minstadave · 9 Jun 2006 at 11:01

StevieP said:
According to the mobo specs the memory can only run at 333mhz if I have 4 x 512mb sticks (as the Geil chips are double sided) - but what is 1T & 2T though?? Is it something to do with dual channel???

StevieP

It says 333mhz with 4x512mb because the motherboard was released before the Venice cores came out which do better with 4x512mb.

The 1T/2T timing is also know as command rate, its another memory timing, nothing to do with single/dual channel. There's more here:

http://www.overclock.net/amd-memory/32605-1t-vs-2t-command-rate-there.html

StevieP · 9 Jun 2006 at 13:10

Sorry to be a noob but does this mean then that if I do buy 2 more 512mb Geil Value sticks, because my processor is a Venice, they will definitely run at 400mhz, still dual channel....but run at 2T rather than 1T?? (albeit take into account the slight performance decrease as per the link)

The reason I'm looking at this is to get a decent performance increase in games like BF2 and the new Ghost Recon game - will I still see a substantial difference even though they are running at 2T???

Thanks again guys....

StevieP

Dutch Guy · 9 Jun 2006 at 13:33

StevieP said:
Sorry to be a noob but does this mean then that if I do buy 2 more 512mb Geil Value sticks, because my processor is a Venice, they will definitely run at 400mhz, still dual channel....but run at 2T rather than 1T?? P

You are right, it will be a little slower due to running at 2T but in situations where 1Gb isn't enough it will be faster, so for Battlefield 2 at high detail 2Gb will be an advantage.

Also in games like F.E.A.R. and Oblivion.

I even found Windows being faster with 2Gb with things like opening Windows Explorer and browsing shortcuts etc...

str · 9 Jun 2006 at 13:38

Considering how little difference timings etc have on performance (10% max some say) we can easily come to the conclusion that 2GB of memory is worth it due to the relatively low cost these days and what with games requiring more than 1GB and also Vista is on the horizon which is reported to also require much more than the old standard of 1GB to run fast.

Some have even mentioned 4GB will soon be the new standard and I don't doubt that'll be the case within a couple of years.