6400 or 8500

  • Thread starter Thread starter ajm
  • Start date Start date

ajm

ajm

Associate
Joined
13 Apr 2004
Posts
1,761
I am thinking of upgrading to..

Intel Core 2 Quad Pro Q6600 "Energy Efficient SLACR 95W Edition" 2.40GHz (1066FSB) - Retail

Gigabyte GA-P35-DS3R (Socket 775) PCI-Express DDR2 Motherboard

and a 512 mb video card not yet decided which but will be at least a 8800 GTS.

Would i be better off going for 2 gig of the 8500 ram or 4 gig of 6400 ram (Both dual ch) considering i will only be using Xp 32 bit and not doing any overclocking ?
 
i think you could get away with buying pc2-4200 RAM, but get pc2-6400 stuff so you can OC when you feel the urge to/when you give into temptation
 
Would i be better off going for 2 gig of the 8500 ram or 4 gig of 6400 ram (Both dual ch) considering i will only be using Xp 32 bit and not doing any overclocking ?
If you aren't overclocking you might as well buy 667, or even 533, you only need 533 to run at stock with a Q6600.

To answer your question get PC2-6400.
 
buy the best you can afford.. that way you can upgrade your processor at a later date without having to buy ram as well :)
 
buy the best you can afford.. that way you can upgrade your processor at a later date without having to buy ram as well
To an extent, if you get 667 Mhz RAM then you can use 1333 FSB cpus (common), if you get 800 Mhz RAM you can use 1600 FSB cpus (very uncommon but on the way) and if you get PC2-8500..... ?

I'd wager that by the time PC2-8500 is required to match stock FSB DDR3 will be more common and much cheaper than it is now and is where AMD and Intel are going (AM3, Nehalem).
 
Well it looks like my best option as i will not be oc-ing would be 4gig 6400.
get 4 gig of PC2 8000 as this will allow you to have 500fsb without having to clock ure ram
This confuses me as others have said it is a waste of time getting anything else:confused:

Thanks to everyone that has posted info.
 
Back
Top Bottom