AMD Processors
Decrease font size
Increase font size
Topic Title: Memory Question
Topic Summary:
Created On: 10/09/2005 02:23 PM
Status: Read Only
Linear : Threading : Single : Branch
Search Topic Search Topic
Topic Tools Topic Tools
View similar topics View similar topics
View topic in raw text format. Print this topic.
 10/09/2005 02:23 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
Tevarian
Junior Member

Posts: 3
Joined: 10/09/2005

Somebody recommended this site to me for a question i have. Im planning on build a computer this christmas and have been researching a few things. The motherboard I am planning on purchasing is the Asus A8N-SLI Premium with a FX-57 which allows a max of 4 gig's of memory. I was thinking why not fill it to the max but then i have heard that the more memory you have it slows itself down. I know 4 gig's is overkill but why not put it in if its not going to hurt anything. Can anyone clarify any of this for me and recommend anything? I was thinking of either installing 4 512 modules or 4 1gig modules. Thank you.
 10/09/2005 02:36 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
axy1985
Ninja Zombie Killer

Posts: 6424
Joined: 08/25/2004

first off, 4x512MB will top on 2GB, but you already know that.
second, it's not that "if it will take 4 GB, let's give it 4 GB!" there is a reason of why nearly no one does that.
setting 4GB of RAM will increase latencies and/or lower speed and/or set the timings to 2T. if you add all of those things, you get that performance gets very crippled.
frankly, mobos "support" so much RAM to garantee future compatibilty or expansion, not so they get filled as they are bought. nowadays, more than 1GB:
1. is overkill (not needed, too few apos/no games require or need that much)
2. decreases performance
i suggest you settle for 1GB of quality, performance RAM for now, you don't need more. you'll save money, as you won't lose any performance (in fact, you gain performance).
of course, i'm assuming you'll give the PC a "normal" use, mixed perhaps with gaming. if you're setting up a media enconding/server/who knows what else PC, then you might need the extra RAM. what ARE you going to use the PC for?
hope it helps /smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' />

-------------------------
AMD Athlon II X2 440 @ 2.7 GHz (Sempron unlocked)
2x2GB OCZ DDR3 1600MHz 8-8-8-24 AMD Black Edition
Gigabyte GA-890GPA-UD3H 890GX
MSI nVidia GTX460 1GB Hawk
X-Fi Titanium Fatal1ty Professional
Antec TruePower New 650W
 10/09/2005 02:41 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
Reinvented
Senior Member

Posts: 289
Joined: 04/27/2005

QUOTE(axy1985 @ Oct 9 2005, 10:36 AM)first off, 4x512MB will top on 2GB, but you already know that.
second, it's not that "if it will take 4 GB, let's give it 4 GB!" there is a reason of why nearly no one does that.
setting 4GB of RAM will increase latencies and/or lower speed and/or set the timings to 2T. if you add all of those things, you get that performance gets very crippled.
frankly, mobos "support" so much RAM to garantee future compatibilty or expansion, not so they get filled as they are bought. nowadays, more than 1GB:
1. is overkill (not needed, too few apos/no games require or need that much)
2. decreases performance
i suggest you settle for 1GB of quality, performance RAM for now, you don't need more. you'll save money, as you won't lose any performance (in fact, you gain performance).
of course, i'm assuming you'll give the PC a "normal" use, mixed perhaps with gaming. if you're setting up a media enconding/server/who knows what else PC, then you might need the extra RAM. what ARE you going to use the PC for?
hope it helps /smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' />
[right][snapback]519565[/snapback][/right]


In all honesty, I'd only fill up all 4 dimms if I was running a dual core cpu. But, 4x 512 for stability, and 2x 512 for performance AND stability. I was running my 3700+ with 4x 512...and I got nothing but headaches and restarts from it. But, it worked eventually...and then...the performance dropped a bit...but stability was greater. It's all about preference.

-------------------------
{Signature removed, please read the Forum Rules and Guidlines regarding signatures}
 10/09/2005 02:45 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
Tevarian
Junior Member

Posts: 3
Joined: 10/09/2005

Its mostly going to be a gaming PC... i want to build something with good performance and money is not too much of an issue at the moment so i thoguht if 4 gig's doesn't hurt anything why not fill it, but if what you say is correct i might as well go for the 2 gig's or maybe even only get 1 gig.
 10/09/2005 02:46 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
Reinvented
Senior Member

Posts: 289
Joined: 04/27/2005

QUOTE(Tevarian @ Oct 9 2005, 10:45 AM)Its mostly going to be a gaming PC... i want to build something with good performance and money is not too much of an issue at the moment so i thoguht if 4 gig's doesn't hurt anything why not fill it, but if what you say is correct i might as well go for the 2 gig's or maybe even only get 1 gig.
[right][snapback]519570[/snapback][/right]


Another popular option to even do is 2x 1GB...latencies will be like 3-4-4-8...but, you'll still remain at the 1T performance timing.

-------------------------
{Signature removed, please read the Forum Rules and Guidlines regarding signatures}
 10/09/2005 04:01 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
Tevarian
Junior Member

Posts: 3
Joined: 10/09/2005

QUOTE(Reinvented @ Oct 9 2005, 01:46 PM)Another popular option to even do is 2x 1GB...latencies will be like 3-4-4-8...but, you'll still remain at the 1T performance timing.
[right][snapback]519571[/snapback][/right]


What is the 1T timing and how is affected by the number of modules i use?

EDIT: Also, Does anyone know of a PDF or a site that has more in depth info of memory modules other than what usual basic info most websites provide. I remember coming across a PDF that explained each timing and they ran tests to see which of the numbers is actually the most beneficial. Thanks
 10/09/2005 04:28 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
fozzyfire
Member

Posts: 149
Joined: 09/26/2004

QUOTE(Tevarian @ Oct 9 2005, 12:01 PM)What is the 1T timing and how is affected by the number of modules i use?

EDIT: Also, Does anyone know of a PDF or a site that has more in depth info of memory modules other than what usual basic info most websites provide. I remember coming across a PDF that explained each timing and they ran tests to see which of the numbers is actually the most beneficial. Thanks
[right][snapback]519615[/snapback][/right]


I found that when i tried 4 x 512's 1T didn't work and i had to go 2T ( slower ) also the mobo didn't like all 4 used ??so i went for 2x1gigs, far better and the timings have not worked out too bad either.

foz
Athlon 64 4000 San Diego @ 2.5 gig
Stock AMD HSF
Asus A8N-SLI Premium bios vers 1005
2 X MSI 7800 GTX 78.01 drvs
Audigy 2 ZS soundcard 5.12.2.444 drvs
2 x 1 gig sticks of Ballistix PC 4000 DDR500 @ 3,3,3,6 1T 2.8v
Tagan 480 U01 28 amps 12v rail
40 gig ide 7200 rpm & 120 gig Sata hard drives

-------------------------
AMD 64 X2 6000@3.01gig
Vista Premium
A/C Freezer 64 Pro
Asus Crosshair
2x1 gig Corsair XMS2
BFG 8800 GTX 163.69 drvs
Audigy 2 ZS soundcard 5.12.2.444 drvs
Tagan 480 U01 28 amps 12v rail
320gig & 120gig Sata hard drives
 10/10/2005 09:48 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
DavidNJ
Junior Member

Posts: 1
Joined: 10/10/2005

QUOTE(axy1985 @ Oct 9 2005, 02:36 PM)first off, 4x512MB will top on 2GB, but you already know that.
second, it's not that "if it will take 4 GB, let's give it 4 GB!" there is a reason of why nearly no one does that.
setting 4GB of RAM will increase latencies and/or lower speed and/or set the timings to 2T. if you add all of those things, you get that performance gets very crippled.
frankly, mobos "support" so much RAM to garantee future compatibilty or expansion, not so they get filled as they are bought. nowadays, more than 1GB:
1. is overkill (not needed, too few apos/no games require or need that much)
2. decreases performance
i suggest you settle for 1GB of quality, performance RAM for now, you don't need more. you'll save money, as you won't lose any performance (in fact, you gain performance).
of course, i'm assuming you'll give the PC a "normal" use, mixed perhaps with gaming. if you're setting up a media enconding/server/who knows what else PC, then you might need the extra RAM. what ARE you going to use the PC for?
hope it helps /smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' />
[right][snapback]519565[/snapback][/right]
Not so. Many current applications--Photoshop, especially CS2, Premier Pro, any database (used for development)--like more than 2GB of memory. Intel-based platforms handle it with ease.

Now for an SLI gamer with over $700 in video cards, 2 3.3volt 2-2-2-2-5 DDR500 512MB DIMMs may do. For a developer or media content editor, 2GB is the minimum and 4GB is desired.

The memory controller is built into the CPU on the AMDs. The real unknown, at least to me so far, is what the controller is like on the X2 Toledo/Manchesters. Does it have the same 4 stick issues as the earlier single core Athalons?
Statistics
112018 users are registered to the AMD Processors forum.
There are currently 0 users logged in.

FuseTalk Hosting Executive Plan v3.2 - © 1999-2014 FuseTalk Inc. All rights reserved.



Contact AMD Terms and Conditions ©2007 Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. Privacy Trademark information