| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 84903 | 2007-11-22 21:48:00 | Ram speed improvement--or no? | effie c (6856) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 614067 | 2007-11-22 21:48:00 | Hi, :blush: I have just installed a second 512 mb ram stick-ie a matched set,making 1.24 gb- on the advice of a lot of people who should know. Question ! was the speed result anything gained- answer! perhaps, just perhaps, a little. I was at a public meeting yesterday and there too I was told of exactly the same sentiments by an associate :rolleyes: Now my XP Pro is running on dual chanel as was predicted as against single- but then what do I get? I have XP Pro 3.02 cpu,40 gb h/d sp1 and 2 etc etc etc O K I have sold my original 512 mb stick- and it should be well worth the buyer's while to use it as it never let me down, so I am not seriously out of pocket Comments please? :( effie c |
effie c (6856) | ||
| 614068 | 2007-11-22 22:21:00 | errrrr..........how do you get dual channel out of 1.24gb ? you need to run two matched sticks to get dual channel....and as for upgrading from say 768mb to 1.5gb the difference may be negligible...I run a little meter in my system tray which shows how much free ram there is in the system .......at the mo i'm runnin 1.5gb which is far too much cause theres always over 700mb free and often over 1gb (xp home ) perhaps you should have done the same before you bought some more ram ? Indeed if you had 768 or more before and run just 'ordinary' apps then you'd most likely have noticed there was little need for more ram. Ram does not in and of itself necessarily increase the system speed - really it'll help if you are runnin out of ram and then the system will use the virtual mem system , (swapfile) which as it's located on the hdd is much slower to read from and write to than ram. In that case addin more ram will certainly speed up the system because reading/writing to ram is FAR faster than to a hdd. | drcspy (146) | ||
| 614069 | 2007-11-22 23:01:00 | Lots of RAM is good for gaming. Net, spreadsheets and emailing - nope. |
pctek (84) | ||
| 614070 | 2007-11-22 23:09:00 | yeh I REALLY only have the xtra ram so I can run virtualpc's easily... | drcspy (146) | ||
| 614071 | 2007-11-23 01:12:00 | Hi The ram, is a matched pair and in fact does show in start up that it is on dual chanel The mere thought of gaming makes me say no to it- I am too old for that. I play a lot of on-line chess ( e mail and website)-I surf the net and read but rarely download what I see I don't mind the e mail being slow- the broadband download speed is a delight to watch and certainly no more speed needed. To me I would be happier if the extra ram merely speeded up my various programs already installed on my pooter- really that was all I was asking for drcspy, the total ram is 1.24 gb made up of two matched sticks- as you will see tomorrow ;) It looks like the extra ram was an unecessary expenditure but, no matter- at my age perhaps I am rather gullible :D effie c |
effie c (6856) | ||
| 614072 | 2007-11-23 02:06:00 | 2 X 512MB + 2 X 128MB both pairs in dual channel is the only way I can see it would make sense | Agent_24 (57) | ||
| 614073 | 2007-11-23 02:37:00 | Hi,Agent_24 You've lost me now- I repeat as in original post, I have just had installed ---2 matched sticks of ram ( ie 512 mb X 2) and on "start up" the dual chanel is shown on-screen, where as before it showed only"single chanel" on start up. This is not a duo core set up, and the installer knows his skills and also come to that, said my speed would increase. I only want my "installed programs, ie Word,Excell etc" to operate that bit faster and as I am happily on broadband I don't hanker after any faster downloads Perhaps I am wrongly set up in the first place- in relation to the extra ram- I don't know :badpc: effie c |
effie c (6856) | ||
| 614074 | 2007-11-23 03:45:00 | I think you may have confused 1024MB with 1.24GB, they are different. All I was really saying, was to answer drcspy's question "how do you get dual channel out of 1.24gb ?" The only way you'd get that would be 2x128 and 2x512 in dual channel Dual channel is certainly faster than single channel, but the speed increase in simple tasks such as word processing may not be noticable |
Agent_24 (57) | ||
| 614075 | 2007-11-23 04:18:00 | Hi Agent_24 Thank you- I stand corrected and mortified:waughh: O K I goofed- at my age that can happen- still I would like to see the greater speed as promised by using dual channel and 1024 mb ram :blush: Effie c |
effie c (6856) | ||
| 614076 | 2007-11-23 04:39:00 | Hi Agent_24 Thank you- I stand corrected and mortified:waughh: O K I goofed- at my age that can happen- still I would like to see the greater speed as promised by using dual channel and 1024 mb ram :blush: Effie c Who promised? OK you have 1 Gig RAM. 2 x 512. Office programs like word and excel will not notice the difference. Do you use an onboard graphic card? If so this will use on board RAM. With a 40 Gig hard drive it may be running at 5400 rpm rather than 7200 or more. |
Sweep (90) | ||
| 1 2 | |||||