| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 84864 | 2007-11-21 05:51:00 | Ram type query | Scouse (83) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 613669 | 2007-11-21 05:51:00 | Hi Folks. Couple of quickies.... 1. With an AMD Athlon 64 4000+X2 AM2 CPU with a 160 Gb hard drive, would the difference between 1 Gb DDRR2 667 MHz RAM and 1 Gb DDR 800 MHz matter? If so, which would you prefer and how would the difference show - using for correpondence, photographs and virtually no games. 2. For each of them, would there be much benefit in moving to 2 Gb? Thoughts appreciated before I let the moths out. Thanks |
Scouse (83) | ||
| 613670 | 2007-11-21 06:02:00 | I doubt in real life you'd notice much if any speed increase. Depending on what OS (XP or Vista) you run and your use of the PC, 2GB of RAM can speed things up a bit. | qazwsxokmijn (102) | ||
| 613671 | 2007-11-21 06:17:00 | Thanks gaz*. Should have mentioned that the plan is to try Vista Home Premium. | Scouse (83) | ||
| 613672 | 2007-11-21 07:37:00 | From experience I had Vista Ultimate (which is pretty much Home Premium/Business with a few extra useless features) and 1GB RAM at one point. I can definitely feel a significant boost in gaming when I upgraded to 2GB, but with 1GB it was fast enough anyway for non-gaming uses. With 2GB, though, I can feel a little speed boost in non-gaming uses, but nothing to wow me. So I say if you're not doing anything intensive, then 1GB is enough. What do you mean by photograph? Editing? Then maybe 2GB will serve you better than 1GB I presume. |
qazwsxokmijn (102) | ||
| 613673 | 2007-11-21 19:01:00 | Scouse, I have just doubled the RAM in both of my main machines, one from 1GB to 2GB and for everyday use (browsing the internet, correspondence, etc) have noticed no difference at all. However, browsing my photo files has become noticeably snappier, especially for the huge 100MB+ TIF files from slide scans. I am expecting it to have a positive effect when photo editing as well. If you are planning to use Vista Home Premium, 1GB would be sufficient but I would definitely get 2GB if it were me. Vista is more resource hungry than Win XP, which is what I am using. The difference between 1 Gb DDRR2 667 MHz RAM and 1 Gb DDR 800 MHz would probably not be noticeable but if there is a negligible price difference between the two, I would go for the 800MHz myself. |
FoxyMX (5) | ||
| 613674 | 2007-11-22 06:29:00 | There isn't much to worry about if you are not playing cpu hungry games or do video editing since the AMD memory controller reduces latency. But if you got cash to spare go buy ddr2 800 or faster ram. |
JUST INSANE (6682) | ||
| 1 | |||||