DDR400 Dual channel is slower than single channel?

[Titan2782]

Here is my setup

Abit AN7
AMD XP 3000+
Kingston DDR400 Dual Channel (2x512mb)

I have had my memory in the non-dual channel slots since i put it together, (I read the manual wrong). I got PC Mark 04 scores of 3600 (max) with o/c, but an average of 3200 w/o o/c. Then I realised yesterday that my memory was not running in dual channel mode, so I swapped slots and now it's activated. I know this because the board now say's 'Dual channel enabled'. But when I run pc mark 04 again, I am getting scored like 2200 or lower. WTF? I've set the ram to run at from 333mhz to 400mhz and it hasnt changed the score any and I dont see any improvment. WTF?

Thanks for any help in this matter. It's reallyt frustrating to see my co workers getting scores of 6000+ with their dual memory setup. Of course they are also running P4's. I would like to see at least 4000 on pc mark.

[David]

Welcome to the forums :)

First of all, dual channel doesnt make as much difference to AMD systems as it does to Intel systems, due to the higher FSBs Intel CPUs have.

I would try running Sandra from www.sisoftware.co.uk - run the memory bandwidth benchmark with dual channel enabled, and with it disabled and see if there is any difference.

Is everything else being kept the same?

[stratcatprowlin]

Yeah,I got a very slight improvement running dual channel with my NF7-S and a 2500 Barton.Definitely not something I could see a difference in.Only benchmarks,and even then It was barely anything.