• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

How much RAM to get?

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

greywood

Registered
Joined
Aug 4, 2002
Location
Blue Bell, Pa
I'm about to get some of the PQI Turbo 2,2,2,5 RAM for the system in my Sig.
and I'd appreciate some help deciding whether to settle for 512 MB (2 x 256)
or go for 1 Gb (2 x 512).

I've been able to push this rig as far as FSB 205 x 12.5 in the past (but not
Memtest / Prime-95 stable). I guess my question really is: assuming the same
FSB, timings, etc. for either amount of RAM, would I really get enough better
performance out of 1 Gb to be worth the extra cost?

Yeah, I know that's really subjective but some good feed-back will help me
make up my mind (if any). I use this rig mostly for games about 1-gen old
(no Far Cry or Doom-3 yet) a lot of broad-band browsing / downloads, and
general putzing about.
 
watch your memory usage now and see how much pagefile activity there is. That will help determine whether you should go to 1gb or not.
 
Id go for the gig also the more the better :) i used to have a 256 stick till i got my gig and i saw a big improvment in load times on most aps and games. But i dont know how big a dif it would be from a 512 stick.
 
If you've got the money, a gig is nice to have. I'd take a gig of slower ram over 512MB of "fast" ram. Sometimes 512 is enough and sometimes it isn't (FarCry). This is especially true with newer games, serious photo/video apps, or if you keep a dozen apps open at the same time. I wouldn't buy 2 new sticks of 256MB Ram, get a single 512MB stick and you can add another later. Dual channel doesn't make that big of difference for AMD.
 
Thanks for the feed-back everyone. I think I'm gonna go for the 1 Gb dual-channel kit.
Yah, it real "spensive" ($249 @ newegg vs $128 for 512 Mb dual-kit) but, if I don't go
for it, I'll wind up wondering if I "shorted" myself. Besides - it oughta work real good in
an AMD 64-bit box later on. :p
 
A larger amount of slow memory (2.5-3-3-6-1T, I'd recommend nothing slower than this) will always be faster than a smaller amount of fast memory (2-2-2-5-1T).

Of course, it would be nicec to have a larger amount of the 2-2-2-5-1T RAM, but most of us aren't made of money ;o)
 
i went from 512 to 1024 about a year ago and coupled with sata in raid 0 the speed jump was very noticeable. i love having a gig of ram, and can barely wait to have a gig of FAST ram...
 
Back