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

Difference from 1.00GB to 1.50GB of Ram?

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

OC-Master

Member
​
Joined
Jul 14, 2001
Location
Edmonton, Alberta
Will there be any use for the extra 512MB of ram if I buy it? I have just one slot left and I was thinking of filling it up!

1.50GB of ram sure would be nice though :D

I play Quake3/Aquanox/UT/Total Annihilation/RA2/Diablo2)

Maybe I can benefit from the extra 512MB when Doom3 and Quake4 come out?

Last, I heard that you can get a small performance boost when 'all' slots are used when you enable 4-way interleaving.
 
It would make no noticeable difference to you.

I doubt that you would be able to even tell a difference if you took 512MB out of what you have now.

Alot of motherboards actually begin to exhibit problems when filling all the memory slots...doesn't mean that yours would at all but I've experienced this in 2 boards I own.

As far as better performance in filling all slots in relation to 4-way interleaving, I'd have to say your source is false. It would have no effect. Scalability may increase slightly in some circumstances when using that much memory but it wouldn't in your case. Games don't use near that much memory.
 
Anyone else, Jon's opinion seems accurate. But doesnt the AGP port use up to 256MB of ram just for textures? Thats means that I would have 768MB left now, then XP takes 128MB then Doom3/WC3/NWN would probally take 256MB,

256+128+256= 128MB Free is everything was running and every setting was maxed.
 
you can set the agp to use up to 256mg of memory

i always say you can't have enough memory

but, all that memory may not be used

and when you start getting up there in the numbers like 1.5gigs

you want to make sure its ECC, if not good luck, lots of problems and errors

but that much memory is really only needed for servers in my opinion
 
i noticed a difference going from 128 to 256 (not in 98 but in XP/200 yes), but noe difference going from 256 to 512...of course all i do is game in my case memory is not the bottleneck, PIII/Geforce2 is...
 
The AGP aperature would use 256MB if you have it set to that and there is that much that needs to be cached. Normally, that amount of textures would only be cached when using very large graphic files and or while using video editing...not when playing games.

Games are designed to renew the cache quite frequently to keep frame rates up and very rarely go over the actual cache size onboard the video card itself (16MB-64MB for even the most recent games). This allows for most games to played on a wide range of cards and systems with weaker specifications.
 
I have 768MB mrmory and thats enough for everthing, no matter how much stuff I open it never slows.

And I would wait anyway till the prices go back down again.

Then I might see how much DDR333 1.5Gigs is!!!!
 
Warlord2 said:
I though that AGP adapter thing in the bios was for how much memory you want the graphic card to use......



:confused: :confused: :confused:
Click to expand...

It is. Doesn't mean it will actually use as much as 256MB if that's what you set it at though.
 
wow, i always figured more ram the better. Why in the world would all these motherboards support so much ram then? I mean...by the time the average person needs that much...the motherboard will be outdated and old, and the ram it supports will be nothing but a joke. Is there any real benefit for more than 512mb ram? Or up to 1 gig ram?
 
If I understand this all correctly the aperature size is like a cache for video ram. The ram on your vc operates faster than your main ram, so it will fill that first. After filling your vc ram it will then begin to fill your main ram, which will accept up to your aperature size. Therefore you don't lose the aperature setting ram in addtion to what's used by gaming, the aperature setting is used by the gaming. As was posted earlier, most games won't even fill your video card.

512 is enough, 1 gb you won't use, more than that is just $50-$100 you could have spent on better cooling...
 
OK OK, when I went from 128MB to 256MB in Windows 2000, I noticed a huge increase in FPS and complete ending of lag in Quake3Arena. Now, when I installed Windows XP, the game begain to stuter and lag again and it started to cache from the Hard Drive when all graphics and settings were maxed. But then I jumped to 512MB and everything cleared up. Now, with 512MB, it stil was smooth even with XP in, since the computer used 350MB at max with XP. But with Unreal 2 supposed to be requireing 256MB with a GeForce2/3, 512MB is recommmended and required for max performance with XP, I just see 1GB I guess to be perfect!
 
I think 256 mb is good for games, 512 mb is about the most needed for games and will handle Photoshop for most people.
While above 1 gige is really only useful for CAD, 3d modeling, movies, and major Photoshop work.
 
Make a RAMDrive and make use of all that unused memory! There's gotta be something that accesses the HD quite a lot that could benifit from making a RAMDrive.

I've heard of people sticking games on RAMDrives to decrease loading times, but I don't know how well it works since my newest game was released back in 1998....:rolleyes:

JigPu
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

ssjwizard
Mismatched RAM advise
Replies
5
Views
718
ssjwizard
ssjwizard
S
ram errors with xmp but dram changed to proper speeds works fine? am i ok?
Replies
10
Views
1K
trents
trents
TechWizard
SOLVED Unable to run more than 1 stick of RAM after AIO and 3080 Ti installation
2 3
Replies
55
Views
5K
TechWizard
TechWizard
S
Mixing 2400 mhz ram and 2666 mhz ram! NEED HELP!
Replies
16
Views
5K
Schurkee
S
S3KT10N
RAM Overclocking
2 3
Replies
48
Views
3K
S3KT10N
S3KT10N
Back