Looking At 8GB DDR2 (4x2GB)

I am looking at OCZ's 4GB (2x2GB) PC8500 DDR2 Kit I am going to upgrade to VISTA as I believe it will use my hardware alot more thats not to say XP dosn't just think it's about time to move on.

4GB would be enough but I've just sold my OCZ 2GB PC8500 I have below for £35 I've only had it for 2 months I've seen the OCZ 4GB kit for £38 was thinking about buying 2. Is there any serious power hungary problems from using 4x 2GB chips should be fine with my set-up below shouldn't it.

Another note is I'll be also upgrading to the other stuff below soon as well power shouldn be around 400w maybe more possibly should I get the memory etc.

Needless to say, ensure that you are using a 64 bit operating system.

4 ram sticks can limit your oc a little bit aswell

JoT said:

Needless to say, ensure that you are using a 64 bit operating system.

Click to expand...

Right was looking at 64bit VISTA Premium

before you move to vista go on google and make vista vs xp then come back here =)

i have gone vista 64b cos on xp 64b most of my drivers didn't work.

and remember M$ is a criminal organization. if you want good os you go xp, if you want dx10 and better driver support you go vista but with less performance GRRRRR

Zantal said:

and remember M$ is a criminal organization. if you want good os you go xp, if you want dx10 and better driver support you go vista but with less performance GRRRRR

Click to expand...

Uh, no.....please can we stop the MS/Vista bash......there is NOTHING wrong with Vista...

OP... 4Gb is usually plenty, depending on your use of the system but 8 is always better...

8 G works fine here that way, might have to pump a bit more into your NB to get things stable though.

Not sure if it's necessary atm, but what I did when those sticks came out I guess

Vista x64 I hope for 8 gig.

crosshairs said:

there is NOTHING wrong with Vista...

Click to expand...

That comment pretty much invalidates anything you coudl offer to this thread.

OP, the only issue might be that you will get stuck under 900MHz. The majority are not able to clock over that with all slots filled.

Ach3r0n said:

That comment pretty much invalidates anything you coudl offer to this thread.

Click to expand...

I am a Linux user full time. Also my favorite OS in the Microsoft lineup was probably XP SP2. I do not see how him mentioning there is nothing wrong with Vista invalidates his input in the thread. In his experience and millions of other experiences, backs that up. Most have no issues running Vista in all the variants it has. Myself, I do not like it or the layout of it. I do think it runs great for those who like it and won't try for odd pokes to say otherwise.

My wife has Vista Home Premium 64bit. It works as I would expect and has nothing wrong with it... really there is nothing wrong with it. Besides it is Windows and has bugs like any other operating system, even Linux and apple./ has bugs. Other than that. I have to agree. There is nothing wrong with it.

Saying a company is a criminal organization. Then directly after that. Suggesting the same company's product, is an odd statement. Furthermore, attempting to invalidate another's suggestion in your next post is not productive.

I so wish Microsoft would of released a kernel patch to allow more than 4gigs for 32bit Windows. Linux seems to have a patch. Be it is a bit of performance hit using that patch. But it is not impossible to run more than 4gigs in a 32bit kernel.

8Gigs in a 64bit Vista would be a nice setup. Like others mentioned. Your going to be putting a bit more strain on the machine. So more voltage is going to be needed maybe. Depending how far you push the overclock.

I know on the machine that my wife has. It has 12gigs. Runs fantastic and is very snappy. I love to do large encoding projects on that machine and huge graphic projects. It seems like I never will run out of RAM. It is pretty snappy and seems as snappy as my Linux EXT4 file-system (main rig) machine.

Normally I would say the sweet spot if 4gigs on a run of the mill desktop. But the cool factor is hard to pass up, with cheap high speed ram prices.
If you are having overclock issues. You might have to choose between more voltage and heat. Or dropping back to stock, or simply lower clocks.. Maybe adding more cooling.

Propagating all the RAM slots. Does strange things at higher speeds. It add more stress on the controller. So be sure to compensate for it.

Ach3r0n said:

OP, the only issue might be that you will get stuck under 900MHz. The majority are not able to clock over that with all slots filled.

Click to expand...

im running all 4 slots filled at well over 900mhz

BenF said:

4 ram sticks can limit your oc a little bit aswell

Click to expand...

I haven't run into this issue myself. I've got 8GB of DDR1066 OCZ gold and it overclocks to 1120 2 sticks or 4. I haven't hit my limit, just my limit at the voltage I'll run.

With my very limited experience with Vista (I am a Linux user as well, except for gaming), it does have a few good things. The UAC thing, a copy of UNIX's "sudo", makes it practically possible to run as an unprivileged user and be prompted for admin privilege. That's a major reason why UNIX and UNIX-like systems are more secure than Windows. It used to be not possible to implement in Windows because Windows programs typically assumed they have admin privilege. The VirtualStore thing is a workaround for that, and I think it is a very cool idea, and it actually works most of the time. Also, using free memory as disk cache (again a copy of what Linux has had for a few decades already) should improve harddrive performance.

ReadyBoost I believe is just marketing stuff. It doesn't even make sense from a theoretical point of view, unless you have extremely limited amount of memory. Flash drives are just too slow.

DirectX 10 I don't know... I am not a graphics programmer myself, but after the Crysis hoax, I'm really not terribly fond of it.

BTW, ext4 is amazing . Ubuntu 9.04 + ext4 boots up in less than 20 seconds on my laptop with AMD crap dualcore and a 5400 RPM harddrive.

cyberfish said:

With my very limited experience with Vista (I am a Linux user as well, except for gaming), it does have a few good things. The UAC thing, a copy of UNIX's "sudo", makes it practically possible to run as an unprivileged user and be prompted for admin privilege. That's a major reason why UNIX and UNIX-like systems are more secure than Windows. It used to be not possible to implement in Windows because Windows programs typically assumed they have admin privilege. The VirtualStore thing is a workaround for that, and I think it is a very cool idea, and it actually works most of the time. Also, using free memory as disk cache (again a copy of what Linux has had for a few decades already) should improve harddrive performance.

ReadyBoost I believe is just marketing stuff. It doesn't even make sense from a theoretical point of view, unless you have extremely limited amount of memory. Flash drives are just too slow.

DirectX 10 I don't know... I am not a graphics programmer myself, but after the Crysis hoax, I'm really not terribly fond of it.

BTW, ext4 is amazing . Ubuntu 9.04 + ext4 boots up in less than 20 seconds on my laptop with AMD crap dualcore and a 5400 RPM harddrive.

Click to expand...

The point of readyboost isn't to be used as extra/additional RAM, but to improve access times to executables that windows has found to be frequently used. If on bootup you always load up prime 95, cpu-z, core temp, real temp, WMP, and firefox like I do, readyboost gives a slight boost to startup speed after it develops the pattern.

Ach3r0n said:

That comment pretty much invalidates anything you coudl offer to this thread.

OP, the only issue might be that you will get stuck under 900MHz. The majority are not able to clock over that with all slots filled.

Click to expand...

I am running 4x2GB at 1080 MHz no problem. Original 800 4-4-4-12 at 5-5-5-15 FSB 450x8. Stable like rock



/edit 1080 I mean ....

The point of readyboost isn't to be used as extra/additional RAM, but to improve access times to executables that windows has found to be frequently used. If on bootup you always load up prime 95, cpu-z, core temp, real temp, WMP, and firefox like I do, readyboost gives a slight boost to startup speed after it develops the pattern.

Click to expand...

Hmm that I wasn't aware of.

But isn't it possible to store those programs in memory disk cache? I think that's how Linux does it.

Just need to copy it to harddrive on shutdown, and from harddrive to memory on boot. Since it's just a binary "blob", it will be sequential access, which harddrives are very good at.

As for the original topic, I definitely noticed a lower FSB wall going from 2 sticks to 4 on my Gigabyte P35. The FSB wall went from ~510mhz to ~460-470mhz.

cyberfish said:

As for the original topic, I definitely noticed a lower FSB wall going from 2 sticks to 4 on my Gigabyte P35. The FSB wall went from ~510mhz to ~460-470mhz.

Click to expand...

I haven't had that issue myself. My CPU's FSB wall is apparently around 300 or so.

cyberfish said:

Hmm that I wasn't aware of.

But isn't it possible to store those programs in memory disk cache? I think that's how Linux does it.

Just need to copy it to harddrive on shutdown, and from harddrive to memory on boot. Since it's just a binary "blob", it will be sequential access, which harddrives are very good at.

Click to expand...

dunno. The system is out and they aren't accepting advice. Who knows why?

I haven't had that issue myself. My CPU's FSB wall is apparently around 300 or so.

Click to expand...

Oh I mean the FSB wall of the motherboard. I am running a E6300 with 7x multiplier... so it's annoying. I guess not many people need that kind of FSB, though.

cyberfish said:

BTW, ext4 is amazing . Ubuntu 9.04 + ext4 boots up in less than 20 seconds on my laptop with AMD crap dualcore and a 5400 RPM harddrive.

Click to expand...

Plus they got the Sleep and Hibernation dialed in pretty good. I don't turn my machine off anymore. Nor do I leave it setting idle. I used to leave my machine on 24/7. Now I put it to sleep. I have to admit, it works kickass now. Nary an issue for me. First time ever I could rely on it to power down my machine and bring it back up. Never had it work right on Windows or Linux, reliably every time. Does now though!

My machine boot in 12 sconds. But I still have to get through POST and that stuff. So it is much longer in reality.. So putting it to sleep is really faster overall. No POST or waiting for the RAID to load and all that.. Pop the power button, type my key in. And it is on. In like 10 seconds from pushing the power button.

Having the extra RAM is a perk with the sleep feature.