would you rather have 1GB of ddr 266 or 512 MB ddr 400?

would you rather have 1GB of ddr 266 or 512 MB ddr 400?

In message "Mr Rafal Rozborski"
wrote:

would you rather have 1GB of ddr 266 or 512 MB ddr 400?


For what usage?

--
"Gee, Bill what do you want to do tonight?"
"The same thing we do every night Steve. Try to take over the world!"

On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 22:58:10 -0500, "Mr Rafal Rozborski"
wrote:

would you rather have 1GB of ddr 266 or 512 MB ddr 400?


Why are we taking this poll?

It can't be a serious question because there is no context,
no description of the system it'll be in or the use of that
system.

The generic answer is that your memory bus should be at same
speed as the FSB or +33MHz may be marginally better on some
Intel/P4 supportive chipsets or with use of integrated
video. Only deviate from that if you have particular uses
of the system that need significantly more than 512MB
memory. This generic answer may not be quite accurate since
it cannot be applied to the system or use.

"Mr Rafal Rozborski" wrote in message
news
would you rather have 1GB of ddr 266 or 512 MB ddr 400?

I'd go for 1gb for sure but that's me.

Michael

"Mr Rafal Rozborski" wrote in message
news
would you rather have 1GB of ddr 266 or 512 MB ddr 400?


thats easy - 1gb. I take it you have 1 stick of each and and are pondering
whether to use both sticks at the slower speed or the one faster stick on
its own. loads of games now really need 1gb.

The generic answer is that your memory bus should be at same
speed as the FSB or +33MHz may be marginally better on some
Intel/P4 supportive chipsets or with use of integrated
video. Only deviate from that if you have particular uses
of the system that need significantly more than 512MB
memory. This generic answer may not be quite accurate since
it cannot be applied to the system or use.

I didn't know that. I have 1.5GB in my Athlon XP 2400. I use the computer
for all sorts, but need lots of RAM for large photo and multimedia work. The
CPU is 166MHz (FSB 266), but the RAM runs at 166MHz, DDR333, so is set to
FSB + 33MHz. This is the default setting for this motherboard (Soltek
SL75-DRV5). Should I turn the RAM speed down to match the CPU frequency? Why
would the motherboard offer this option if it is not faster? Why is slower
memory faster?

On Wed, 18 Jan 2006 11:36:36 -0000, "GT"
wrote:

The generic answer is that your memory bus should be at same
speed as the FSB or +33MHz may be marginally better on some
Intel/P4 supportive chipsets or with use of integrated
video. Only deviate from that if you have particular uses
of the system that need significantly more than 512MB
memory. This generic answer may not be quite accurate since
it cannot be applied to the system or use.

I didn't know that. I have 1.5GB in my Athlon XP 2400. I use the computer
for all sorts, but need lots of RAM for large photo and multimedia work. The
CPU is 166MHz (FSB 266), but the RAM runs at 166MHz, DDR333, so is set to
FSB + 33MHz.

Presumably you mean CPU is 133MHz (DDR266).


This is the default setting for this motherboard (Soltek
SL75-DRV5). Should I turn the RAM speed down to match the CPU frequency? Why
would the motherboard offer this option if it is not faster? Why is slower
memory faster?

There are multiple busses, and on athlon both mem and fsb
are DDR, double data rate. The throughput of the northbridge
to CPU (FSB) is the bottleneck. Raising the memory bus
speed to an async setting adds latency because that is
inherant in different bus speeds. IF the FSB were at a
higher data rate (not necessarily clock speed), for example
the P4 has quad-pumped (4X) bus instead of Athlon XP's
Double Data Rate (2X) bus, then it would not be a bottleneck
anymore and exploiting the higher throughput of the FSB
might be worthwhile even with the added latency. With the
integrated video, data to/fro northbridge/memory is used as
a frame buffer and with integrated video being more of a
bottleneck to video uses (and consuming bandwidth
continually) it will then help to have the higher mem bus.

How much of a difference you'd see can also depend on the
default and changed bus speed as it allows for a memory
timings change. Generally dropping the mem bus MHz will
allow tigher (lower numbered) timings and will be of
benefit. You should try it with the synchronous (133MHz)
memory bus and use CPU-Z (Google will find it) to check the
before and after memory timings the board sets (note that
CPU-Z will show both the SPD-programmed timings and those
the board is actually using, both sets of info are useful).

The difference is not a lot though, and your particular make
and model of board may determine if it's stable at any
particular timings per bus speed with any particular
module... I'm impressed that your board (which seems to be
KT333 based?) can even run 166MHz memory with 1.5GB
installed.

"Mr Rafal Rozborski" wrote in message
news
would you rather have 1GB of ddr 266 or 512 MB ddr 400?



My system is: Pentium 4 630 (3.00GHz) FSB 199.5 Bus speed 798.1
I need to choose between DDR 266 4 sticks of 256 MB each vs 1 stick of 512
MB DDR 400. Computer used for everyday tasks ... I would like to get best
performance when running latest games.

--
RR

On Wed, 18 Jan 2006 21:07:30 -0500, "Mr Rafal Rozborski"
wrote:


"Mr Rafal Rozborski" wrote in message
news
would you rather have 1GB of ddr 266 or 512 MB ddr 400?



My system is: Pentium 4 630 (3.00GHz) FSB 199.5 Bus speed 798.1
I need to choose between DDR 266 4 sticks of 256 MB each vs 1 stick of 512
MB DDR 400. Computer used for everyday tasks ... I would like to get best
performance when running latest games.


Why would you "need" to choose?
Both are poor options. Latest games benefit greatly from
both high memory bus speed AND more than 512MB of memory.
Since each game places slightly different demands on a
system, it's even possible that one game might benefit more
from 1GB of slow memory while another game benefits more
from 512MB at the correct PC3200 DDR400 speed. Further,
having 4 x 256MB modules is likely going to cause the memory
timings to be raised for stability reasons so it's even
slower than DDR266, PC2100 memory would normally be.

The goal here should be to add another 512MB module of
PC3200 (DDR400) memory so you have 2 x 512MB, 1GB total of
PC3200. Sell the 1GB of DDR266 if you already have it, to
offset the cost of more PC3200 memory.

"kony" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 18 Jan 2006 11:36:36 -0000, "GT"
wrote:

The generic answer is that your memory bus should be at same
speed as the FSB or +33MHz may be marginally better on some
Intel/P4 supportive chipsets or with use of integrated
video. Only deviate from that if you have particular uses
of the system that need significantly more than 512MB
memory. This generic answer may not be quite accurate since
it cannot be applied to the system or use.

I didn't know that. I have 1.5GB in my Athlon XP 2400. I use the computer
for all sorts, but need lots of RAM for large photo and multimedia work.
The
CPU is 166MHz (FSB 266), but the RAM runs at 166MHz, DDR333, so is set to
FSB + 33MHz.

Presumably you mean CPU is 133MHz (DDR266).

Typo! Yes CPU is 133MHz, RAM is 166MHz at present.

This is the default setting for this motherboard (Soltek
SL75-DRV5). Should I turn the RAM speed down to match the CPU frequency?
Why
would the motherboard offer this option if it is not faster? Why is slower
memory faster?

There are multiple busses, and on athlon both mem and fsb
are DDR, double data rate. The throughput of the northbridge
to CPU (FSB) is the bottleneck. Raising the memory bus
speed to an async setting adds latency because that is
inherant in different bus speeds. IF the FSB were at a
higher data rate (not necessarily clock speed), for example
the P4 has quad-pumped (4X) bus instead of Athlon XP's
Double Data Rate (2X) bus, then it would not be a bottleneck
anymore and exploiting the higher throughput of the FSB
might be worthwhile even with the added latency. With the
integrated video, data to/fro northbridge/memory is used as
a frame buffer and with integrated video being more of a
bottleneck to video uses (and consuming bandwidth
continually) it will then help to have the higher mem bus.

How much of a difference you'd see can also depend on the
default and changed bus speed as it allows for a memory
timings change. Generally dropping the mem bus MHz will
allow tigher (lower numbered) timings and will be of
benefit. You should try it with the synchronous (133MHz)
memory bus and use CPU-Z (Google will find it) to check the
before and after memory timings the board sets (note that
CPU-Z will show both the SPD-programmed timings and those
the board is actually using, both sets of info are useful).

The difference is not a lot though, and your particular make
and model of board may determine if it's stable at any
particular timings per bus speed with any particular
module... I'm impressed that your board (which seems to be
KT333 based?) can even run 166MHz memory with 1.5GB
installed.

This board is indeed KT333. At the time, it was one of the best I could get
find for overclocking features. I always planned to overclock, but I have
never actually bothered!. I figure an extra 5% is not really worth the extra
stress on the CPU. Instead, I have the processor running at normal speed
settings, but I have under-volted it and replaced all standard HSFs with
passives and designed careful airflow round the case so it all runs silently
and cool.

I have been running this M/B at CPU133 and RAM166 (CL2.5) for about 2 years
(maybe longer) now. I used to use 2GB RAM (1G+512+512), but the 3rd DIMM
slot on the board packed up about 6 months ago, so I am down to 1.5GB with a
spare 512 DDR333. There was a thread a few days ago about DIMM slots failing
and someone told me then (perhaps you?) that the KT333 chipsets are poor at
handling RAM in more than 2 slots.

Anyway, I've only just read your reply, so I haven't had a chance to test
the lower memory speed, but I would like to try it and find out if there is
much real-world difference - can you recommend a good benchmark tool for a
before and after speed test of CPU+RAM? I have a demo version of SiSoft
Sandra on CD if that is worth trying?