![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|||
| Welcome
to Tech Support Forum home to more then 136,000 problems solved. Issues
have included: Spyware, Malware, Virus Issues, Windows, Microsoft,
Linux, Networking, Security, Hardware, and Gaming Getting your
problem solved is as easy as: 1. Registering for a free account 2. Asking your question 3. Receiving an answer Registered members: * See fewer ads. * And much more..
|
| Want to know how to post a question? click here | Having problems with spyware and pop-ups? First Steps |
|
|||||||
| RAM and Power Supply Support Support forum for memory and power supplies; Kingston, Corsair, PNY |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
|
#1 (permalink) |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 181
OS: XP Pro-SP2
|
Is it always best to user faster ram?
I am working on a friends Dell Dimension 8400 and need to add some memory.
Is there any reason not to go from the 400 to the 533 MHz or even 667 MHz (If I am not going to use the existing 400MHz modules?) Right now it has 2 x 256MB DDR2 400 (PC2 3200) and I was thinking of getting rid of these and going with 2 sets of 2x512 DDR2 533 (PC2 4200) So I would have (4)512 modules. Or would it be better to go with 2x1GB ? It is cheaper. But I always thought the performance would be better from 4x512 rather than 2x1GB (all else constant) At least for overclocking. (I can OC my CPU more on 512's than I can on 1024 modules) If it makes no difference between 4x512 & 2x1024 then what speed? -What speed is best? -Are the higher speeds useless if I am not overclocking the cpu? -Are the higher speeds less stable in my situation? -Is the latency going to be slower for the faster speeds? (they show no latency specs for the 667) -is it better to have the 4x512 than the 2x1gb for only $10 more? Choice: 1) 4x512MB 533MHz ($50) 2) 2X1GB 533MHz ($39) 3) 2x1GB 667MHz ($39) TIA |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 (permalink) | |
|
Mentor
|
Re: Is it always best to user faster ram?
whatever you decide, remember this-
Quote:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820145527 Last edited by speedster123 : 01-20-2008 at 05:11 PM. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 (permalink) | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 181
OS: XP Pro-SP2
|
Re: Is it always best to user faster ram?
Quote:
Why? I know all abut the limited bios. It is not my system so I do not want to overclock it. Why do you suggest the 2x1gb 533 and not the 667? why not 4x512? is it because they are only better for overclocking? thanks for the reply |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 (permalink) | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 181
OS: XP Pro-SP2
|
Re: Is it always best to user faster ram?
Quote:
Also the Ram guy told me that the 4x512 would tax the memory controller more than the 2x1gb and agreed that the 512 were better for overclocking because of their density, (the 1gb sticks are denser) I know this from experience , I can OC my cpu more with my xms 512 than I can with my xms 1024's. Thanks for the reply and input. |
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|