RAM question..? which is faster?

**FEINT** · 3rd February 2006, 09:47

I recently installed some new RAM in my computer. I don't know a better place than KB to ask!

I just purchased 2x512mb Cosair DDR400 SD-RAM. I am running them in dual-channel mode.

I was running Kingston 2x256mb DDR-400 SD-RAM.

WHen I plug in the both the cosair and kingston, my RAM clock speed drops to 333mhz instead of the 400mhz. If I only have 1 brand installed, it runs at 400mhz. From this, I gather there is some conflict between the different manufacturers.

I am wondering if

1) Run 2 x 512 mb Cosair at 400mhz. (total of 1024mb)

OR

2) Run 2 x 512 mb cosair + 2 x 256mb kingston at 333 mhz (total of 1500mb)

??????

**White trash** · 3rd February 2006, 09:49

RAM offers more eficiency as you get going faster, effectivley pressurizing the air box and feeding more air to the engine.

The faster you go, the more the pressure. Also, the bigger the mess.

**WRT** · 3rd February 2006, 09:53

Also, RAM's go extremely fast when followed by White Trash - they heard what happened to the EWE's.

Feint - check your BIOS settings, they may have been set for specific settings on the original modules, and if the latencies are too low for the new RAM then your PC will slow the speed of all RAM to match. Go over them carefully, and set them to the slower settings off the two types, or just go for an "auto" config.

**flash** · 3rd February 2006, 09:55

im not a pro, but ild say their about the same?.

run memtest (a geek program)
or try pcmark, 3dmark, aquamark and see which way gives you the most points

**Sparky Mark** · 3rd February 2006, 10:00

Originally Posted by WRT

Feint - check your BIOS settings, they may have been set for specific settings on the original modules, and if the latencies are too low for the new RAM then your PC will slow the speed of all RAM to match. Go over them carefully, and set them to the slower settings off the two types, or just go for an "auto" config.

Also it might be an idea to check the BIOS version is up to date before going through the configs.

**FEINT** · 3rd February 2006, 10:04

Originally Posted by flash

im not a pro, but ild say their about the same?.

run memtest (a geek program)
or try pcmark, 3dmark, aquamark and see which way gives you the most points

i might go and try memtest or some other memory testing program.. not a whizz at computers, so I dont think I want to try messing with my bios. I think it is currently on AUTO.

**WRT** · 3rd February 2006, 10:19

The memtest should just confirm what we already know - 400mhz is better than 333mhz. However, this is not really what Feint means.

Question is, will the OS benefit from more memory at a slower speed or less memory at a higher speed? For that, your best bet is to chuck in the extra memory and see if you cant spot any difference yourself. Open a few apps, play a few games, see what happens.

**cowpoos** · 3rd February 2006, 10:20

you'll find that texel's are the fastest....followed by suffox's.... although a freashly shorn perindale has a good turn of speed but run out of puff quickly...but quite hard to get a hold of because they a freashly shorn... rommeny's are just too bulky and big to move quickly... but that makes them easy to catch :spudbooge

**WRT** · 3rd February 2006, 10:36

I think what Poos is saying is fuck the slow RAM, and just run with the fast RAM? In other words, he votes for the 1024Mb of 400mhz.

**FEINT** · 3rd February 2006, 11:27

Originally Posted by WRT

The memtest should just confirm what we already know - 400mhz is better than 333mhz. However, this is not really what Feint means.

Question is, will the OS benefit from more memory at a slower speed or less memory at a higher speed? For that, your best bet is to chuck in the extra memory and see if you cant spot any difference yourself. Open a few apps, play a few games, see what happens.

exactly!! that is what I need to know.. Is it beneficial to have more RAM at a slower speed!

Thank you.

**James Deuce** · 3rd February 2006, 12:17

Feint, motherboard bus throughput capacity comes into the equation as well. Is this s PCI-X mobo, or an AGP?

**Marmoot** · 3rd February 2006, 12:44

the real question lies in the price difference and performance difference.

Would the performance difference justify the cost difference?

If the cost is about the same, and the performance is about the same, would the difference justify worrying about it?

And if the end result is not much different, would it justify losing riding time on worrying about it? Or worse, losing time to surf porn....

Actually, that was my original question but I forgot....would more memory makes your PC faster when surfing porn?

**flash** · 3rd February 2006, 13:45

Originally Posted by WRT

The memtest should just confirm what we already know - 400mhz is better than 333mhz. However, this is not really what Feint means.

Question is, will the OS benefit from more memory at a slower speed or less memory at a higher speed? For that, your best bet is to chuck in the extra memory and see if you cant spot any difference yourself. Open a few apps, play a few games, see what happens.

memtest puts the RAM under heavy strain and counts how fast and how much your ram is transfering from the north bridge to the south. it doesnt just tell you 400 is better than 333.....

**WRT** · 3rd February 2006, 14:18

Have no fear, I am well familiar with what memtest is and what it does - however, I think you are missing the point of what Feint is asking. He doesnt care about testing the memory for flaws or seeing how much is being transferred between the north and south bridges, he merely wants to know (as Marmoot so elequently put it) which is faster for downloading porn! (or whatever other tasks he shall choose to use his computer for.)