More Ram lowering performance?

2008-07-06 21:55:07

#1

OmniDeath: ~; +726|6911

So my current build has 4GB of ram. I have recently obtained two sticks that are 1GB each, so I threw them in with the other 4GB. I re-ran Vista's system performance rating, and it dropped the Memory(Ram) rating down to 5.0 from 5.1.

Why would adding 2GB of ram lower my performance score? It is even worth using then?

System specs (not including the new ram)

[UPDATE] So I finally bought to new sticks of the same ram that was already in my PC (2x 2GB). I now have 8GB of ram of all matching sticks, and again the performance rating has lowered from 5.1 to 5.0!! I don't get it, they're all the same speeds, why would it lower? Are the sticks even worth using if they're going to lower the performance?

Here is the ram I'm using.

Last edited by OmniDeath (2008-09-01 10:07:53)

2008-07-06 21:58:41

#2

Cheez: Herman is a warmaphrodite; +1,027|6706|King Of The Islands

"Memory operations per second"

My state was founded by Batman. Your opinion is invalid.

2008-07-06 22:09:07

#3

Flaming_Maniac: prince of insufficient light; +2,490|6974|67.222.138.85

What was the new RAM? Was it lower spec stuff?

2008-07-06 22:49:15

#4

AussieReaper: ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°); +5,761|6420|what

If you have slots of ram with different speeds you can really screw with it's performance. Only use ram slots that are of the same size.

2008-07-06 22:54:59

#5

OmniDeath: ~; +726|6911

Flaming_Maniac wrote:
What was the new RAM? Was it lower spec stuff?

Yes, but I wouldn't think that would have made a difference... does it?

TheAussieReaper wrote:
If you have slots of ram with different speeds you can really screw with it's performance. Only use ram slots that are of the same size.

Look at the motherboard, I'm pretty sure they're all the same.

2008-07-06 22:56:57

#6

AussieReaper: ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°); +5,761|6420|what

Your old rig had two 2GB sticks of Ram. That means you have to add 2GB sticks of ram if you want to increase the speed.

You cannot add ram with different speeds and expect an increase. It will screw with your system.

2008-07-06 23:12:13

#7

Flaming_Maniac: prince of insufficient light; +2,490|6974|67.222.138.85

Well, you can have RAM with different speeds, but it certainly fucks with your system. I believe the problem is when RAM is running in dual channel with slower RAM, it slows down the faster RAM so it's all at the same speed. You have more bandwidth running at a slower speed right now.

2008-07-06 23:56:38

#8

OmniDeath: ~; +726|6911

I see, so is it better to have less ram at a faster speed, or more ram at a lower one?

2008-07-07 00:00:39

#9

Cheez: Herman is a warmaphrodite; +1,027|6706|King Of The Islands

OmniDeath wrote:
I see, so is it better to have less ram at a faster speed, or more ram at a lower one?

Depends.

Doing lots of things at once, you want more RAM, so as to not page from the hard drive.

Doing one thing which is memory-intensive, you want as fast as it will go (naturally).

I seriously wouldn't complain about 0.1 of a difference though, I doubt you'd even notice.

My state was founded by Batman. Your opinion is invalid.

2008-07-07 00:01:11

#10

AussieReaper: ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°); +5,761|6420|what

OmniDeath wrote:
I see, so is it better to have less ram at a faster speed, or more ram at a lower one?

Less ram at a faster speed.

Two 2gb sticks of ram is better than 4 1gb sticks of ram.

Just stick with what you currently have. If you want to upgrade your ram you'll have to buy another 2gb stick of ram. I'd suggest getting the same type, so you'll have 4 sticks of ram all at the same speed. Else, use 3 of them and use the other 2gb in another machine or as backup.

2008-07-07 00:08:02

#11

Flaming_Maniac: prince of insufficient light; +2,490|6974|67.222.138.85

I would say it primarily depends on what size jumps you are talking about. 1gb of faster RAM or 2gb of slow RAM? 2gb, especially with Vista. 2 and 4 though...I would stick with the 2gb of faster sticks, unless you notice some performance problems you know are from lacking RAM. I suppose you may be taxing your RAM if you're doing some heavy duty graphical rendering, but other than that all I can think of is maybe BF2 might be pushing it.

2008-07-07 00:46:45

#12

OmniDeath: ~; +726|6911

Well since I've added the new ram programs keep crashing for no reason (firefox, photshop, and battllefield). All have happened more than once per program and had never happened before, only after I added the ram... I don't see how it would be connected, but it seems like it.

2008-07-07 00:49:24

#13

Poseidon: Fudgepack DeQueef; +3,253|6805|Long Island, New York

OmniDeath wrote:
Well since I've added the new ram programs keep crashing for no reason (firefox, photshop, and battllefield). All have happened more than once per program and had never happened before, only after I added the ram... I don't see how it would be connected, but it seems like it.

It does - your computer's not designed to run on two different speeds of RAM. Get 4x1 DDR2-800 (or whatever speed) sticks or 2x2gb DDR2-800 and you'll notice a major difference.

2008-07-07 02:46:16

#14

CrazeD: Member; +368|6940|Maine

Stability-wise, it shouldn't matter if the RAM is different speeds. RAM automatically defaults to the slowest stick. It's not like one stick runs at 400MHz, and the other at 333MHz...doesn't work that way.

However, some (most) motherboards have problems using all 4 memory slots. It is better to have 2x2GB than 4x1GB. Often times you will have to loosen timings and/or increase voltages (as they usually aren't running at rated voltage anyway) to make all 4 slots stable.

Also take into consideration that once you start mixing and matching RAM, you lose dual channel. You must have the same RAM in each dual-channel slot. For example, if you have a 2x2GB kit running in dual channel, then you add one Corsair 1GB stick, and one OCZ 1GB stick (just random brands, for example purposes) then you know have 6GB of RAM, however you don't have dual channel. You would need 2x2GB kit, and a 2x1GB kit to keep dual channel.

You should always want to keep dual channel, because it doubles the data bandwidth. This, of course, doesn't mean it will run twice as fast, however it will run faster.

2008-07-07 06:17:34

#15

OmniDeath: ~; +726|6911

CrazeD wrote:
Stability-wise, it shouldn't matter if the RAM is different speeds. RAM automatically defaults to the slowest stick. It's not like one stick runs at 400MHz, and the other at 333MHz...doesn't work that way.

However, some (most) motherboards have problems using all 4 memory slots. It is better to have 2x2GB than 4x1GB. Often times you will have to loosen timings and/or increase voltages (as they usually aren't running at rated voltage anyway) to make all 4 slots stable.

Also take into consideration that once you start mixing and matching RAM, you lose dual channel. You must have the same RAM in each dual-channel slot. For example, if you have a 2x2GB kit running in dual channel, then you add one Corsair 1GB stick, and one OCZ 1GB stick (just random brands, for example purposes) then you know have 6GB of RAM, however you don't have dual channel. You would need 2x2GB kit, and a 2x1GB kit to keep dual channel.

You should always want to keep dual channel, because it doubles the data bandwidth. This, of course, doesn't mean it will run twice as fast, however it will run faster.

Random brands? lol... those are the brands I'm using! Haha. I have 2x2GB sticks of OCZ, that's what was there first, then I added 2x1GB sticks of corsair.

2008-07-07 07:51:26

#16

Freezer7Pro: I don't come here a lot anymore.; +1,447|6465|Winland

This thread is confusing me.

First of all, it's by far not most motherboards that have problems using all RAM slots. It's mainly nVidia chipsets that fuck that up.

Second, 4x1GB should outperform 2x2GB. In all simplicity, 2x2 uses 480 pins, 4x1 uses 960 pins. Most mobos can run four sticks in dual-channel Interleaved, handling all the RAM as one big chunk with many pins, at a 2x128-bit bus. Which, obviously, is quite a lot better than the single 64-bit bus of single-channel.

Third, mixing RAM is not an optimal solution, but it should work notheless. Having 2GB 800MHz, and adding another 2GB 667MHz, should only drag the speed down to 667MHz. However, mixing different timing sticks is likely to cause problems, as it may stick to the tightest timings. If the 2GB 800MHz in the example is 4-4-4-12, and the new 667MHz is 5-5-5-18, and it sticks to 4-4-4-12, it's likely for the slower RAM to cause problems.

My advice to you, Omni, is to get rid of the new RAM, find out exactly what your old RAM is, and get two sticks of that.

The idea of any hi-fi system is to reproduce the source material as faithfully as possible, and to deliberately add distortion to everything you hear (due to amplifier deficiencies) because it sounds 'nice' is simply not high fidelity. If that is what you want to hear then there is no problem with that, but by adding so much additional material (by way of harmonics and intermodulation) you have a tailored sound system, not a hi-fi. - Rod Elliot, ESP

2008-07-07 08:18:09

#17

Flaming_Maniac: prince of insufficient light; +2,490|6974|67.222.138.85

Listen to Freezer. It should work, though your computer isn't very happy about it, and I don't think you have a problem using all your RAM slots on that premium motherboard.

2008-07-07 08:23:30

#18

Freezer7Pro: I don't come here a lot anymore.; +1,447|6465|Winland

Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Listen to Freezer. It should work, though your computer isn't very happy about it, and I don't think you have a problem using all your RAM slots on that premium motherboard.

nVidia chipset. The RAM issues still haven't been solved. It's shit. They've been there ever since NF1. nVidia have had 6 generations of chipsets to solve them on. If they were to solve them, they would have been solved. More NB voltage and more RAM voltage might help. Otherways, using 2x2GB might be a better option in this case.

I didn't look on the specs before posting, I must admit that. Loading pics takes ages, I'm surfing on ISDN speeds.

The idea of any hi-fi system is to reproduce the source material as faithfully as possible, and to deliberately add distortion to everything you hear (due to amplifier deficiencies) because it sounds 'nice' is simply not high fidelity. If that is what you want to hear then there is no problem with that, but by adding so much additional material (by way of harmonics and intermodulation) you have a tailored sound system, not a hi-fi. - Rod Elliot, ESP

2008-07-07 08:27:10

#19

Flaming_Maniac: prince of insufficient light; +2,490|6974|67.222.138.85

Freezer7Pro wrote:
Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Listen to Freezer. It should work, though your computer isn't very happy about it, and I don't think you have a problem using all your RAM slots on that premium motherboard.
nVidia chipset. The RAM issues still haven't been solved. It's shit. They've been there ever since NF1. nVidia have had 6 generations of chipsets to solve them on. If they were to solve them, they would have been solved. More NB voltage and more RAM voltage might help. Otherways, using 2x2GB might be a better option in this case.

I didn't look on the specs before posting, I must admit that. Loading pics takes ages, I'm surfing on ISDN speeds.

I honestly haven't seen any problems since these last two generations of chipsets using all 4 slots. I have a nForce 4, 650i, and a 680i motherboard (all different brands) in this house, all with full RAM slots and none have had any problems. I didn't see anyone having problems with full RAM slots with those motherboards in the reviews as well. I was sure to look for it when my old nVidia chipset motherboard was supposed to have that problem.

2008-07-07 08:35:49

#20

Freezer7Pro: I don't come here a lot anymore.; +1,447|6465|Winland

Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Freezer7Pro wrote:
Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Listen to Freezer. It should work, though your computer isn't very happy about it, and I don't think you have a problem using all your RAM slots on that premium motherboard.
nVidia chipset. The RAM issues still haven't been solved. It's shit. They've been there ever since NF1. nVidia have had 6 generations of chipsets to solve them on. If they were to solve them, they would have been solved. More NB voltage and more RAM voltage might help. Otherways, using 2x2GB might be a better option in this case.

I didn't look on the specs before posting, I must admit that. Loading pics takes ages, I'm surfing on ISDN speeds.
I honestly haven't seen any problems since these last two generations of chipsets using all 4 slots. I have a nForce 4, 650i, and a 680i motherboard (all different brands) in this house, all with full RAM slots and none have had any problems. I didn't see anyone having problems with full RAM slots with those motherboards in the reviews as well. I was sure to look for it when my old nVidia chipset motherboard was supposed to have that problem.

A(n IRL) mate of mine recently got a 780i, and 4GB of DDR800. We ended up RMAing his RAM for 2x2GB, for that exact reason. I spent four hours playing with speeds and timings, and nothing would work. Well, almost nothing. It worked at 533MHz and max timings, with quite a lot of NB voltage. I've seen similar issues with both 650i and 680i boards, as well as NF1, 2, 3 and 4.

The idea of any hi-fi system is to reproduce the source material as faithfully as possible, and to deliberately add distortion to everything you hear (due to amplifier deficiencies) because it sounds 'nice' is simply not high fidelity. If that is what you want to hear then there is no problem with that, but by adding so much additional material (by way of harmonics and intermodulation) you have a tailored sound system, not a hi-fi. - Rod Elliot, ESP

2008-07-07 08:37:43

#21

Flaming_Maniac: prince of insufficient light; +2,490|6974|67.222.138.85

Freezer7Pro wrote:
Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Freezer7Pro wrote:

nVidia chipset. The RAM issues still haven't been solved. It's shit. They've been there ever since NF1. nVidia have had 6 generations of chipsets to solve them on. If they were to solve them, they would have been solved. More NB voltage and more RAM voltage might help. Otherways, using 2x2GB might be a better option in this case.

I didn't look on the specs before posting, I must admit that. Loading pics takes ages, I'm surfing on ISDN speeds.
I honestly haven't seen any problems since these last two generations of chipsets using all 4 slots. I have a nForce 4, 650i, and a 680i motherboard (all different brands) in this house, all with full RAM slots and none have had any problems. I didn't see anyone having problems with full RAM slots with those motherboards in the reviews as well. I was sure to look for it when my old nVidia chipset motherboard was supposed to have that problem.
A(n IRL) mate of mine recently got a 780i, and 4GB of DDR800. We ended up RMAing his RAM for 2x2GB, for that exact reason. I spent four hours playing with speeds and timings, and nothing would work. Well, almost nothing. It worked at 533MHz and max timings, with quite a lot of NB voltage. I've seen similar issues with both 650i and 680i boards, as well as NF1, 2, 3 and 4.

maybe then. As far as I know the problems with full RAM slots have much lower occurrence rate.

2008-07-07 18:57:05

#22

OmniDeath: ~; +726|6911

Thanks for the input everyone, I've removed the "new" insufficient ram (it was some cheap corsair stuff), and I'm just gonna stick with my OCZ stuff... although I may buy another set of what's already in there.

2008-08-31 19:00:36

#23

OmniDeath: ~; +726|6911

Freezer7Pro wrote:
My advice to you, Omni, is to get rid of the new RAM, find out exactly what your old RAM is, and get two sticks of that.

So I finally bought to new sticks of the same ram that was already in my PC (2x 2GB). I now have 8GB of ram of all matching sticks, and again the performance rating has lowered from 5.1 to 5.0!! I don't get it, they're all the same speeds, why would it lower? Are the sticks even worth using if they're going to lower the performance?

2008-08-31 21:09:08

#24

Flaming_Maniac: prince of insufficient light; +2,490|6974|67.222.138.85

OmniDeath wrote:
Freezer7Pro wrote:
My advice to you, Omni, is to get rid of the new RAM, find out exactly what your old RAM is, and get two sticks of that.
So I finally bought to new sticks of the same ram that was already in my PC (2x 2GB). I now have 8GB of ram of all matching sticks, and again the performance rating has lowered from 5.1 to 5.0!! I don't get it, they're all the same speeds, why would it lower? Are the sticks even worth using if they're going to lower the performance?

Maybe try it with three sticks and see what happens?

2008-08-31 21:20:59

#25

Freezer7Pro: I don't come here a lot anymore.; +1,447|6465|Winland

OmniDeath wrote:
Freezer7Pro wrote:
My advice to you, Omni, is to get rid of the new RAM, find out exactly what your old RAM is, and get two sticks of that.
So I finally bought to new sticks of the same ram that was already in my PC (2x 2GB). I now have 8GB of ram of all matching sticks, and again the performance rating has lowered from 5.1 to 5.0!! I don't get it, they're all the same speeds, why would it lower? Are the sticks even worth using if they're going to lower the performance?

Windows Performance Index (or w/e) isn't a reliable benchmark. It changes depending on time, how long you boiled your tea, your girlfriend's menstrual cycle, etc. Do some real benchmarks instead. Plus, 1/50th less performance is something that I'd accept for twice the RAM.

The idea of any hi-fi system is to reproduce the source material as faithfully as possible, and to deliberately add distortion to everything you hear (due to amplifier deficiencies) because it sounds 'nice' is simply not high fidelity. If that is what you want to hear then there is no problem with that, but by adding so much additional material (by way of harmonics and intermodulation) you have a tailored sound system, not a hi-fi. - Rod Elliot, ESP

BF2S Forums More Ram lowering performance?

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

TheAussieReaper wrote:

OmniDeath wrote:

OmniDeath wrote:

OmniDeath wrote:

CrazeD wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Freezer7Pro wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Freezer7Pro wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Freezer7Pro wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Freezer7Pro wrote:

Freezer7Pro wrote:

OmniDeath wrote:

Freezer7Pro wrote:

OmniDeath wrote:

Freezer7Pro wrote:

Board footer