2GB or 3GB?

Hey people

im thinking of getting some new RAM atm i have some crappy OEM 2gb at 667mhz, with no heatsinks and timings are poor something like 5 5 15 20.

anyway i was just going to get some another bunch of ddr2 sticks with heatsinks faster clocks and timings

the thing is, is it better to get 1066mhz 2gb ram or 800mhz 3GB, i have vista 32 so 3GB is max, i have a Q6600 at stock and the mobo supports the 1066 speed

and also considering crysis which was ahead of its time and the fact it shows an extreme amount of map and detail, which only needs 2GB of ram would there really be any point of getting any higher than 2GB as the chance of another crysis game for a while will be small techniocally 2GB should last a couple years as long as i dont change my OS?

what do you think help me decide, thnks

Dual channel doesn't have a significant impact on preformance from what I have heard. More memory > dual channelLuminouslight

3 would mean not having dual channel, does that matter?metalisticpain

Depending on your motherboard, you can easily have 3GB running in dual channel.

3 would mean not having dual channel, does that matter?metalisticpain

yes, it does make a difference. On a high end comp either dual it or don't bother with it.

so for the op, either get 2gb of 1066 or 4 of it.

[QUOTE="metalisticpain"]3 would mean not having dual channel, does that matter?ch5richards

Depending on your motherboard, you can easily have 3GB running in dual channel.

But really, why stop at 3GB? Go for 4GB of RAM already... or 8, since it's cheap enough to do now.codezer0

more than 4GB is a waste of money at the moment. Plus there is the cost of buying 64bit software to make use of it.

2GB fine with XP

3GB-4GB for Vista.

yes, it does make a difference. On a high end comp either dual it or don't bother with it.

Demo24

I actually tried my memory is dual or single channel mode and honestly I found little or no difference.

[QUOTE="Demo24"]

yes, it does make a difference. On a high end comp either dual it or don't bother with it.

teddyrob

I actually tried my memory is dual or single channel mode and honestly I found little or no difference.

not very scientific there. You may not notice the difference surfing the internet, but it's there.

[QUOTE="teddyrob"][QUOTE="Demo24"]

yes, it does make a difference. On a high end comp either dual it or don't bother with it.

Demo24

I actually tried my memory is dual or single channel mode and honestly I found little or no difference.

not very scientific there. You may not notice the difference surfing the internet, but it's there.

Nope but as a said little or no difference not a lot of difference if at all in most applications. You are not going to see 10FPS in Crysis if you use dual memory configuration or anything like that. I never saw a single frame increase in that game.

If you have XP, 2 is fine, but if you have Vista, get 3 GB.Luminouslight

2GB is more than enough if using Vista. Adding more memory wouldn't make a difference.

Vista will consume enough ram to impact performance on Crysis if you only have 2 GB I believe.Luminouslight

That is false.

[QUOTE="Luminouslight"]If you have XP, 2 is fine, but if you have Vista, get 3 GB.Deihmos

2GB is more than enough if using Vista. Adding more memory wouldn't make a difference.

2GB was fine for me and Crysis but I heard some say you need more for supreme commander. Not playing this game much I don't know.

[QUOTE="Demo24"][QUOTE="teddyrob"][QUOTE="Demo24"]

yes, it does make a difference. On a high end comp either dual it or don't bother with it.

teddyrob

I actually tried my memory is dual or single channel mode and honestly I found little or no difference.

not very scientific there. You may not notice the difference surfing the internet, but it's there.

Nope but as a said little or no difference not a lot of difference if at all in most applications. You are not going to see 10FPS in Crysis if you use dual memory configuration or anything like that. I never saw a single frame increase in that game.

perhaps not, nor did I ever say you would gain frames. It's going to effect loading of textures and programs with high levels of memory useage the most.

[QUOTE="Deihmos"]

[QUOTE="Luminouslight"]If you have XP, 2 is fine, but if you have Vista, get 3 GB.teddyrob

2GB is more than enough if using Vista. Adding more memory wouldn't make a difference.

2GB was fine for me and Crysis but I heard some say you need more for supreme commander. Not playing this game much I don't know.

That is also false. Vista consumes 300 - 400MB of ram. I played Supremem Commander before and never had a problem but didn't like the game.

[QUOTE="Luminouslight"]If you have XP, 2 is fine, but if you have Vista, get 3 GB.Deihmos

2GB is more than enough if using Vista. Adding more memory wouldn't make a difference.

2gb is almost a joke. Honestly. Or I suppose it just depends on how you use your computer. It's more than enough for the average joe internet, word, powerpoint, etc. user. If you're going to be using one program (i.e: any video game) at a time with a few background processes, ok; 2gb is fine. However, there are games out there with a 3gb recommended amount for vista. One of those games would be "Fury". Also, pplications such as photoshop or any workstation type programs LOVE and WILL use all the ram they can. For reference, photoshop can use a maximum of 3gb of ram. 2gb more than enough?

On the other hand, there are people who play their mmo's in window mode with multiple clients open, tab out of a game for whatever reason, or even have more than 1 fullscreen game going at the same time. Tell me if I'm wrong but multitasking with any game or other applications will increase your ram usage, thus the need for more ram. 2gb is simply not "more than enough".

Oh yes, don't forget; more ram = less page file usage = more performance. Period.

Dual Channel does yield an increase in framerates, but nothing to die for

If Fury recommends 3Gb of ram then there is somethign wrong with that game and it is poorly coded. Maybe why it got a 4.5.

Who installs 3GB of ram anyway. That will be single channel so the ram runs slower and like I said the actual OS only use about 300MB. I think people look at the task manager and thing OMG I am using 1GB of ram. The truth is it's not actual being used just cache. If you want more ram just get 4GB.

Of course if you want to have 50 applications in the background and still playing a game then memory will become an issue.

Read your little forum post again. It clearly says 3gb for vista under recommended specifications. You're still not going to notice a difference in game performance with dual or single channel ram.

Haha... ninja edit.

There isn't a single game that recommends 3GB of ram and no Fury is not one of them. http://forums.auran.com/fury/forum/showthread.php?t=363

Who installs 3GB of ram anyway. That will be single channel so the ram runs slower and like I said the actual OS only use about 300MB. I think people look at the task manager and thing OMG I am using 1GB of ram. The truth is it's not actual being used just cache.

Deihmos

I don't necessarily want 50 background applications. There often comes a time when a person uses applications simultaneously. I could have Photoshop, Illustrator, Flash, DreamWeaver, Premiere, Vegas Video (not all at the same time but some, and quite often) and ram usage goes up, fast. And wether the 1gb of ram is being used by what the user is doing or not, it's still being used.

There isn't a single game that recommends 3GB of ram and no Fury is not one of them. http://forums.auran.com/fury/forum/showthread.php?t=363

Who installs 3GB of ram anyway. That will be single channel so the ram runs slower and like I said the actual OS only use about 300MB. I think people look at the task manager and thing OMG I am using 1GB of ram. The truth is it's not actual being used just cache.

Of course if you want to have 50 applications in the background and still playing a game then memory will become an issue.

Deihmos

FURY Recommended Specifications

Operating system
Windows XP (Service Pack 2)
Windows Vista

CPU
Intel Core 2 Duo or equivalent

RAM
Windows XP: 2GB
Vista: 3GB

Graphics
High end renderer

• NVidia GeForce 7600 series with 256MB VRAM
• ATI Radeon x1600 with 256MB VRAM

site

Oh really....

THNKS FOR THE RESPONSES

i think i will go with 4GB of crucial ballistix 800mhz ram timings 4-4-4-12, i dont plan on fiddling with clocks etc coz of my mobo so these were the cheapest i could find and gd performance

[QUOTE="Luminouslight"]If you have XP, 2 is fine, but if you have Vista, get 3 GB.Deihmos

2GB is more than enough if using Vista. Adding more memory wouldn't make a difference.

[QUOTE="Deihmos"]

[QUOTE="Luminouslight"]If you have XP, 2 is fine, but if you have Vista, get 3 GB.codezer0

2GB is more than enough if using Vista. Adding more memory wouldn't make a difference.

Every benchmark I looked at show no improvement after 2GB. http://www.gamespot.com/features/6182806/p-6.html I have an extra 2GB of ram so I installed 4GB and can't say I noticed any difference. 64bit is basically a waste of time at the moment. All applications are 32bit so and using 64bit means that the 32bit enviroment has to be emulated. I don't see the point. When applications show more support for 64bit then it might be a worthy upgrade.

Every benchmark I looked at show no improvement after 2GB. http://www.gamespot.com/features/6182806/p-6.html I have an extra 2GB of ram and installed 4GB and can't say I noticed any difference in anything.

Deihmos

[QUOTE="Deihmos"]

[QUOTE="Luminouslight"]If you have XP, 2 is fine, but if you have Vista, get 3 GB.muirplayer

2GB is more than enough if using Vista. Adding more memory wouldn't make a difference.

2gb is almost a joke. Honestly. Or I suppose it just depends on how you use your computer. It's more than enough for the average joe internet, word, powerpoint, etc. user. If you're going to be using one program (i.e: any video game) at a time with a few background processes, ok; 2gb is fine. However, there are games out there with a 3gb recommended amount for vista. One of those games would be "Fury". Also, pplications such as photoshop or any workstation type programs LOVE and WILL use all the ram they can. For reference, photoshop can use a maximum of 3gb of ram. 2gb more than enough?

On the other hand, there are people who play their mmo's in window mode with multiple clients open, tab out of a game for whatever reason, or even have more than 1 fullscreen game going at the same time. Tell me if I'm wrong but multitasking with any game or other applications will increase your ram usage, thus the need for more ram. 2gb is simply not "more than enough".

Oh yes, don't forget; more ram = less page file usage = more performance. Period.

Dual Channel does yield an increase in framerates, but nothing to die for

that isn't true, I have vista and 2gb and it has never even been close to the 2gb and I use demanding apps, like photoshop, solidworks and gaming. vista doesn't use nearly as much extra as its made out to be.

Read your little forum post again. It clearly says 3gb for vista under recommended specifications. You're still not going to notice a difference in game performance with dual or single channel ram.

Haha... ninja edit.

[QUOTE="Deihmos"]

There isn't a single game that recommends 3GB of ram and no Fury is not one of them. http://forums.auran.com/fury/forum/showthread.php?t=363

Who installs 3GB of ram anyway. That will be single channel so the ram runs slower and like I said the actual OS only use about 300MB. I think people look at the task manager and thing OMG I am using 1GB of ram. The truth is it's not actual being used just cache.

muirplayer

I don't necessarily want 50 background applications. There often comes a time when a person uses applications simultaneously. I could have Photoshop, Illustrator, Flash, DreamWeaver, Premiere, Vegas Video (not all at the same time but some, and quite often) and ram usage goes up, fast. And wether the 1gb of ram is being used by what the user is doing or not, it's still being used.

well i just put your little theory to test, firefox, photoshop, word, fireworks, dreamweaver, freehand, indesing, and flash all open at once and only 1.34gb of ram used, so really you don't need 3-4gb to make vista multitask, 2gb is basicly as much as it is in xp despite what everyone seems to think

[QUOTE="Deihmos"]

There isn't a single game that recommends 3GB of ram and no Fury is not one of them. http://forums.auran.com/fury/forum/showthread.php?t=363

Who installs 3GB of ram anyway. That will be single channel so the ram runs slower and like I said the actual OS only use about 300MB. I think people look at the task manager and thing OMG I am using 1GB of ram. The truth is it's not actual being used just cache.

Of course if you want to have 50 applications in the background and still playing a game then memory will become an issue.

Luminouslight

FURY Recommended Specifications

Operating system
Windows XP (Service Pack 2)
Windows Vista

CPU
Intel Core 2 Duo or equivalent

RAM
Windows XP: 2GB
Vista: 3GB

Graphics
High end renderer

• NVidia GeForce 7600 series with 256MB VRAM
• ATI Radeon x1600 with 256MB VRAM

site

Oh really....

just like ac says you need a dual core cou when it runs fine on a single core, so?

[QUOTE="muirplayer"]

Read your little forum post again. It clearly says 3gb for vista under recommended specifications. You're still not going to notice a difference in game performance with dual or single channel ram.

Haha... ninja edit.

[QUOTE="Deihmos"]

There isn't a single game that recommends 3GB of ram and no Fury is not one of them. http://forums.auran.com/fury/forum/showthread.php?t=363

Who installs 3GB of ram anyway. That will be single channel so the ram runs slower and like I said the actual OS only use about 300MB. I think people look at the task manager and thing OMG I am using 1GB of ram. The truth is it's not actual being used just cache.

imprezawrx500

I don't necessarily want 50 background applications. There often comes a time when a person uses applications simultaneously. I could have Photoshop, Illustrator, Flash, DreamWeaver, Premiere, Vegas Video (not all at the same time but some, and quite often) and ram usage goes up, fast. And wether the 1gb of ram is being used by what the user is doing or not, it's still being used.

well i just put your little theory to test, firefox, photoshop, word, fireworks, dreamweaver, freehand, indesing, and flash all open at once and only 1.34gb of ram used, so really you don't need 3-4gb to make vista multitask, 2gb is basicly as much as it is in xp despite what everyone seems to think

1. Do you have any idea what a paging file is?

2. Did you just have them open for the sake of having them open or were you actually using the programs?

[QUOTE="imprezawrx500"][QUOTE="muirplayer"]

Read your little forum post again. It clearly says 3gb for vista under recommended specifications. You're still not going to notice a difference in game performance with dual or single channel ram.

Haha... ninja edit.

[QUOTE="Deihmos"]

There isn't a single game that recommends 3GB of ram and no Fury is not one of them. http://forums.auran.com/fury/forum/showthread.php?t=363

Who installs 3GB of ram anyway. That will be single channel so the ram runs slower and like I said the actual OS only use about 300MB. I think people look at the task manager and thing OMG I am using 1GB of ram. The truth is it's not actual being used just cache.

muirplayer

I don't necessarily want 50 background applications. There often comes a time when a person uses applications simultaneously. I could have Photoshop, Illustrator, Flash, DreamWeaver, Premiere, Vegas Video (not all at the same time but some, and quite often) and ram usage goes up, fast. And wether the 1gb of ram is being used by what the user is doing or not, it's still being used.

well i just put your little theory to test, firefox, photoshop, word, fireworks, dreamweaver, freehand, indesing, and flash all open at once and only 1.34gb of ram used, so really you don't need 3-4gb to make vista multitask, 2gb is basicly as much as it is in xp despite what everyone seems to think

1. Do you have any idea what a paging file is?

2. Did you just have them open for the sake of having them open or were you actually using the programs?

I use these programs all at once on a frequent basis, well not all of them at once but 3-5 of them at once and I have no ram issues what so ever. 2gb probably isn't enough if you have intergrated graphics but with dedicated vram 2gb is fine for vista.

I wasn't talking about running out of memory in general. I was trying to make the point of not having to use the virtual memory because it slows down performance.

Come up with something to prove this wrong and then I'll believe 2gb is more than enough. If you don't like reading too much, you can skip to page 8 and read the first paragraph.