Which would be better for overclocking and gaming, 2 sticks of 1GB or 4 sticks of 512MB?
Which Would Be Better?
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Joined
·
3,983 Posts
4 sticks I would think. Lower latencies.
Joined
·
4,724 Posts
go with the x4 512
Joined
·
11,430 Posts
But 4 sticks will tax the memory controller more. Running that much memory basically screws your overclockability either way you go...
![]()
Joined
·
3,983 Posts
Quote:
True.
Originally Posted by YiffyGriffy But 4 sticks will tax the memory controller more. Running that much memory basically screws your overclockability either way you go...
|
Joined
·
3,983 Posts
Yes in this case. And yes.
Joined
·
11,430 Posts
2x1GB would put less strain on the memory controller but 1GB modules have very poor latencies and I've never seen nor heard them to be very overclockable. To run dual channel you need at least 2 modules of similar speed and make. Is there any specific reason you need 2GB? Because unless you're running a lot of massive CAD or encoding operations, 1GB is more than enough.
Joined
·
3,983 Posts
Quote:
Photo and video editing. Especially photo editing. Also graphic design.
Originally Posted by Jori ... 1 gig would do fine and go with 2x512. 1 gig is what you need for gaming and really anything else.. Can someone tell me what you would need more than 1 gig for?.. |
Quote:
So 1GB(2x512MB) would be able to run games such as Half-Life 2 on the highest settings without any problems? Thanks for all your help.
Originally Posted by YiffyGriffy 2GB would put less strain on the memory controller but 1GB modules have very poor latencies and I've never seen nor heard them to be very overclockable. To run dual channel you need at least 2 modules of similar speed and make. Is there any specific reason you need 2GB? Because unless you're running a lot of massive CAD or encoding operations, 1GB is more than enough. |
Joined
·
11,430 Posts
Exactly. You'll notice on the box the game may recommend 512MB of memory, and what that means is the game itself under normal circumstances uses 512+MB of memory, but what people don't often factor in is that Windows XP itself also is using 256+MB of memory on its own. So ultimately 1GB is actually a little more than necessary, but for efficient dual channel you want identicle memory modules, so yes, 2x512MB is your best option for performance, ease of use, and good overclockability
![]()
Joined
·
3,983 Posts
Quote:
Have you ever tried to manipulate a 10 meg picture file? If so you should know why.
Originally Posted by Jori That much >_>.. Why? |
Joined
·
11,430 Posts
Indeed, and 10MB is rather small for a high-res image. My dad does some work (sort of an ameture photographer) with completely uncompressed scanned negatives that can easily exceed 90MB.
Joined
·
3,983 Posts
Quote:
Yeah I noticed. Im lazy. A 10 meg file would be like a 2400 dpi scan. Super high resolutions.
Originally Posted by Jori Thats a big pic.. By the way Digital, one of your smileys is broken in ur sig. |
what do you mean, especially photo editing, Video Editing requires alot more system resource becuase it is basically needs to be constantly shuffling through footage that gets played at 25fps+ (25fps PAL, 29.9fps NTSC and HDTV 60fps-1200fps). For 1200 FPS it would only play at 60fps (it's for slow motion if some of you havent worked that out already, example=BadBoys 2 bullet through glass bottle at start was at 1200fps)
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Join the discussion
