TechSpot

ram trouble

By netrom82
Feb 6, 2004
  1. need som help...

    i got an msi k7n2 motherboard and i just bought some more ram, now i got 2x512
    i have heard that the computer will work faster if you put the ram in slot 1 and 3, instead of 1 and 2, but when i do that windows wont start at all, and it wont install either when i try to.

    is there a way to solve this peoblem?? do you get any higher performance at all when you put the ram this way?


    i do have matching ram types.


    thanks in advance
     
  2. RealBlackStuff

    RealBlackStuff TS Rookie Posts: 6,503

    If you want to run dual-channel mode, on this board you have to use memory slots 2 and 3, not 1 and 3.
     
  3. netrom82

    netrom82 TS Rookie Topic Starter

    ahh....

    thanks a lot, but will it increase performance?
     
  4. RealBlackStuff

    RealBlackStuff TS Rookie Posts: 6,503

    I honestly don't know that, but dual-channel is supposed to be faster than single.
     
  5. netrom82

    netrom82 TS Rookie Topic Starter

    ok, thanks
     
  6. bajan

    bajan TS Rookie

    I have an nForce2 mobo as well and I really havn't noticed much of a difference between single channel and dual channel modes. When i first installed the RAM i must have run the system for about a week before i realized that it was running in single channel mode. Then i switched around the modules, got dual channel mode and...... not realy much of a difference.

    I guess you really wouldn't see much of a difference unless you're using a really memory-intensive app, like if you want to benchmark your system using an old game that depended on the system's cpu and ram, instead of the newer ones that use the video cards. :D
     
  7. Bug

    Bug TS Rookie Posts: 79

    You are completely correct. The Dual Channel will only be noticed when you are using an application that runs strickly off of bandwidth and memory size. Take BattleField 1942 (or DesertCombat). Run it with single channel 512 and you are doing pretty good, but run it Dual Channel and the MoBo is optimized for sharing both sticks of RAM simultaneously. It is like having a single stick of 512 MB DDR, running with twice the number of IO ports. If you have the chance run a memory bandwidth test...

    SiSoft Sandra is a good one
    http://www.sisoftware.net/

    Bug
     
  8. Didou

    Didou Bowtie extraordinair! Posts: 4,274

    On an AMD K7 platform, running a Dual Channel configuration will result at most in a 5% performance increase.

    The Dual Channel memory controller on the nForce 2 platform was designed with the memory needs of all the integrated devices ( LAN, Sound, Sata & VGA ) in mind. So the best case for you to notice a difference is if you have a high network traffic, heavy IDE transfers & video activity ( mainly games ) all at the same time. Other then that you will not see much difference.
     
  9. Rick

    Rick TechSpot Staff Posts: 4,573   +65

    The position of your memory modules has absolutely no effect on speed, save running it in dual-channel mode.
     
  10. Eric Legge

    Eric Legge TS Rookie Posts: 132

    AMD's new Athlon 64 (single channel) and Athlon 64 FX-51 (double channel) processors have the memory controller built into the processor so that the control of the memory works at the speed of the processor instead of the much slower speed of a chipset on a motherboard, which is where the memory controller usually is.

    So, there should be a performance boost when using dual-channel mode and an Athlon 84 FX-51 processor, which has an inbuilt dual-channel memory controller.

    Can anyone say if this is the case or not?

    Eric,
    http://www.legge40.freeserve.co.uk/BuyerBeware.htm
     
  11. Didou

    Didou Bowtie extraordinair! Posts: 4,274

    Well, the Athlon64-FX requires Ram DIMMS to be installed in two different channels, you cannot run it in single channel. But judging from the performance increase between the Athlon64 & the Athlon64-FX, there is a performance extra but not as much as people would think.

    Right now, the FX uses registered memory which is a bit slower then normal memory ( at the same rating ). Once the Athlon64-FX is available in Socket 939 format & doesn't need registered memory, we will really see the performance increase.

    PS. You can look at some reviews of the Athlon64 3400+ ( 2.2 GHZ ) & the Athlon64-FX 51 ( 2.2 GHZ ), you'll notice the real-world difference between the two isn't breathtaking.
     
Topic Status:
Not open for further replies.

Similar Topics

Add New Comment

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...