3gb of RAM vs. 4gb of RAM?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for Arch_Angel_21
Arch_Angel_21

1493

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#1 Arch_Angel_21
Member since 2006 • 1493 Posts

Is there really much of a difference. I know that if its 4GB of RAM all of the same kind then its in dual-channel (I think), but is it a major difference?

This would be on a notebook btw with 667MHz DDR2 RAM:)

Avatar image for sadikovic
sadikovic

3868

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#2 sadikovic
Member since 2004 • 3868 Posts

No difference what so ever to gaming... well for anything actualy.

You can dual channel 3GB's as well: 2x512MB + 2x1GB.

Avatar image for gumeh
gumeh

235

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 32

User Lists: 0

#3 gumeh
Member since 2007 • 235 Posts
most good to set on 4x 1 GB ram on four slots, much more hyper transport treading.
Avatar image for codezer0
codezer0

15898

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 44

User Lists: 0

#4 codezer0
Member since 2004 • 15898 Posts
In a 32-bit OS, a system with only 3GB of RAM installed is more likely to let you use all of that RAM before a system with 4GB of RAM could, thanks to restrictions built in the 32-bit x86 specification because they'd assumed we would have all migrated to 64-bit computing long before this. And while there are chipsets that support asynchronous dual-channel configurations to allow a 2GB stick and a 1GB stick to be in separate channels and still work at a dual-channel rate, it is still very much not ideal. If you want 3GB and true dual-channel, you'd have to do two 1GB sticks and two 512MB sticks... not fun. Honestly, you are much better off just buying 4GB of RAM nowadays for a couple of reasons: (1) it's cheap, (2) no need to worry about being in Async dual channel; you can have true dual channel then (if you do two 2GB sticks or four 1GB sticks), and (3) if you ever do move to a 64-bit OS, you'll see performance start to really improve.
Avatar image for Taylorgc2004
Taylorgc2004

2624

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 Taylorgc2004
Member since 2003 • 2624 Posts
In a 32-bit OS, a system with only 3GB of RAM installed is more likely to let you use all of that RAM before a system with 4GB of RAM could, thanks to restrictions built in the 32-bit x86 specification because they'd assumed we would have all migrated to 64-bit computing long before this. And while there are chipsets that support asynchronous dual-channel configurations to allow a 2GB stick and a 1GB stick to be in separate channels and still work at a dual-channel rate, it is still very much not ideal. If you want 3GB and true dual-channel, you'd have to do two 1GB sticks and two 512MB sticks... not fun. Honestly, you are much better off just buying 4GB of RAM nowadays for a couple of reasons: (1) it's cheap, (2) no need to worry about being in Async dual channel; you can have true dual channel then (if you do two 2GB sticks or four 1GB sticks), and (3) if you ever do move to a 64-bit OS, you'll see performance start to really improve.codezer0
Well said.
Avatar image for teddyrob
teddyrob

4557

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 teddyrob
Member since 2004 • 4557 Posts
I've got 2GBx2 and 32bit Vista registers as 3.5GB ram available.
Avatar image for Luminouslight
Luminouslight

6397

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 Luminouslight
Member since 2007 • 6397 Posts
I wouldn't really expect any difference right now. Ganes really only use up 2GB of ram
Avatar image for bat21win1
bat21win1

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 bat21win1
Member since 2008 • 25 Posts

Is there really much of a difference. I know that if its 4GB of RAM all of the same kind then its in dual-channel (I think), but is it a major difference?

This would be on a notebook btw with 667MHz DDR2 RAM:)

Arch_Angel_21

Personally I would go with the 2x 2gb sticks on a desktop simply because it is so cheap to buy nowadays. However, since you're talking about a notebook... it probably won't be nearly so. Honestly, 2gb of ram is plenty for most people.

I've got 2GBx2 and 32bit Vista registers as 3.5GB ram available.teddyrob

That's probably because the system uses some of your ram for video memory.
Avatar image for X360PS3AMD05
X360PS3AMD05

36320

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#9 X360PS3AMD05
Member since 2005 • 36320 Posts
I would get 2x2GB for OCing.
Avatar image for codezer0
codezer0

15898

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 44

User Lists: 0

#10 codezer0
Member since 2004 • 15898 Posts
I wouldn't really expect any difference right now. Ganes really only use up 2GB of ramLuminouslight
And if you'd stop thinking Wintendo all the time, you'd realize there are many more advantages to having 4GB of RAM than just [insert game here]. :| Seriously, many of us USE our computers for something OTHER THAN GAMES. Think about that, k?
I've got 2GBx2 and 32bit Vista registers as 3.5GB ram available.teddyrob
That's because (default) intel x86 32-bit specification calls for the last .5GB to be reserved for I/O addresses. Optionally, some boards reserve an additional amount in relation to how much video RAM you have, to have a locally accessible reference for vRAM. e.g. If you have a 512MB GPU installed on a system that does this, then you'll only have 3GB maximum that the system will let you use. In the case of me with my 640MB GTS, it only lets me use 2.75GB of the 4GB possible right now, because NVIDIA didn't implement MMIO remapping. And if you're wondering, MMIO remapping is basically a neat (parlor) trick that is supposed to work in cooperation with PAE on the CPU side. Basically, PAE was supposed to allow these reserved I/O bits to be done in the memory space beyond the initial 4GB. Any modern day CPU can do this; any 64-bit capable CPU would almost have to support this for 32-bit OS's. Problem is, that unless the motherboard allows and enables MMIO remapping, it having PAE means nothing, because the system will default to using the "safe" method that is compliant with intel's original spec.
Avatar image for Segaswirl1
Segaswirl1

177

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#11 Segaswirl1
Member since 2003 • 177 Posts

I recently bought a laptop (Acer Aspire 6920G Gemstone Blue), it has a C2D T5750, NVIDIA GeForce 9500m GS TurboCache and 4Gb of RAM, Windows Vista Home Premium. I'm just wondering if my laptop will ever use the full 4Gb that came with it? Seeing as Vista only shows it having 3Gb.

I mean, why would my system come with 4Gb of RAM if it can never be used... would I need to get the 64bit version of Vista just to be able to use that extra 1Gb?

Avatar image for codezer0
codezer0

15898

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 44

User Lists: 0

#12 codezer0
Member since 2004 • 15898 Posts
Likely not, until you disable TurboCache in the BIOS and your video driver. It will mean having a GPU with far less RAM than probably advertised, but see... the thing with TurboCache and HyperMemory is that they basically use some of your system RAM to make the full capable amount that notebook makers usually advertise. So it's unlikely you'll get to use all 4GB of RAM anyway.
Avatar image for ziegd
ziegd

5220

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 29

User Lists: 0

#13 ziegd
Member since 2004 • 5220 Posts
This is gonna be lame, but how do I check to see how much RAM is registering/being used? I have 2x2 for 4 gigs, but I think my system is only using 2 gigs (like one stick may be bad).
Avatar image for blackleather223
blackleather223

1569

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#14 blackleather223
Member since 2004 • 1569 Posts

Youl could try and download cpu-z to make sure that all of your ram is ok and there is a place that you can click on each slot to make sure that the ram is working ok.

Codezer0 You sure do know your stuff. I may have to find you some time to see what you think about this pc that I plan to build.

Avatar image for qman101
qman101

1004

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#15 qman101
Member since 2007 • 1004 Posts

Youl could try and download cpu-z to make sure that all of your ram is ok and there is a place that you can click on each slot to make sure that the ram is working ok.

Codezer0 You sure do know your stuff. I may have to find you some time to see what you think about this pc that I plan to build.

blackleather223

Can't you just check RAM with Task Manager?

Avatar image for blackleather223
blackleather223

1569

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#16 blackleather223
Member since 2004 • 1569 Posts
Or sys info in the oh shoot it has slipped my mind as to how to get to it. darnt.
Avatar image for Targzissian
Targzissian

1228

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#17 Targzissian
Member since 2003 • 1228 Posts
I've got Vista Home Premium 32-bit. I have 4.00GB of RAM installed. When I was running two graphics cards with 768MB each it showed "Total Physical Memory = 2.75GB." Now I have only one graphics card with 1024MB and it shows "Total Physical Memory = 3.25GB." I think that means I can use a little more of my installed RAM now, because there is less total graphics RAM eating into the memory management capabilities of the OS. I don't really understand the details, but I'm happy that I have access to more of the RAM now. I doubt that any more than 3GB of RAM would be used by current games, though.
Avatar image for ziegd
ziegd

5220

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 29

User Lists: 0

#18 ziegd
Member since 2004 • 5220 Posts

"Can't you just check RAM with Task Manager?"

THAT'S what I was looking for. YES, iirc, but I had forgotten (the reason for my question). If I'm not mistaken, under the Preformance tab of the Task Manager (Ctrl-Alt-Del) should tell you how much of your 'available' RAM is actually being utilized...right? (I know that having 4 gigs of RAM will only show something like 3 gigs available in the best-case, for reasons I don't understand but believe.)

Avatar image for ziegd
ziegd

5220

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 29

User Lists: 0

#19 ziegd
Member since 2004 • 5220 Posts

OK...this is making me nuts. I thought I'd post here rather than start another memory thread.

I have 4 gigs RAM (2x2 Corsair DDR2). I put one chip in (either one) and System Properties shows 2 gigs RAM, while Task Manager Physical Memory shows 2.095 gigs.

I put in the second chip (doesn't matter which slot). System Properties still shows 2 gigs, while Task Manager Physical Memory shows 2.096 gigs.

What's the deal? Am I looking in the right place for how much RAM my system has available?

Other specs:
evga nForce 680i SLI mobo
Q6600 @ 2.4ghz
8800gt 512mb