Ram and OS choices

Since working here at Digital Storm, I have found that there is a
lot of confusion about getting 4GB of ram vs 2GB of ram, and
whether or not as gamers, you should get a 32bit Operating System or 64bit.
As a company, we're here to build your system the way YOU want it.
Period.  But if we see an issue or something that doesn't make sense, we're going to recommend what we think would be
best.
Example.  Someone who's buying  a gaming system thinks that buying
4gb of ram will improve their performance.  That is a general
misconception.  The Windows 32-bit operating system (98, XP,
Vista, etc) and all it's 32 bit software would only utilize 2GB of
ram, maybe 2.5 with tweaking and  whereas the 64-bit os will use 4 or more. We long the days of yor when we as gamers could get PC133 and PC333 ram and get the different increments and get 2.5 gigs (1x1gb,
1x256, and 2x512) and get the full benefits of having a system
with maxxed out ram.  With ddr2, things changed because now performance memory comes in pairs, except
the budget minded 667MHz ram.
If you came to us with the intentions of buying a gaming rig, and
wanted 4 GB of 667 ram, a 1066 processor, we're automatically
going to try and sell you the 2GB of 1066 ram to match the 1066
processor.  Why?  Better performance.  Think of it as a highway.  
A 1066 (or higher, the concept is the same with 1333MHz) processor
is running on 4 lanes of open highway, Now, with your 4GB of
667MHz ram, your system is now bottlenecking and therefore
presenting a traffic jam so to speak because think of the 667MHz
ram as a 2 lane highway.  And unfortunately, your system is only
as fast as your slowest Bus Speed.  You want to keep your FSB and
your memory bus speed as close to the same as possible.

So bottom line?  If your processor is 1066, stick with 1066 ram
for the best performance.
Now I bet your wondering why do we even offer the 667 ram? Because
it's good ram.  But it's not performance ram.  It is mainly for
those who want a good system, but are on more of a tight budget
than others.  We are, after all, trying to accommodate everyone on
all budget levels.

Now, on to the 64 bit os and 32 bit arguments.  Most users do not need a 64 bit OS.  Unless your running a server or working with applications that require a lot of processing (Digital video editing and music editing come to mind) , you would only need the 32bit choice.  Now, I am not saying that you shouldn't get a 64-bit os.  I am not saying that at all.  But I can tell you from experience that as a gaming system builder, that there are very few programs that actually would utilize the 64bit architecture namely games due to the fact of the lack of driver support.  I can only think of 2 games that perform better on a 64 bit os, and that is Flight Sim X and the upcoming game, Crysis, and even Crysis will be recommended on a 32 bit OS.
  Anyway, I do hope that this helps clear up some questions. 

Here is some more information:
Computer Memory: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_memory
64bit vs 32bit:           http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/64-bit


Now, forgive me if I skipped around a lot, as it's 12:30am, I am dog tired and downright out of it.

So if any of you out there have anything to say or add to this, flame away.  I only pretend to know everything ;)


Edited by skyR - 22 Oct 2007 at 7:01pm

All the new Intel CPUs are quad-pumped and have a 9x multiplier.

Your Intel Core 2 Q6600 has a FSB of 1066MHz but infact it's 266MHz quad-pumped ( 1066MHz / 4 = 266 or 266 * 4 = 1066MHz ) This means that data is transferred twice per clock cycle, on the rising and falling edge, and also transfers two bytes of data at a time to effectively give four times the throughput of a 266Mhz FSB.

To determine how fast your processor runs at is done by applying a clock multiplier to the FSB. For example, the Q6600 has a FSB of 266 MHz and a multiplier of 9, thus the CPU is set to run 9 times the MHz speed of the FSB. 266 MHz * 9 = 2394 MHz.

RAM works in a similar way, DDR2 is dual-pumped. Meaning if you have a stick of 800 MHz ram, it's infact 400 MHz * 2.

So in reality all you would ever need is 667 MHz or 800 MHz ram. 1066 MHz is a waste of money.

Edited by skyR - 08 Aug 2007 at 5:11pm

Thanks you for the great info

Waste of money or not, that's your opinion.  The rated speed of the ram is at 1066 regardless of how it's clocked or pumped (if you will).  So if you get 800 ram, you're getting just that.  That will be where the system bottleneck is. 

I have never seen windows recognize more than 2.5...  Interesting.

no.  800 ram is 800 ram.

DDR2 ram is made of 2 channels, and the 800MHz ram is 400MHz per channel, hence, 800MHz.

What I am talking about OCing is pretty much everything over 800MHz ram is in fact, overclocked by the manufacturer.  The more expensive the ram, it's because it's timings are a true 1066 or 1250 ram.  That's why say on Newegg and other places you can find highend ram for cheap because it's just oc'd 800 so forth and so on.

So that is why some say 1066 and higher isn't worth it.  But for the enthusiast or extremist, it is.




Edited by Kelly - 08 Aug 2007 at 11:17pm

I've seen 3.6GB.

I think it all depends on the motherboard?

Beg no more. It also depends on the hardware configuration.

http://www.vistaclues.com/reader-question-maximum-memory-in-32-bit-windows-vista

This guy had 3.2GB available.
People here had 2GB, 3.58GB, and 3GB available.

 eVGA boards obviously only allow 2.5GB. Some of the ASUS boards we had before showed 3.2GB.


Edited by Robert - 09 Aug 2007 at 1:54pm

Kelly et al.

Well Tummy,
that makes absolutely NO sense.  becuase I have only 2GB of ram.  So what you're saying, (correct me if I am wrong) is that since I have:
2 8800GTX (768x2= 1536)
x-fi fatlal1ty (64MB)
for a total of 1600MB of hw ram.
so since I have only 2GB of ram, with your reasoning, I should only see 448MB?

Please elaborate.

Hi Kelly...   It would not come out of your 2Gb, but out of the 4GB limit... Since your other hw (vide,bios,sc, hd cache) uses 1600, you would only have 2.4GB available to you, and since you have only 2GB of system ram, you are fine.

Fact #1: FSB Clock = 266 MHz or 333 MHz

Fact #2: a)   667 MB/sec DDR can be clocked up to 333 MHz without exceeding the chip spec.

             b)   800 MB/sec DDR can be clocked up to 400 MHz without exceeding the chip spec

             c) 1066 MB/sec DDR can be clocked up to 533 MHz without exceeding the chip spec

Edited by Bill the Cat - 02 Sep 2007 at 12:26pm

No, I'm getting confused .

Edited by Bill the Cat - 02 Sep 2007 at 12:38pm

Really interesting reads.

Edited by Tyler Lowe - 18 Sep 2007 at 3:34am

It's threads like this that reinforce why I ended up choosing DS. 

If I have this all correct...

Edited by Tyler Lowe - 18 Sep 2007 at 12:21pm

Wow guys thanks for the responses - you just gave me a lot of clarity.
skyR, I had initially thought of going with 64bit, although I am not sure many of the plugins I use for editing (Toontrack's Drumkits from Hell and others) will run well in 64 - they are certainly not officially supported.

I am kind of on the fence - I have a feeling 64bit will be fine, but reading forums it seems like some people experience a lot of issues - and I still want to be able to blaze through Oblivion :)

I'm thinking of going Vista32, with 4GB, as I can always write in for the free upgrade to 64. Thoughts? Maybe I'll just go straight to the 64 bit version..

Chris

You can always make a dual boot system with a 32bit OS and a 64bit OS.