In a RAM Jam

[SaiyanPrideXIX]

Okay so lately my computer--which is pretty dated--has been giving me grief in a lot of new 3D RTS games. Because of this it's gotten me into thinking of upgrading the RAM.

I have 512 RDRAM, in two 256mb chips. Now here's the dilemma...

I see a lot of SDRAM out there and, in theory, it looks better. I can get a gig of SD for the same cost as another pair of 256 RD's, and the numbers look higher overall. I have an Intel i850E motherboard in this junkbox and I'm just looking for a way to extend it's life a little bit longer, since I just got in a car accident and haven't got the grand to go buy a new beast.

The question is, should I get additional RD ram for more money, or is SD ram good enough these days that it would be smarter to replace my RAM entirely with a gig of SD? Help is appreciated, thanks.

EDIT: Here's the details on my RAM according to CPU-Z, if it helps: Samsung PC800-40 (400mhz) RDRAM

 

[DiebytheSword]

Your motherboard can run both RAMBUS and SD RAM? That's unusual. Stick with the RAMBUS unless you plan on upgrading your motherboard, which may not help you anyway (you may introduce need to update your processor as well).

If you do decide to upgrade your machine's mobo, go with a conroe ready platform and purchase DDR2 ram to go with it. This would probably get costly as well, but would yeild significant performance gains over your current P4 setup. 939 systems are very easy to build these days as well if you need some bang and have very little buck.

In any event, look to upgrade to a minimum of 1GB of ram, and 2GB is perferable for more intense games like the Battlefield series. RTS's might not have a huge difference from tapping 1GB or 2GB.

 

[Devion]

Dont buy SD ram, as it will drastically slow you computer down.

It would be a wise choice to save for a new system, as Cucumba said, 939 AMD systems are cheap in costs and very easy to build.

If you want to stick with you current videocard, I recommend you get Asrock 939DUAL-SATA2. Asrock may be budget and scare you off at first, but really its an AWESOME board.
Windows biosflashes, NATIVE AGP _AND_ PCI-E support, options to get a daughterboard and upgrade to AM2, EXTREMELY stable, performance is almost equal to most Asus nForce4 boards and supports all 939 CPU's.

The only thing that pissed me off was that the floppy connector is below the last PCI-slot, which where I put my SoundBlaster Live! 5.1.

If you really need to buy ram, go for 2x256 RD ram, its ALOT faster.

 

[SaiyanPrideXIX]

That's sort of what I was leaning toward. I didn't think I should dare to venture outside of the kind of RAM I already had, I just wanted to be sure.

It's a Dell so honestly I never considered updating the board. it's a cramped case and it's not very well ventilated so I doubt it would house a beastly board and vid card very long before heat started becoming a real issue. I already have plans for a new system I just didn't know if there was some sort of short order stuff I could do to keep this one going a little while longer.

 

[DiebytheSword]

DO NOT UPDATE THE DELL!

Dell's have a propietary voltage that will not work unless you upgrade a few additional parts.

Stick to the RAM upgrade. I do suggest a ASROCK board, bought one myself despite some bad reviews, and I was very pleasantly suprised by how well it runs.

 

[|Overlord|]

Personally I wouldn't bother purchasing more ram for your current setup, RD ram is usually more expensive and harder to find these days. Personally I would go get a Socket T (775) based system using ethier a P965 Express or 975X chipset and conroe, or get a cheaper 800/900 series PentiumD chip and wait for a price drop in the future, or even better wait for Kentsfield chips to start appearing (Intel's quadcore chips). The P965 seems to be the better of the two chipsets atm however, and is cheaper as well (the memory controller on the P965 chipset has been optimized for conroe chips, it uses the ICH8R south bridge which also offeres more sata2 ports). An AM2 system would also be a good route to go.

As already mentioned however, if your'e just after a ram (DDR ram as it's a 939 setup), cpu and mainboard upgrade and still want to use your existing gfx card, go get a Asrock Dual SATA2.

 

[DiebytheSword]

Did you miss the part where he said his concern was money? Where on earth is he going to pull together the scratch to go to a Conroe system?

 

[SaiyanPrideXIX]

I was just looking to maybe inexpensively extend the life of this computer. Hence why the "Just get a new computer" answers don't really advise me either way as far as this older one is concerned.

I could probably buy a new computer soon but I don't want to consider this one junked until further notice because it hasn't got enough power to pull 30fps in Act of War.

 

[|Overlord|]

Did you miss the part where he said his concern was money? Where on earth is he going to pull together the scratch to go to a Conroe system?

I could probably buy a new computer soon but I don't want to consider this one junked until further notice because it hasn't got enough power to pull 30fps in Act of War.

All the more reason. Conroe's Aliendale counterpart (chips with 2mb of total cache, 1mb per core) are also cheaper then higher end Conroe chips, and if people are prepared to save some cash and wait then a new computer becomes a realistic goal. Of course, their are multiple upgrade roots he can take, an example being ethier a 939 setup, a 775 setup or a AM2 setup, with the 939 setup being the cheapest of all to take since he doesn't have to add a new gfx card to the cost of an upgrade.

The only downside of this however is that 939 chips have no future upgrade cycle, and that an AM2 system does. Infact, it's been stated the Socket AM3 chips will be backwards compatible with AM2 mainboards as well, meaning that a future upgrade is always possible without switching mainboards (although it would probably be best to use it in a newer mainboard, getting a new mainboard could be put off for later).

 

[DiebytheSword]

I agree on switching up to a AM2 if you can afford it. DDR2 is still more expensive than DDR. An ASROCK board could settle the problem, but I'm iffy on a riser to support an upgrade. Risers = lag, period. AM3's backwards compatability tickles my inner child, and makes me warm inside.

I like Conroes, and they are very affordable compared to older intel debut chips (knee jerk reaction to saving Intel's ass anyone?), but I feel that $600 is alot to spend on a dual core proc when you are hurting for cash after a car wreck.

 

[|Overlord|]

I agree on switching up to a AM2 if you can afford it. DDR2 is still more expensive than DDR. An ASROCK board could settle the problem, but I'm iffy on a riser to support an upgrade. Risers = lag, period. AM3's backwards compatability tickles my inner child, and makes me warm inside.

Agreed

I like Conroes, and they are very affordable compared to older intel debut chips (knee jerk reaction to saving Intel's ass anyone?), but I feel that $600 is alot to spend on a dual core proc when you are hurting for cash after a car wreck.

Not exactly, some ddr2 kits can be had for around the same price as some DDR400 kits. If you take a look here and here, I can get a 2gb DDR2 667mhz kit a little cheaper then a 2gb DDR 400 kit. DDR2 kits rated at higher speeds however are a lot more expensive, prices also seem to differ from brand to brand as well.

 

[DiebytheSword]

True, but if you are going DDR2, why by 667? 800 ftw.

 

[Devion]

Dont wanna be a prick and correct an admin, but these suggestions arent helping SP, I guess.

The most logical option for SP is to upgrade to a 939 socket, with the Asrock mobo.
Estimated cost.
Asrock 939Dual-SATA2 60 dollars
Athlon 64 3500 100 dollars
1GB of DDR ram 100 dollars

Total 260 dollars.

And when you have more money to spend, get a better videocard and maybe an Athlon 64 X2

 

[DiebytheSword]

939 systems are very easy to build these days as well if you need some bang and have very little buck.

In any event, look to upgrade to a minimum of 1GB of ram, and 2GB is perferable for more intense games like the Battlefield series. RTS's might not have a huge difference from tapping 1GB or 2GB.

And what, pray tell, are you correcting? Read up to my first reply in this thread.

 

[|Overlord|]

And when you have more money to spend, get a better videocard and maybe an Athlon 64 X2

Why not just grab a X2 now while he can given how cheap they have become these days instead of wasting money on a new single core chip?.

In any event, look to upgrade to a minimum of 1GB of ram, and 2GB is perferable for more intense games like the Battlefield series. RTS's might not have a huge difference from tapping 1GB or 2GB.

Agreed. RTS games however, if you're gonig to play over lan do see performance improvements with faster LAN speeds and more memory (especially if you're the server). Iv'e noticed this over the time that Iv'e played Zero Hour/Generals with my brother plus when we have more people over to paly with us, it really can get to the laggy point when you have lots of units, and some slower computers depending on their specs can really hold the performance of the game back because they are lagging behind.

 

[DiebytheSword]

That can also be network collision. RAM is important, but as you pointed out, the overall system may hamper it more than just the ram. More players is more CPU cycles, not just textures and sounds dumped to main memory.

 

[imported_Pemalite]

Whats the rest of the system? I gather its at least a 2.0ghz Processor, considering your motherboard supports Hyper Threading.
Because sometimes, you might see a better increase with a new Graphics card than extra ram. 1024Mb of ram is Indeed becoming the industry Norm for minimum amount of memory. (With the resource hungry Vista coming along, no wonder!).

Now onto the Debate of SD VS RD.
SD = Cheaper, You can buy more for your dollar.
RD = Faster, Expensive, and can get bugger all for your money.
My Advice? Dont bother with the ram, Unless you can pick up a 2x512Mb sticks of RD or SD. Even if you drop 1gb of SD into your system, When it comes to memory intensive games, you will have more performance than with 512Mb of RD. (Only if a large amount of HDD Swapping occures).
I would like to know what speed your Processor is, What kind of Graphics, card. before I can make proper suggestion

 

[DiebytheSword]

PC133 RAM causes a significant slowdown vs Rambus ram, I've seen it proven time and time again. In fact, for a long time, RD was much faster than DDR.

 

[|Overlord|]

PC133 RAM causes a significant slowdown vs Rambus ram, I've seen it proven time and time again. In fact, for a long time, RD was much faster than DDR.

Agreed. Depending on speed, RD and DDR showed some diffecens between each other particular in application perofrmance, where for intel RD would be faster in some appliactions then DDR. Buying SD memory these days is a joke really, harder to find and probably more expensive as well. SD memory would also bottleneck his system and be far worse in comparision to his sytem now in it's current form.

 

[SaiyanPrideXIX]

Well, for the record, I don't usually have any problems in online play in RTS games as far as netspeeds or hosting goes. No one ever lags; but my framerate usually sucks. So this is strictly a graphical horsepower/memory issue on my end. It's just that the games are getting so deep and detailed now; my videocard can do them alright (not great, but alright...) but it is getting harder and harder to maintain minimum playable FPS. I just thought maybe more ram would help me smooth that over.

I dunno where all this cheap ram talk is. I've seen 2x256 RD's on newegg for like 150-200 bucks. Is that right?