2/3/4GB of RAM?

I've been looking to get a new laptop recently but I can't decide between 2/3/4 GB of RAM. Is there a big difference between em? Will I notice the difference when playing WoW, etc.?

 

More RAM memory is always a wise investition, and you will feel noticable improvement in having more of it, especially on Vista. Keep in mind that 32-bit system cannot use more than 3GB of RAM. In WoW you might not fell speed boost with more than 2GB RAM, but in most of the other aplications you will.

I would suggest you getting 3GB if you have 32-bit Windows, and have a money

 

I was thinking Vista 32bit and 3GBs of RAM, how much of a difference is that from Vista 64bit and 4GBs of RAM?

 

4GB makes a difference over 3GB, but mostly in high-demanding tasks such as rendering, video editing, high-end games and similar.

Also, I'm not sure are there some problems with compatibilities of aplications with 64-bit systems.

 

Do you really have to make a thread in each category of the forum concerning memory and 64-bit Vista?

 

Lol dude you keep finding my threads. Still trying to get that Sager...

 

All you have to know: 4GB is more than 3GB. 4GB will obviously be better than 3GB (especially in the long run). However, to fully use/support 4GB, you need a 64-bit OS. Vista 64-bit is stable and runs almost anything (except random mechanical engineering applications and really, really old games).

So, unless you play ancient games or plan on being a mechanical engineer, I say get Vista 64-bit and 4GB of RAM.

 

32-bit systems can use more than 3GB of RAM, they just can't use more than 4GB. Even Windows can use more than 3GB. Because of the design of Windows, it can't use all of the the 4GB address space for the user's data.

I would be remiss if I didn't point out that there are many variants of *Nix (including all of the Linux variants and the Mac OS X) which can use all of a 4GB address space even in 32-bit mode.

 

I thought that the accepted belief was that buying 2 x 2GB on a 32 bit environment was the best way to go, since we're dealing in dual channel memory, you want the same capacity on each RAM stick for best performance? Doesn't the 3.X amount of RAM your 32-bit system utilizes in a 2 x 2GB configuration still faster than 1 GB + 2 GB?

Am I missing something?

 

With the current Intel chipsets, it doesn't really matter, the difference between single and dual is maybe 3%? Also, Intel supports a technology called "flex mode", when you have 2 + 1 GB, the first 1 + 1 GB will be running at dual channel also. However, there is a much bigger difference with AMD though.

 

Actually, I was referring to the Windows XP and Vista specificaly when I wrote that post. And my point was that 32-bit Windows cannot use 4GB of RAM memory, so it is useless to buy that big amount if he doesn't have 64-bit Windows. But, in general, I agree it is always better to have more RAM memory.

 

True indeed.

 

Should I just go ahead and get 4 GB instead of 3 GB, even though I'm not positive I want to go 64 bit yet? It's only like a 25 dollar difference, and I read somewhere that two sticks from the same RAM set is better than two mixed sticks.

 

You can also get some so-dimm ram modules that are 1.5GB per chip. The current HP TX 2517CA comes shipped with them. You may have to special order them but you can do it if you really want to. But really, you can find super chip 2x2GB sodimm sets for the same price or maybe a couple dollars more that 1x1GB and a 1x2GB chips. So even if you use a 32-bit windows varient to start you can always get the 64-bit varient of Windows 7 in very late '09 early '10. (A friend who works for MS in the Windows 7 group says that's they're current internal ship target window)