6831fx 3GB to 4GB with 4-4-4-12 worthy upgrade?

My 6831 came with 3GB ram with CL5. On newegg there is a G.SKILL 4GB (2x2GB) with CL4 for $49.99 is it worth it to upgrade? those seem to be at a good price ATM. How much performance increase can I expect from this upgrade?

 

absolutely zero performance upgrade, becuase you have a 32 bit operating system. You would need to install a 64 bit version of windows for your system to be able to recognize more than 3 Gb of memory.

The upgrade from CL5 to CL4 will show absolutely zero performance difference. You will only see minor differences in synthetic benchmarks.

K-TRON

 

Will they even let you run your ram at CL4?

 

Complete twaddle. A 32-bit OS can access 4GB of memory. Minus hardware memory reservations (e.g. shadow video memory of ~ 512MB) and you're left with about 3.45Gb usable. Not to mention you are also running in asymmetric dual channel mode with 3GB instead of true symmetric dual channel mode that you would get with 4GB.

My RAM runs at CL4 but as you mentioned performance gains are negligible. All adds up though

All in all certainly more than an "absolutely zero performance upgrade" especially so if dougy upgrades to a 64-bit OS.

 

Lower CL RAM for laptops is a scam. It is supposed to be called high performance memory and is mainly for overclocking. But you can't do that in a laptop, because the BIOS is all locked up. Lower CL memory is able to support higher OC frequencies once the CL is raised, as compared to normal value memory. Its good for Desktop OCers who try and OC each and every component to achieve that max PCMark score.

In a laptop, the boost with lower CL memory will only be seen in synthetic benchmarks. And lower CL also makes overclocking the FSB via software more difficult.

And is windows actually using up the whole 3GB ?

With a 32-bit OS, there is no telling how much RAM you will see. The system will address anywhere from 2.5-3.75GB depending upon the H/W, BIOS, etc.

But a kit at 50 bucks, I would just go for it.

 

I noticed a bit faster display of JPG images when I upgraded to 4-4-4-12 modules

I went from 2 to 4GB. But no page file FTW (thought I didnt have one when with 2GB ram either). Photoshop doesn't display warning about no page file when with 4GB ram though

for that cheap, upgrade

 

To save money, you could just buy a single stick of 2GB memory.

32-bit OS can use 4GB depending on the hardware, hacks, and OS. Windows Server 2003 32-Bit and Windows Server 2008 can use 4GB. However, regular desktop 32-bit OS's cannot use all 4GB.

For the sake of simplicity, only 64-bit OS's can fully utilize 4GB of memory.

 

I didn't mention PAE as it has some limitations (e.g. uses additional CPU cycles) and it's a mission to remove the software based lock built into Vista. If you want to give it a go though read this:

http://www.tipandtrick.net/2008/how...-physical-ram-memory-in-32-bit-windows-vista/

You might as well install Vista x64 instead though.

 

are you trying to say the higher the CL values, the better i can overclock my cpu?

 

No it used to be that when overclocking a desktop back in the nforce2 days you would sometimes have to raise your CAS latency value to increase your FSB. However keeping it as low as possible used to increase your throughput so I'm not quite sure what Andy is talking about. I don't think it makes as big difference these days but still the lower the CAS value the better.

 

Lower the CL, performance goes up a bit. Higher the CL, higher the stability when the I/O clock is increased.

Now one cannot play around with the memory multiplier in a laptop, because you don't have the option available in the BIOS, and it is at Auto, so the default multiplier coded in the memory controller is used.

You can also not play around with the CL, except flashing a new SPD to the memory module.

If you're overclocking the FSB, there is no way you can stop the increase to the RAM's I/O Clock. And to get the best+stable memory overclock, you need the highest CL possible.

A memory overclock of a DDR2-667 module, of about 50% will be much more stable with a CL=5/6 rather than a CL=4.
You can play around with the rest of the timings with memset in windows, but cannot change the CL with it.

 

will there be a performance hit if i perform this hack?

 

what about upgrading to 800mhz ram as opposed to 667? If it supports it doesn't the faster bus help?

 

thanx andy for the advice. i was going to get myself a new 4gb kit. i have my cpu constantly overclocked at 2.8Ghz. I would wanna try 2.9 but it's kind of unstable. maybe a higher cl would help anyway

 

Santa Rosa doesn't support 800MHz RAM - it will down clock it to 667MHz.

There will be a very small performance hit dougy yes. However the additional usable RAM will more than cover the performance deficit.

It's really not worth the effort though - as I said you might as well just upgrade to 64-bit Vista.

 

You should be a bit more clear. What 32bit OS? In Vista- you can only take advantage of 3.5gb of RAM if you are running Vista 32bit. Only the 64bit allows the system to use it's full potential.

The following was taken directly from Microsoft's help and support site:

(if you care to read it yourself- direct your browser to microsofts knowledge base and search for issue 946003)

 

DallasinPensacola I think you need to re-read my post and the rest of the thread.

With PAE enabled and the 4GB software lock removed 32-bit Vista can access up to 64GB of RAM. It was a marketing decision by Microsoft to lock down this feature in Vista which is unfortunate.

To answer your question - any 32-bit OS, that's why I wasn't specific.

 

evidently you didn't read the knowledge base I posted. Where is your facts that it was a "marketing decision"? It states that there is an actual issue with the MMIO when you have 4 gb on the 32 bit Vista.

I will repost the clip that was taken directly from Microsoft.

<see below>

For Windows Vista to use all 4 GB of memory on a computer that has 4 GB of memory installed, the computer must meet the following requirements: • The chipset must support at least 8 GB of address space. Chipsets that have this capability include the following:• Intel 975X
• Intel P965
• Intel 955X on Socket 775
• Chipsets that support AMD processors that use socket F, socket 940, socket 939, or socket AM2. These chipsets include any AMD socket and CPU combination in which the memory controller resides in the CPU.

• The CPU must support the x64 instruction set. The AMD64 CPU and the Intel EM64T CPU support this instruction set.
• The BIOS must support the memory remapping feature. The memory remapping feature allows for the segment of system memory that was previously overwritten by the Peripheral Component Interconnect (PCI) configuration space to be remapped above the 4 GB address line. This feature must be enabled in the BIOS configuration utility on the computer. View your computer product documentation for instructions that explain how to enable this feature. Many consumer-oriented computers may not support the memory remapping feature. No standard terminology is used in documentation or in BIOS configuration utilities for this feature. Therefore, you may have to read the descriptions of the various BIOS configuration settings that are available to determine whether any of the settings enable the memory remapping feature.
• An x64 (64-bit) version of Windows Vista must be used to gain full use of the 4096mb of memory.
Contact the computer vendor to determine whether your computer meets these requirements.


FYI- how can it be a marketing decision (at least a profitable one) when the 32 bit and the 64 bit cost the same (on new models) I'm not the smartest person in the world- and even I can tell that wouldn't be a "smart marketing decision".

As for your solution- don't think you think the people at Microsoft would have known about the workaround you mentioned by enabling the PAE? It's a little more than just that. I would like to see data where you had a 32 bit OS and did what you mentioned- and have it be a bonified solution to the issue. I will recind my criticism of your remark.

 

DallasinPensacola I can read, there's no need to repost another large section of the same text thanks. And I did read it.

Microsoft have had the ability to use more than 4GB RAM in a 32-bit OS for some time. The facility is available in both Windows Server 2003 and Server 2008. I say again I think you need to read the thread and the link I posted:

http://www.tipandtrick.net/2008/how...-physical-ram-memory-in-32-bit-windows-vista/

 

32bit OS can address exactly 4GB addresses ... so unless you computer consists only of RAM, then you can not use all 4GB for ram only.

it's called memory mapping. It's explained up top as well. It's used to tell the OS that the computer has other stuff like video card, HDDs, CDs, modems, etc.

with that said, if your hardware can buffer data, then you can go above 4GB addresses, but that will take 2 or more processor cycles to access, or slow the system down. So it's not worth it.