Help with RAM???

I'd like to purchase my RAM by tomorrow (November 02, '04), so can
someone help me? Can someone tell me if the following PC4000 RAM will
be good for my computer. The new RAM, for the time being, would run in
conjunction with my old PC3200 RAM, which I know isn't as good as the
PC4000 RAM so you don't get the full effects of the PC4000 RAM. But
eventually I'd like to replace the PC3200 RAM with the same PC4000
RAM.

Despite that, can you tell me if I'd get the full effect of the PC4000
RAM even if that's all I had?

thanks!!!!!!

Here is my info. The RAM I think I'd like to buy is:

Kingston Hyperx Series 184 Pin 512MB DDR PC-4000
Speed: DDR500(PC4000)
Type: 184 Pin DDR SDRAM
Error Checking: Non-ECC
Registered/Unbuffered: Unbuffered
Cas Latency: 3-4-4-8-1T
Support Voltage: 2.6V
Bandwidth: 4.0GB/s
Organization: 64M x 64 -Bit


According to PC Wizard my Memory Controller Information is:
Memory Controller : SIMM, DIMM
Number of connectors : 4
Max. Module Size : 512 MB
Max. Memory Size : 2048 MB
Supported Speed : 70ns, 60ns
Supported Voltages : 3.3v
Error Detection Method : 64-bit ECC
Error Correction Capability : Unspecified
Current/Supported Interleave : 1-way/1-way

Type : DDR-SDRAM PC3200 (200 MHz)

CPU:
Pentium 4 - 3.2GHz
voltage - 3.3V

Mainboard: (ASUSTek Computer Inc.)
Product - P4SD-VX

Videocard: Radeon 9800 Pro

Misc:
Bus Speed - 798 MHz
front side AND memory bus speeds - 199.5 MHz


p.s. Let me know if you need more info

I upgraded my computer to 2 Gigs of RAM, up from 1 GIG of RAM.

But when I open applications, it doesn't seem to open faster. Is this
an unreasonable expectation that an application like Netscape or
Photoshop would open faster with 2 Gigs of RAM as opposed to 1 Gig of
RAM?

What performance boosts should I expect with the new RAM?

Thanks!

"Jaxim" wrote in message...
I upgraded my computer to 2 Gigs of RAM, up from 1 GIG of
RAM.

But when I open applications, it doesn't seem to open faster.

Why, were you expecting them to?

Is this an unreasonable expectation that an application like Netscape
or Photoshop would open faster with 2 Gigs of RAM as opposed
to 1 Gig of RAM?

You shouldn't expect a hugely noticeable difference in application load
times just because you've increased the amount of system memory. After a
certain point there is a law of diminishing returns involved here. If you
had gone from 128MB to 2GB of installed memory you certainly would have
spotted a difference, but with a gig onboard already you are past the point
where adding even more is going to result in easily noticeable boosts.

Sure, there will be a little less page file use in certain circumstances,
but the main determinator of application load speed, especially for apps
with loads of plugins and support files like Photoshop, is the speed at
which the files can be read off hard disk, and to a certain extent the
prefetching techniques that are used.

What performance boosts should I expect with the new RAM?

Where you would see more of a difference is if you do a lot of multitasking,
or work with large files in applications like Photoshop. In other words, you
need to do stuff that *uses* lots of memory in order to see a difference.
Look in the Performance tab of Task Manager to see what your memory usage
is. I daresay it's normally less than 1024MB.

It's also fair to say that to see the biggest benefit you'll have to tune
your virtual memory, paging executive and related settings. Keeping the
Windows executive in memory instead of swapping it would give you a boost,
but you'll then have less memory for use by apps like Photoshop. As with all
things it's a case of tuning for the work you do, rather than magically
expecting improvements.
--


Richard Hopkins
Cardiff, Wales, United Kingdom
(replace .nospam with .com in reply address)

The UK's leading technology reseller www.dabs.com
Get the most out of your digital photos www.dabsxpose.com

It's also fair to say that to see the biggest benefit you'll have to tune
your virtual memory, paging executive and related settings. Keeping the
Windows executive in memory instead of swapping it would give you a boost,
but you'll then have less memory for use by apps like Photoshop. As with
all things it's a case of tuning for the work you do, rather than
magically expecting improvements.

I also have 2GB of Ram. I have this much for large image manipulation. How
do I force the windows executive into memory like you said above? I have
turned off the virtual memory setting as I rarely go above 512MB usage in
normal conditions, except when working with my large images + then I don't
get too close to my 2GB limit.

"Gareth Tuckwell" wrote in message...
How do I force the windows executive into memory like you said
above?

If you've completely disabled virtual memory, you may already have done this
by default. However, if you open the registry editor, and (assuming you're
running Win2k or XP), navigate to:

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\System\ControlSet001\Control\Se ssion Manager\Memory
Management

Once you're there, you'll see the DisablePagingExecutive option. Setting
this to a hex value of 1 will force the executive to remain in memory.

There are some other options you may want to tweak in the Memory Management
settings, not least the SecondLevelDataCache option, which XP uniformly
fails to set by itself. Set the value for this as your L2 cache size in hex.
IOW for 512K of L2 enter 200 in this field.
--


Richard Hopkins
Cardiff, Wales, United Kingdom
(replace .nospam with .com in reply address)

The UK's leading technology reseller www.dabs.com
Get the most out of your digital photos www.dabsxpose.com

Richard Hopkins wrote:
"Gareth Tuckwell" wrote in message...

How do I force the windows executive into memory like you said
above?


If you've completely disabled virtual memory, you may already have done
this by default. However, if you open the registry editor, and (assuming
you're running Win2k or XP), navigate to:

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\System\ControlSet001\Control\Se ssion Manager\Memory
Management

Once you're there, you'll see the DisablePagingExecutive option. Setting
this to a hex value of 1 will force the executive to remain in memory.

There are some other options you may want to tweak in the Memory
Management settings, not least the SecondLevelDataCache option, which XP
uniformly fails to set by itself. Set the value for this as your L2
cache size in hex. IOW for 512K of L2 enter 200 in this field.

That value being "0" does not mean Windows 'failed' to set it. A 0 entry
tells XP to get the cache size from the HAL abstraction layer. A non zero
value is only useful if it can't get it from the HAL (defaults to 256K)
and, then, only for old processors.

http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;EN-US;183063


"it is only useful for computers with direct-mapped L2 caches. Pentium II
and later processors do not have direct- mapped L2 caches."


Yes, I know that's an NT4 article. It's the same in later versions, except
they're more emphatic about it.

http://www.microsoft.com/resources/d...c_evl_fhcj.asp

Evaluating Memory and Cache Usage

Do not change the SecondLevelDataCache entry

Some third-party sources have erroneously reported that modifying the
SecondLevelDataCache registry entry in
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\System\CurrentControlSet
\Control\Session Manager\Memory Management
can enhance system performance. The second level (L2) cache is recognized
by the operating system and is fully utilized regardless of the setting of
this parameter.

http://www.microsoft.com/resources/d...n-us/29938.asp

SecondLevelDataCache HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Session
Manager\Memory Management

Data type Range Default value
REG_DWORD 0 | 1-Cache size (in bytes) 0 (256 KB)

Description
Specifies the number of bytes in the secondary processor cache, also known
as the L2 cache. The value of this entry is used only when the Hardware
Abstraction Layer (HAL) cannot detect the L2 cache.