I feel cheated.

[SuAside]

But it seems that in general it's a better solution to have 4 512Mb sticks than 2 512Mb + 1Gb?

i didnt say that.

that wholely depends on your motherboard.

it's kinda technical to explain.

I didn't say he should use 1 gb + 512 + 512.
I meant that he should use 1gb instead of 2x512.

then you're just always wrong, since 1 stick doesnt take advantage of dual channel.

 

[Serge 13]

I didn't say he should use 1 gb + 512 + 512.
I meant that he should use 1gb instead of 2x512.

then you're just always wrong, since 1 stick doesnt take advantage of dual channel.

I meant 2 x 1 GB .
That he should throw away/sell his 2 x512 and buy 2x1 GB

 

[SuAside]

on some mobos you can use 1gb + 512mb + 512mb at the exact same speed as 1gb+1gb.

which is logical, since most 1gb sticks are just double sided while the 512mb is single sided. put 2 single sided on one PCB and you get a doublesided.

 

[Serge 13]

on some mobos you can use 1gb + 512mb + 512mb at the exact same speed as 1gb+1gb.

which is logical, since most 1gb sticks are just double sided while the 512mb is single sided. put 2 single sided on one PCB and you get a doublesided.

i must say ,your a real hardware nut !...and a real hard one to crack
but wouldn't it be a waste of space that way ?
i mean if you want to have more ram later .

 

[SuAside]

perhaps a waste of space, sure, but this way he'd have only to buy 1gb instead of 2x 1gb.

besides, if he wants to upgrade further, and he has the luck to have a higher end mobo, he'll be able to fit 1gb&512mb + 1gb&512mb in dual channel.

 

[TheWesDude]

My speccedie-specs:

Intel Core 2 2400 MHz
Physical / Logical: CPUs 1 / 2
MultiCore: 2 Processor Cores

dual core cpu, so that means you are running 1200 mhz cpu. was your old cpu faster than 1.2 ghz? if so thats why. apps unless specifically designed to run on multi-core computers will only run on 1 core. if your old cpu was faster than 1.2 ghz thats going to slow you down. how large is the L2 cache? most companies up the L2 due to this problem. never get a quad core, the performance sucks.

Graphics Card: ATI RADEON X1600
Graphics Driver: Radeon X1650 SE

not too familiar with ATI cards, whats this comprable to in the nvidia line?

System Memory: 2048 MB

not enough info, how good is this ram, whats its speed and timings? what brand? is it fully compatible? you can fit any kind of ram into an asus board at 2 gig, that doesnt mean its fully compatible ram. the only way to test fully compatible ram is to put in 4 gigs and see how fast it lets you set the ram to for FSB speeds. if its incompatible it will only see 2.5 or 3 gigs of ram and possibly downrank the FSB speed. that will tell you its not 100% compatible.

Operating System: Microsoft Windows Vista

yea, im sorry. if you dont know why this is a problem, there isnt any way any of us can help you solve this problem, find a computer nerd in your area to downrank your OS.

 

[Kyuu]

Graphics Card: ATI RADEON X1600
Graphics Driver: Radeon X1650 SE

not too familiar with ATI cards, whats this comprable to in the nvidia line?

Not 100%, but I believe the closest approximation from nVidia would be a 7600GS. It's a low-end card, but I'm still guessing it's much better than his old one, since he said his rig was 6 years-old.

I also highly doubt his CPU is inferior, even considering that apps which can't take advantage of dual-cores will be running on a single core at 1200MHz, for the same reason.

If you want to find out about your systems specs, my favorite program for that is Everest Home Edition. It'll tell you pretty much everything. Just wish they still supported the free version; not interested in paying for the bloated Ultimate Edition with features I don't need.

 

[TheWesDude]

cpu doesnt have to be inferior...

if he was running a single core like 3 ghz cpu, its going to benchmark better than a dual core 4ghz because your testing is done at 3ghz rather than 2ghz.

 

[Kyuu]

cpu doesnt have to be inferior...

if he was running a single core like 3 ghz cpu, its going to benchmark better than a dual core 4ghz because your testing is done at 3ghz rather than 2ghz.

Which means that, assuming everything else was equal, the CPU is inferior at running any program that can't take advantage of the dual-cores, which is what I meant. I'm just saying that, assuming the CPU in his rig was 6 years old, it's not likely that the old CPU is faster than the Core 2 Duo even with only a single core going at it.

 

[Froggystylexz95]

Nevah evah git a prebuilt.. Surely you got some computer geek friends that could've advised you on better parts? Oy Gevault! For future reference... if it has HP, Gateway, Dell, or Intel stamped on it... it aint good infact, it's more rancid than limberger cheese.

So you're saying that Core 2 Duo's are bad processors?