# 2GB vs 4GB RAM (windows Xp 32) and new processor



## Gamax (May 12, 2008)

Hi. I currently am thinking of upgrading my CPU and RAM. I have atm 2GB and an Opteron 170 overclocked to 2.8.

I read on some websites that Quad cores and 4GB are the way to go if I had vista 64 bit or something. However I don't plan on getting it and will continue to use XP for a while until I finally buy a new system. 

I want to play Crysis though (have a 8800GTS 512), so I am curious, which processor would you guys recommend for this? A core2quad or core2duo? My main thing is gaming, I don't really do anything else on this comp. Also, for WinXP32, would 2GB be fine? Or must I get 4GB to play crysis fine? (I take it crysis is the most demanding game for a long shot)

I am estimating a budget of $400 by the end of June probably. (Including memory CPU and motherboard)

Thanks.


----------



## HTC (May 12, 2008)

Gamax said:


> Hi. I currently am thinking of upgrading my CPU and RAM. I have atm 2GB and an Opteron 170 overclocked to 2.8.
> 
> I read on some websites that Quad cores and 4GB are the way to go if I had vista 64 bit or something. However I don't plan on getting it and will continue to use XP for a while until I finally buy a new system.
> 
> ...



In order for Windows to recognize the 4 GB, it will have to be a 64 bit version of Windows: doesn't matter if it's XP or Vista.

Both Windows XP 32 and Windows Vista 32 will *not* recognize the whole 4 GB.


----------



## Wile E (May 12, 2008)

HTC said:


> In order for Windows to recognize the 4 GB, it will have to be a 64 bit version of Windows: doesn't matter if it's XP or Vista.
> 
> Both Windows XP 32 and Windows Vista 32 will *not* recognize the whole 4 GB.



No, it won't recognize all 4GB, but 3-3.75GB is still better than just 2.


----------



## Darknova (May 12, 2008)

With the price of DDR2 so low now I see no reason not to get 4Gb even if you only use 32-bit, because when you go 64-bit in the future you'll be able to use all the memory.

Also, for gaming, I would recommend either the Q6600, or E8400 depending on your other uses. If you do other things like video encoding, or don't intend to upgrade in a few years, than the Q6600. Otherwise get the E8400, which is a dual core, not a quad.

Currently, there are very few, if any, games that actually take advantage of more than 2 cores.


----------



## HTC (May 12, 2008)

Wile E said:


> No, it won't recognize all 4GB, but 3-3.75GB is still better than just 2.



Correct: it depends greatly on the video card used.

As i understand it, the more memory the video card has, the less memory XP will recognize. Not sure how exactly, though 

EDIT



Darknova said:


> Also, for gaming, I would recommend either the Q6600, or E8400 depending on your other uses. If you do other things like video encoding, or don't intend to upgrade in a few years, than the Q6600. Otherwise get the E8400, which is a dual core, not a quad.
> 
> Currently, there are very few, if any, games that actually take advantage of more than 2 cores.



This would imply a change in the motherboard as well. I'm not all that familiar with the AMD line up, atm but, if your current motherboard supports it, i would recommend a Phenom processor. Dunno if it would fit your budget, though!


----------



## Wile E (May 12, 2008)

HTC said:


> Correct: it depends greatly on the video card used.
> 
> As i understand it, the more memory the video card has, the less memory XP will recognize. Not sure how exactly, though



Because XP considers all the memory on the system to be part of the total. The OS itself is limited to address 4GB total, including all memory in the system.


----------



## Darknova (May 12, 2008)

HTC said:


> Correct: it depends greatly on the video card used.
> 
> As i understand it, the more memory the video card has, the less memory XP will recognize. Not sure how exactly, though



Well, in a 32-bit OS, you have a 32-bit register, and all expansion cards are allocated a certain part of that register at the top end, this was fine when we were using less memory than we used to, now however it's causing problems.

The amount of memory allocated to each expansion card depends greatly on how much onboard memory it has.


----------



## lemonadesoda (May 12, 2008)

I'm not 100% sure on the accuracy of the chipset claims, but otherwise, most of the other info stacks up.



> If you installed total 4GB memory, the system will detect less than 4GB of total memory because of address space allocation for other critical functions, such as:
> 
> - System BIOS (including motherboard, add-on cards, etc..)
> - Motherboards resources
> ...



Basically, on older chipsets, e.g. i865, if you had 4GB memory, you only saw about 3GB +/- depending on settings like: AGP aperture size, number of PCI cards installed, etc. The reason for this is that the range 3GB-4GB is called the "system arena" in Windows 32 and is used for memory mapping peripherals and GPU.

If the above quote is correct, then on newer chipsets, the BIOS "swaps out" the system arena to some extent, so that more memory is available under Win32.  Anyone care to comment on that claim?


----------



## happita (May 12, 2008)

Wile E said:


> Because XP considers all the memory on the system to be part of the total. The OS itself is limited to address 4GB total, including all memory in the system.



So by that logic, if I were to switch up my video card to lets say a 1GB HD 2900XT, then XP would only recognize 3GB system memory +/- a few hundred megabytes for other things.
Right now I have a 512MB HD 3870 and my system recognizes 3.25GB


----------



## Wile E (May 12, 2008)

happita said:


> So by that logic, if I were to switch up my video card to lets say a 1GB HD 2900XT, then XP would only recognize 3GB system memory +/- a few hundred megabytes for other things.
> Right now I have a 512MB HD 3870 and my system recognizes 3.25GB



More or less, yes, that's how it would work.


----------



## tkpenalty (May 12, 2008)

Crysis only uses around 1GB of memory, which means 2GB of RAM will be enough, expect to have half a gig of memory free. In a 32bit environment, more than 2GB of RAM is honestly a bit on the redundant side. 

A 8800GTS 512MB and your current setup is more than capable of handling crysis fairly well, even at high settings, and resolutions around 1280x1024 ish, it will still be very playable. Don't bother upgrading to 4GB of RAM.


----------



## Gamax (May 12, 2008)

Thanks for the replies.

Yes I am thinking of getting a new motherboard, CPU and RAM. Can prolly go up to $450 by the end of next month.

I plan on this to be my last upgrade before I purchase a new system which would be Summer 2009. Which means I'll keep my ancient optical drives and HDD for now, as well as WinXp.

Which would be better though, a Q6600 or an E8400? And is it really worth 4GB over 2GB? Let's say for 1 - 2 years from now.


----------



## Darknova (May 12, 2008)

1-2 years from now 4Gb will be the standard. 2Gb right now is the standard, and DDR2 is so cheap you'd be unwise not to grab 4Gb IMO.

And in your case, definitely the Q6600. In a few years quad core optimised programs will be a lot more in use than they are at the current time.


----------



## Gamax (May 12, 2008)

I remember a couple of years ago some games performed worse on dual cores than single cores because they were not optimized for them. Does this happen now with dual and quad cores? 

Also I think my budget will let me grab 4 GB actually if they remain cheap for a month and a half or so.


----------



## Darknova (May 12, 2008)

Gamax said:


> I remember a couple of years ago some games performed worse on dual cores than single cores because they were not optimized for them. Does this happen now with dual and quad cores?
> 
> Also I think my budget will let me grab 4 GB actually if they remain cheap for a month and a half or so.



That was a few years ago 

No longer matters, it'll perform the same on a dual or quad as on a single, if it's only optimised for one core, but if it's optimised for more cores, then it'll perform even better


----------



## happita (May 12, 2008)

Gamax said:


> I remember a couple of years ago some games performed worse on dual cores than single cores because they were not optimized for them. Does this happen now with dual and quad cores?
> 
> Also I think my budget will let me grab 4 GB actually if they remain cheap for a month and a half or so.



I say go for it. When I upgraded, I got a 7-10fps jump in STALKER at all high settings 1280x1024 res. Although this isnt the best game to make a comparison for, its still significant.


----------



## Gamax (May 12, 2008)

Thanks again. I may end up getting the QuadCore and OC it to the E8400 speed and expect the same or better performance right? 

Also which is better, 4x 1GB or 2X 2GB? (can get any for about $85)

Could anyone recommend a good motherboard too?


----------



## francis511 (May 12, 2008)

Re: 4 gigs. I bought 2 gigs to add to my original 2 gigs to make gears of war play faster on vista. DAMN that game lagged beforehand. So yeah , you do notice the difference sometimes. BTW Vista 32 with sp1 recognizes 4 gigs.


----------



## Darknova (May 12, 2008)

Gamax said:


> Thanks again. I may end up getting the QuadCore and OC it to the E8400 speed and expect the same or better performance right?
> 
> Also which is better, 4x 1GB or 2X 2GB? (can get any for about $85)
> 
> Could anyone recommend a good motherboard too?



If no price difference, 2 x 2Gb for future proofing. To be honest, despite what people say, I've never had an issue with 4x1Gb for overclocking...but eh.

If you can OC the Q6600 to E8400 you'll be set for a year or 2 I would think 

A good motherboard? Foxconn MARS, except I know availability is now seriously reduced. Abit IP35-Pro, there are a number of Asus ones...but I'm not an Asus fan so I wouldn't know about them.


----------



## ntdouglas (May 12, 2008)

tkpenalty said:


> Crysis only uses around 1GB of memory, which means 2GB of RAM will be enough, expect to have half a gig of memory free. In a 32bit environment, more than 2GB of RAM is honestly a bit on the redundant side.
> 
> A 8800GTS 512MB and your current setup is more than capable of handling crysis fairly well, even at high settings, and resolutions around 1280x1024 ish, it will still be very playable. Don't bother upgrading to 4GB of RAM.




Thats not true. The more ram you have the more the game will use. I'm running 8 gig and crysis uses over 3 gig. So go for 4 gig and be done with it.


----------



## Darknova (May 12, 2008)

ntdouglas said:


> Thats not true. The more ram you have the more the game will use. I'm running 8 gig and crysis uses over 3 gig. So go for 4 gig and be done with it.



Heheh, and he only uses 2Gb...can't really listen to a guy who's never used 4Gb in his main system


----------



## ntdouglas (May 12, 2008)

Darknova said:


> Heheh, and he only uses 2Gb...can't really listen to a guy who's never used 4Gb in his main system




+1 I never knew it either until I started adding more ram. lol


----------



## Darknova (May 12, 2008)

ntdouglas said:


> +1 I never knew it either until I started adding more ram. lol



I know what you mean...I could never upgrade to DDR3 until 4Gb becomes affordable lol.


----------



## Gamax (May 12, 2008)

What is the difference between DDR3 and DDR2? Is there any performance gain or something?


----------



## ntdouglas (May 12, 2008)

Gamax said:


> What is the difference between DDR3 and DDR2? Is there any performance gain or something?





Don't worry about ddr3. $450 might not even get you a 2 gig kit. lol


----------



## Gamax (May 12, 2008)

Btw I heard the Q6600 is power hungry. With my 8800 GTS and that one OC'ed, will an Enermax Liberty 500W be enough? (adding the other parts too) http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817194003 (my PSU)


----------



## Darknova (May 12, 2008)

Gamax said:


> Btw I heard the Q6600 is power hungry. With my 8800 GTS and that one OC'ed, will an Enermax Liberty 500W be enough? (adding the other parts too) http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817194003 (my PSU)



Yup. Good quality PSU with nice amps on the 12v rails. You'll be fine.


----------



## Gamax (May 12, 2008)

So far I am thinking 

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115017 Q6600

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231122  2GB X2 G.Skill

Just need the mobo and a good CPU cooler. (So far those 2 things are $305).


----------



## Darknova (May 12, 2008)

http://www.newegg.com/product/product.aspx?item=N82E16835233003

http://www.newegg.com/product/product.aspx?item=N82E16813186119

Take a look at those. $451.96 in all


----------



## Gamax (May 12, 2008)

Thanks. Is there a non cf version by any chance? heh


----------



## theeldest (May 12, 2008)

For $5 more you can switch from DDR2 800 to DDR2 1000

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231145

From the comments, it seems to overclock well. Just be aware that it is meant to run at 2.0-2.1v, where most mobos are 1.8v standard. To take care of this G.Skill SPDed the memory to be DDR2 800 at 1.8. You need to manually set it to DDR2 1000 (by using a 3:4 memory divider) and set the voltage to 2.0-2.1v as per the official manual.

If you are unsure, you can wait a couple days. I'll have this memory delivered tomorrow, and I'll tell you how it runs (and OCs)


----------



## Darknova (May 12, 2008)

Gamax said:


> Thanks. Is there a non cf version by any chance? heh



I've not seen a decent P35 board without it, and let's be honest, does it really matter if it does or doesn't have it? If you're not going to use it fair enough, but it gives you the option, and it is a higher quality board than the ones without.

The Foxconn P35A is just the MARS without the absurd overclocking features (absurd but FUN ). Does overclock well and is very stable though.


----------



## francis511 (May 12, 2008)

500w WASN`T enough to power a q6600 + 8800 gts on my rig. It wasn`t a great brand but 600w or at least 550 might be wiser..


----------



## Darknova (May 12, 2008)

francis511 said:


> 500w WASN`T enough to power a q6600 + 8800 gts on my rig. It wasn`t a great brand but 600w or at least 550 might be wiser..



That's the difference. A 500W really well made PSU, will power far far more than a crappy build PSU.


----------



## Gamax (May 12, 2008)

francis511 said:


> 500w WASN`T enough to power a q6600 + 8800 gts on my rig. It wasn`t a great brand but 600w or at least 550 might be wiser..



That is quite odd. A friend of mine is powering an OC'ed E6400 and a 8800GT with a 400W PSU. I just wanted to know myself just in case.


----------



## wiak (May 12, 2008)

HTC said:


> Correct: it depends greatly on the video card used.
> 
> As i understand it, the more memory the video card has, the less memory XP will recognize. Not sure how exactly, though
> 
> ...


jupp
if you have 2 graphic cards in SLI/Crossfire aka 1GB, you will then only see 2GB in XP & vista 32-bit, regard less of the memory hole fix thingy
32-bit max limit on 4GB that includes ALL card in system, also videocard, audio cards
this is the 32-bitr memory mapping allocation etc, i highly recommend go 64-bit XP or Vista
i have used 64-bit since XP x64 beta days, you just have to be OPS that your printer and scanner has 64-bit drivers, and software, many software supports 64-bit like photoshop.

people needs to change to 64-bit, 32-bit is a pain in the ass, 64-bit = more stable, no need to support 16bit exec, more memory

read this
http://www.bit-tech.net/bits/2007/10/16/64-bit_more_than_just_the_ram/1


----------



## wiak (May 13, 2008)

wiak said:


> jupp
> if you have 2 graphic cards in SLI/Crossfire aka 1GB, you will then only see 2GB in XP & vista 32-bit, regard less of the memory hole fix thingy
> 32-bit max limit on 4GB that includes ALL card in system, also videocard, audio cards
> this is the 32-bitr memory mapping allocation etc, i highly recommend go 64-bit XP or Vista
> ...



and at the PSU question
i had a 580W hiper thant didnt want to power my Phenom 9850 + radeon 3870 + 5 HDs
quess what? it only had less than 60W on all 12v rails
the 12v rails should atlest be 500 on a 580W psu etc


----------



## Gamax (May 13, 2008)

Mine has 384W on the 2 12v rails. But your processor is a lot more power hungry and you have 5 HDD's. But my card draws more power. If I had to purchase another PSU that'd really suck... there's no way right now for me to see if it would work, so that sucks.


----------



## Gamax (May 15, 2008)

Bumping this for a question.

I had thought of getting this RAM http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231122
It's perfect for my budget, have great reviews, etc. 

However some people say I should get sticks with lower timings (which are more expensive). I plan to OC the CPU (Still can't decide if an E8400 or a Q6600 lol) but I don't really know a lot about overclocking the RAM and the timings. 

Also If I use 4 GB on my 32 bit OS, I know it won't recognize it all (Have a 8800 GTS 512), but will it still run in dual channel? I've seen some cases in which 3GB (if it's the most it will use) or so performs worse than 2GB. (I will play cod 4, crysis, world in conflict, STALKER, Company of Heroes, TF2, Hl2.)  If that's going to be the case here I'd rather just get 2 GB, right?


----------



## Wile E (May 15, 2008)

It will still run in dual channel. And as long as your aren't a benchmark junkie, that ram should be fine for you.


----------



## Darknova (May 15, 2008)

Gamax, when you start OCing your RAM, there are very few sets (especially 2x2Gb sets) that can do lower than 5-5-5 timings at over 1000mhz. Those G Skill will be very good, and you could probably get 1100mhz out of them.

And even though it's a balancing act (timing vs raw speed) Intel platforms benefit more from increasing the raw speed (And hence the bandwidth) than tightening up the timings.


----------



## farlex85 (May 15, 2008)

If your not going to jump to a 64-bit os, then yeah, there's not much point in getting 4gb (unless you are going to go to 64 soon). It will run dual channel still I believe, just a quarter of one of the sticks won't show up. That G.Skill is solid, but if your sticking w/ your current os then get a low cas4 ddr2 800-1066 2gb kit. 

And I disagree pretty fully with the comment darknova made about no p35 board being good that doesn't have crossfire. Mine doesn't and its great. And you won't probably want to run crossfire w/ 4x anyway (plus you have nvidia). Just about any gigabyte or asus or abit p35 would be solid, scan through them and see which offer the features you may be looking for.


----------



## Wile E (May 15, 2008)

farlex85 said:


> If your not going to jump to a 64-bit os, then yeah, there's not much point in getting 4gb (unless you are going to go to 64 soon). It will run dual channel still I believe, just a quarter of one of the sticks won't show up. That G.Skill is solid, but if your sticking w/ your current os then get a low cas4 ddr2 800-1066 2gb kit.
> 
> And I disagree pretty fully with the comment darknova made about no p35 board being good that doesn't have crossfire. Mine doesn't and its great. And you won't probably want to run crossfire w/ 4x anyway (plus you have nvidia). Just about any gigabyte or asus or abit p35 would be solid, scan through them and see which offer the features you may be looking for.



It's not pointless to go 4GB in 32bit. The 3GB+ that shows up, is still better than 2GB.


----------



## farlex85 (May 15, 2008)

Wile E said:


> It's not pointless to go 4GB in 32bit. The 3GB+ that shows up, is still better than 2GB.



True, but its still paying for stuff that isn't used, and that just strikes me the wrong way, pointless I suppose was a tad extreme. If the op is planning on sticking w/ a 32-bit os, I would get a couple of 1gb sticks, then maybe throw another one in later if wanted.


----------



## Gamax (May 15, 2008)

I am going to get the Gigabyte GA P35 DS3L I believe. The only benchmarks will be playing games heh. Thing is I am not exactly sure how Overclocking RAM works and if it has to do with overclocking the CPU too. (as if I had to OC the RAM to OC the Processor, timings, etc.) Like if having lower timings would help with OC'ing the CPU. 

I am getting 4 GB because they are really really cheap at the moment. But my main concern was the dual channel stuff and how the 3GB would perform agianst 2 GB (some reviews on games performance show 2GB doing better but I guess it was with 3 x 1GB sticks or something not dual channel).


----------



## Gamax (May 15, 2008)

farlex85 said:


> True, but its still paying for stuff that isn't used, and that just strikes me the wrong way, pointless I suppose was a tad extreme. If the op is planning on sticking w/ a 32-bit os, I would get a couple of 1gb sticks, then maybe throw another one in later if wanted.



I may actually get Vista 64 bit by the end of the year.


----------



## farlex85 (May 15, 2008)

Ram is integrally linked to ocing the cpu, at least at current w/ intel's architecture. There are memory straps and such to consider, as said before though w/ intel timings are not as important as speedl. However, low stock timings can often indicate better oc potential in my experience.

If you are planning on getting vista 64 then go ahead and get the 2x2gb kit. Especially if you've already decided on 4gb, 2x2gb is the way to go for a number of reasons.


----------



## Gamax (May 15, 2008)

Thing is, I'm afraid they would give me any trouble if I try to overclock the CPU. For example if I get a Q6600 or a E8400, I won't try to OC it to extreme speeds (Say 3.2 for the Q6600 or 3.6ish for the E8400). I don't think that will happen, just in case


----------

