Which is faster RAM set up?

  gippingman 17:02 23 Jul 11
Locked

My Dell Dimension 5150 PC came installed with 2 x 512mb PC2-3200 (200 MHZ)modules, giving 1gb total.

I have now added 2 x 1gb PC2-5300 (333MHZ) modules, giving a total of 3gb.

I swapped the modules round, so I have the new pair of modules in primary bank a and the original pair of modules in secondary bank b - I am running Windows XP - my question is I am best running on 3gb set up as above or sticking solely with new modules on a 2gb set up

advice appreciated

  ACOLYTE 17:05 23 Jul 11

Not sure but i think they would be running at the speed of the lowest ram,so although your new ones are 333,they would be running at 200.The ram increase would still boost you pc tho.

  Proclaimer 17:09 23 Jul 11

ACOLYTE is correct, all your RAM will run at 200MHZ.

  ACOLYTE 17:12 23 Jul 11

Keep the 3 gig and run at 200,the benefit from having 3gig compared to 1 gig would outway the speed of the ram imo.

  gippingman 17:13 23 Jul 11

Thanks - I forgot to mention I knew it overall runs at the slowest speed, but would the 2 gb new modules on a higher speed be better than my current 3gb set up of mixed speeds (running at the speed of the original modules)

  Secret-Squirrel 17:49 23 Jul 11

For an XP PC, 2GB is more than enough and the extra 1GB is unlikely to make any difference at all. You can check this for yourself by going to into Task Manager -> "Performance" tab. If the "Commit Charge Peak" is less than 2GB (and I'm willing to bet it is) then that extra 1GB isn't doing any good at all so remove both the original memory modules and your PC's performance will increase due to the 2GB of faster RAM.

  gippingman 18:31 23 Jul 11

Thanks - Commit Charge Peak says 1002208k

  woodchip 18:36 23 Jul 11

Why do you need all the Ram? it only works faster if its got a load of work to do rather than caching to hard drive, such as video editing or photo editing with big files. Too many using PC's think by adding Ram its going to make the PC fly. You will not see none of that. I use XP home with 1 Gig of ram and do Editing of Video and Photos and its not slow for me.

  Secret-Squirrel 18:43 23 Jul 11

"Commit Charge Peak says 1002208k"*

That tells us that the maximum amount of RAM that was in use (since the PC was switched on) was just 1GB.

  ACOLYTE 20:34 23 Jul 11

Not often i disagree with things on here,but i have to say ram does make a difference in performace,even with a pc just bieng used for web surfing,the more ram the pc has the better it will perform even the most simplest of tasks. People that say ram makes no difference to a pc,imo dont know what they are talking about.

  Secret-Squirrel 21:17 23 Jul 11

Hi Acolyte

",but i have to say ram does make a difference in performace"

Yes, I agree with that statement, but there comes a point when adding more RAM ceases to improve performance.

",even with a pc just bieng used for web surfing,the more ram the pc has the better it will perform even the most simplest of tasks."

I thought I'd clearly demonstrated to the OP earlier, using XP's Task Manager, that his PC's maximum RAM usage was just 1GB during the current Windows session. That means that there's 2GB of RAM that isn't being used - how can that remaining memory improve performance when it's sat there doing nothing?

I stand by the advice I gave earlier where I said that 2GB of RAM is enough for the OP's XP PC and the original 2x512MB modules should be removed.

"People that say ram makes no difference to a pc,imo dont know what they are talking about."

I agree with that too, but has anyone on this thread said that?

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Nintendo Switch review: Hands-on with the intuitive modular console and its disappointing games…

1995-2015: How technology has changed the world in 20 years

New Corel ParticleShop plugin now available: 11 new brushes & 6 new brush packs

Apple AirPods review: Apple's beautiful new Bluetooth headphones bring true intelligence to…