I'm planning to add some memory to a PC. The motherboard supports "DDR up
to 333 MHz (enhanced) memory bus."
333 MHz (PC2700) or slower DDR SDRAM isn't easy to find on today's market,
and when you do find it, it's considerably more expensive than the DDR
which runs at 400 MHz (PC3200). What would happen if I bought 400 MHz DDR
RAM and installed it in a motherboard which only supports speeds up to 333
MHz (PC2700)? Would it work? If it did work, would it work as well as the
slower PC2700 RAM?
I've gotten conflicting answers to this question. Two computer stores told
me that it wouldn't work. Another store and a book I consulted said it
would.
I'd also like some opinions on which brand of RAM I should get. Kingston
and Samsung are ubiquitous where I live, so the choice comes down to one
of those. Both brands are about the same price, with the Samsung being
marginally cheaper.
Finally, would a 128 MB stick of 266 MHz DDR RAM be able to run in the
same computer as, say, a 512 MB stick of 400 MHz DDR RAM? If so, would
using both at the same time degrade the performance of the faster RAM?
--
(Note: I'm using a bogus reply-to address to avoid spam, so please don't
reply by email.)
Igor wrote:
> I'm planning to add some memory to a PC. The motherboard supports "DDR
> up to 333 MHz (enhanced) memory bus."
>
> 333 MHz (PC2700) or slower DDR SDRAM isn't easy to find on today's
> market, and when you do find it, it's considerably more expensive than
> the DDR which runs at 400 MHz (PC3200). What would happen if I bought
> 400 MHz DDR RAM and installed it in a motherboard which only supports
> speeds up to 333 MHz (PC2700)? Would it work? If it did work, would it
> work as well as the slower PC2700 RAM?
>
> I've gotten conflicting answers to this question. Two computer stores
> told me that it wouldn't work. Another store and a book I consulted said
> it would.
>
> I'd also like some opinions on which brand of RAM I should get. Kingston
> and Samsung are ubiquitous where I live, so the choice comes down to one
> of those. Both brands are about the same price, with the Samsung being
> marginally cheaper.
>
> Finally, would a 128 MB stick of 266 MHz DDR RAM be able to run in the
> same computer as, say, a 512 MB stick of 400 MHz DDR RAM? If so, would
> using both at the same time degrade the performance of the faster RAM?
>
If you tell us the motherboard make and model, we give better advice.
If the machine is Dell or HP, tell us the model number etc.
Faster DDR is compatible with slower speed applications.
Whether mixing RAM makes sense, really depends on what speed the motherboard
and its current configuration, would support. If your processor is limiting
the speeds that the Northbridge can run the memory, then maybe removing the
128MB stick would make no difference.
Details count. Motherboard and processor information would help. You can
also get some hints from looking at both:
On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 17:31:38 -0400, Igor
<donotreply@nospam.com> wrote:
>I'm planning to add some memory to a PC. The motherboard supports "DDR up
>to 333 MHz (enhanced) memory bus."
>
>333 MHz (PC2700) or slower DDR SDRAM isn't easy to find on today's market,
>and when you do find it, it's considerably more expensive than the DDR
>which runs at 400 MHz (PC3200). What would happen if I bought 400 MHz DDR
>RAM and installed it in a motherboard which only supports speeds up to 333
>MHz (PC2700)? Would it work? If it did work, would it work as well as the
>slower PC2700 RAM?
Yes it'll work and do so as well/fast as PC2700, providing
it has timings spec'd at least as (Low) fast as the PC2700
module had. This is not a large difference in performance
though so a random suggestion would be to get a CAS2.5 @ 2.5
or 2.6V spec'd part.
>
>I've gotten conflicting answers to this question. Two computer stores told
>me that it wouldn't work. Another store and a book I consulted said it
>would.
Avoid those two computer stores from now on when seeking
advice, or at least the particular techs you spoke with as
PC3200 is always backwards compatible. It's the same memory
only the maxium speed the PC3200 is guaranteed to be able to
run stabily is higher, and the prom on the module is
programmed with timings to validate this if/when a
motherboard checks to see what the memory can do.
>
>I'd also like some opinions on which brand of RAM I should get. Kingston
>and Samsung are ubiquitous where I live, so the choice comes down to one
>of those. Both brands are about the same price, with the Samsung being
>marginally cheaper.
Which country do you reside in? Often buying online is
cheaper unless there's a particularly good sale or rebate
ongoing. Kingston's valueram tends to be lower spec, many
other name brand modules are better or cheaper for the same
specifications.
>
>Finally, would a 128 MB stick of 266 MHz DDR RAM be able to run in the
>same computer as, say, a 512 MB stick of 400 MHz DDR RAM? If so, would
>using both at the same time degrade the performance of the faster RAM?
The two could run in single channel mode, which would be the
mode it was in currently. Some motherboard chipsets can run
dual channel mode for a performance increase (which varies
from very little to a fair amount) and some of these require
two of same size and compatible timings, modules. Some only
require two modules with compatible timings but need not be
the same size (would then support dual channel mode only up
to the amount of memory of the smallest module total on one
channel, times 2). nForce 2 is an example of such a chipset
that can do this, though unless using integrated video the
performance gain from dual channel mode is minimal.
Igor wrote:
>
> I'm planning to add some memory to a PC. The motherboard supports
> "DDR up to 333 MHz (enhanced) memory bus."
>
> 333 MHz (PC2700) or slower DDR SDRAM isn't easy to find on today's
> market, and when you do find it, it's considerably more expensive
> than the DDR which runs at 400 MHz (PC3200). What would happen if
> I bought 400 MHz DDR RAM and installed it in a motherboard which
> only supports speeds up to 333 MHz (PC2700)? Would it work? If it
> did work, would it work as well as the slower PC2700 RAM?
>
> I've gotten conflicting answers to this question. Two computer
> stores told me that it wouldn't work. Another store and a book I
> consulted said it would.
The faster stuff is just fine. The stores want to unload their old
stock, or are completely lacking in knowledge. Take your pick.
But, if the MB can handle it, ensure you get ECC capable memory.
--
Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
<http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
On Oct 2, 10:31 pm, Igor <donotre...@nospam.com> wrote:
> I'm planning to add some memory to a PC. The motherboard supports "DDR up
> to 333 MHz (enhanced) memory bus."
>
> 333 MHz (PC2700) or slower DDR SDRAM isn't easy to find on today's market,
> and when you do find it, it's considerably more expensive than the DDR
> which runs at 400 MHz (PC3200). What would happen if I bought 400 MHz DDR
> RAM and installed it in a motherboard which only supports speeds up to 333
> MHz (PC2700)? Would it work? If it did work, would it work as well as the
> slower PC2700 RAM?
>
> I've gotten conflicting answers to this question. Two computer stores told
> me that it wouldn't work. Another store and a book I consulted said it
> would.
>
I don't understand this. You went into stores asking?!!!! You
consulted books?!!!
This is such an obvious question to ask. Lots of people have asked it
on usenet.
Didn't you think to search usenet?
you're concerned about price and asking on the internet, and it didn't
occur, or you lacked the confidence, to buy on the internet?!
> I'd also like some opinions on which brand of RAM I should get. Kingston
> and Samsung are ubiquitous where I live, so the choice comes down to one
> of those. Both brands are about the same price, with the Samsung being
> marginally cheaper.
>
GOOD MAKES OF RAM
this is an obvious search. You can read books but you can't use
google?!!!!
Kingston and Crucial are good makes. I seem to recall somebody here
saying one wasn't so good, but they work for most people. Don't get a
bad or unknown or unlabelled make / unbranded ram.
> Finally, would a 128 MB stick of 266 MHz DDR RAM be able to run in the
> same computer as, say, a 512 MB stick of 400 MHz DDR RAM?
you mean at the same time?
i'd try it. it's unlikely that the mbrd wouldn't like it, and even
then, it's unlikely that it'd smoke out.
> If so, would
> using both at the same time degrade the performance of the faster RAM?
>
I vaguely recall that they'd run at the slower speed. .
> (Note: I'm using a bogus reply-to address to avoid spam, so please don't
> reply by email.)
You know about spam, so learn how to search usenet. Your behaviour
doesn't seem logical. What kind of justification do you have?!
> I'm planning to add some memory to a PC. The motherboard supports "DDR up
> to 333 MHz (enhanced) memory bus."
>
> 333 MHz (PC2700) or slower DDR SDRAM isn't easy to find on today's market,
> and when you do find it, it's considerably more expensive than the DDR
> which runs at 400 MHz (PC3200). What would happen if I bought 400 MHz DDR
> RAM and installed it in a motherboard which only supports speeds up to 333
> MHz (PC2700)? Would it work? If it did work, would it work as well as the
> slower PC2700 RAM?
The only time a good PC3200 module didn't work with one of my slower
mobos was when I set the mobo's BIOS to use the "safe" default
timings. That caused an ECS K7S5A Pro (max memory speed: 266 MHz) to
not boot and show only a completely blank screen.
> I'd also like some opinions on which brand of RAM I should get. Kingston
> and Samsung are ubiquitous where I live, so the choice comes down to one
> of those. Both brands are about the same price, with the Samsung being
> marginally cheaper.
I'd get Samsung because Samsung is a real RAM chip manufacturer while
Kingston just buys chips or silicon wafers from other companies and
doesn't seem to test them very thoroughly. About 20-30% of the
Kingstons I've tried were troublesome, with a whopping 8 out of 11-12
PC3200 512MB Kingston ValueRAMs failing. OTOH all 5 PC3200 512MB PNY
modules worked fine, even when overclocked (I don't normally
overclock). I strongly recommend testing each module overnight with
both MemTest86 AND Gold Memory.
> Finally, would a 128 MB stick of 266 MHz DDR RAM be able to run in the
> same computer as, say, a 512 MB stick of 400 MHz DDR RAM?
I was able to run a 256MB PC2100 and 512MB PC3200 together in a mobo
that supported 400 MHz. I don't know what happened to the timings of
the faster RAM.
On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 17:50:59 -0400, Paul <nospam@needed.com> wrote:
<snip>
>
> If you tell us the motherboard make and model, we give better advice.
I don't see how that information is relevant to my two primary questions,
or even why it would be necessary to venture an answer to the third.
They're pretty general questions. Are you one of those guys who likes to
make everything more complicated than it needs to be?
> On Oct 2, 10:31 pm, Igor <donotre...@nospam.com> wrote:
>> I'm planning to add some memory to a PC. The motherboard supports "DDR
>> up
>> to 333 MHz (enhanced) memory bus."
>>
>> 333 MHz (PC2700) or slower DDR SDRAM isn't easy to find on today's
>> market,
>> and when you do find it, it's considerably more expensive than the DDR
>> which runs at 400 MHz (PC3200). What would happen if I bought 400 MHz
>> DDR
>> RAM and installed it in a motherboard which only supports speeds up to
>> 333
>> MHz (PC2700)? Would it work? If it did work, would it work as well as
>> the
>> slower PC2700 RAM?
>>
>> I've gotten conflicting answers to this question. Two computer stores
>> told
>> me that it wouldn't work. Another store and a book I consulted said it
>> would.
>>
>
> I don't understand this. You went into stores asking?!!!! You
> consulted books?!!!
>
> This is such an obvious question to ask. Lots of people have asked it
> on usenet.
>
> Didn't you think to search usenet?
>
> you're concerned about price and asking on the internet, and it didn't
> occur, or you lacked the confidence, to buy on the internet?!
>
>> I'd also like some opinions on which brand of RAM I should get. Kingston
>> and Samsung are ubiquitous where I live, so the choice comes down to one
>> of those. Both brands are about the same price, with the Samsung being
>> marginally cheaper.
>>
>
> GOOD MAKES OF RAM
> this is an obvious search. You can read books but you can't use
> google?!!!!
> Kingston and Crucial are good makes. I seem to recall somebody here
> saying one wasn't so good, but they work for most people. Don't get a
> bad or unknown or unlabelled make / unbranded ram.
>
>
>> Finally, would a 128 MB stick of 266 MHz DDR RAM be able to run in the
>> same computer as, say, a 512 MB stick of 400 MHz DDR RAM?
>
>
> you mean at the same time?
> i'd try it. it's unlikely that the mbrd wouldn't like it, and even
> then, it's unlikely that it'd smoke out.
>
>> If so, would
>> using both at the same time degrade the performance of the faster RAM?
>>
>
> I vaguely recall that they'd run at the slower speed. .
>
>> (Note: I'm using a bogus reply-to address to avoid spam, so please don't
>> reply by email.)
>
> You know about spam, so learn how to search usenet. Your behaviour
> doesn't seem logical. What kind of justification do you have?!
>
>
>
>
If you don't have anything intelligent to say, it's better that you don't
say anything at all.
On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 19:38:51 -0400, kony <spam@spam.com> wrote:
<snip>
>
>>
>> I'd also like some opinions on which brand of RAM I should get. Kingston
>> and Samsung are ubiquitous where I live, so the choice comes down to one
>> of those. Both brands are about the same price, with the Samsung being
>> marginally cheaper.
>
> Which country do you reside in? Often buying online is
> cheaper unless there's a particularly good sale or rebate
> ongoing. Kingston's valueram tends to be lower spec, many
> other name brand modules are better or cheaper for the same
> specifications.
>
>
I live in Canada. Which Internet-based retailers would you recommend?
The more popular mailorder places in the U.S. won't ship to Canada, most
likely due to import/export restrictions.
I don't like eBay for a variety of reasons and will not do business
through them.
I looked at the prices at tigerdirect.ca and didn't find them to be
appreciably better than the computer stores in my neighbourhood (a $3 or
$4 difference, not counting shipping). Frankly, for such small potential
savings, I prefer the convenience of buying locally.
On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 20:32:30 -0400, CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com>
wrote:
<snip>
> But, if the MB can handle it, ensure you get ECC capable memory.
>
My motherboard's manual doesn't say anything about supporting ECC, so I'll
assume that it doesn't.
However, I plan on putting together a PC from scratch in the near future,
so perhaps ECC support is something I should be looking for in a
motherboard.
In a nutshell, why is ECC capable memory more desirable?
On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 02:48:44 -0400, larry moe 'n curly
<larrymoencurly@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> Igor wrote:
>
>> I'm planning to add some memory to a PC. The motherboard supports "DDR
>> up
>> to 333 MHz (enhanced) memory bus."
>>
>> 333 MHz (PC2700) or slower DDR SDRAM isn't easy to find on today's
>> market,
>> and when you do find it, it's considerably more expensive than the DDR
>> which runs at 400 MHz (PC3200). What would happen if I bought 400 MHz
>> DDR
>> RAM and installed it in a motherboard which only supports speeds up to
>> 333
>> MHz (PC2700)? Would it work? If it did work, would it work as well as
>> the
>> slower PC2700 RAM?
>
> The only time a good PC3200 module didn't work with one of my slower
> mobos was when I set the mobo's BIOS to use the "safe" default
> timings. That caused an ECS K7S5A Pro (max memory speed: 266 MHz) to
> not boot and show only a completely blank screen.
>
That's good to know, as the motherboard I'm dealing with is also an ECS.
>> I'd also like some opinions on which brand of RAM I should get. Kingston
>> and Samsung are ubiquitous where I live, so the choice comes down to one
>> of those. Both brands are about the same price, with the Samsung being
>> marginally cheaper.
>
> I'd get Samsung because Samsung is a real RAM chip manufacturer while
> Kingston just buys chips or silicon wafers from other companies and
> doesn't seem to test them very thoroughly. About 20-30% of the
> Kingstons I've tried were troublesome, with a whopping 8 out of 11-12
> PC3200 512MB Kingston ValueRAMs failing. OTOH all 5 PC3200 512MB PNY
> modules worked fine, even when overclocked (I don't normally
> overclock). I strongly recommend testing each module overnight with
> both MemTest86 AND Gold Memory.
>
Thanks for your opinion, and even better, for backing it up with something
more than "I'm using brand X because that's what everyone says is the
best."
I'm not familiar with the programs you mention but I will do a search for
them.
I'll follow your recommendation, and make sure I can return the memory if
it fails.
>> Finally, would a 128 MB stick of 266 MHz DDR RAM be able to run in the
>> same computer as, say, a 512 MB stick of 400 MHz DDR RAM?
>
> I was able to run a 256MB PC2100 and 512MB PC3200 together in a mobo
> that supported 400 MHz. I don't know what happened to the timings of
> the faster RAM.
>
Somewhere on the interweb "jameshanley39@yahoo.co.uk" typed:
> On Oct 2, 10:31 pm, Igor <donotre...@nospam.com> wrote:
<snip a lot of angry, little-man-syndrome words>
> > If so, would
> > using both at the same time degrade the performance of the faster
> > RAM?
> >
>
> I vaguely recall that they'd run at the slower speed. .
Your vague recollections are of little use to someone asking for facts.
> > (Note: I'm using a bogus reply-to address to avoid spam, so please
> > don't reply by email.)
>
> You know about spam, so learn how to search usenet. Your behaviour
> doesn't seem logical. What kind of justification do you have?!
And yours seems agressive and antagonistic. What's your justification? On
second thoughts, just go away.
--
TTFN
On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 02:54:49 -0400, Igor
<donotreply@nospam.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 17:50:59 -0400, Paul <nospam@needed.com> wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>>
>> If you tell us the motherboard make and model, we give better advice.
>
>I don't see how that information is relevant to my two primary questions,
>or even why it would be necessary to venture an answer to the third.
>They're pretty general questions. Are you one of those guys who likes to
>make everything more complicated than it needs to be?
Paul does a good job of answering questions and posing
details of variables that may matter. Sometimes the rest of
us just make assumptions instead of putting forth as much
effort. His point was good, that providing details of your
hardware is a good idea, it allows a reply more applicable
to specific hardware.
Somewhere on the interweb "Igor" typed:
> On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 20:32:30 -0400, CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > But, if the MB can handle it, ensure you get ECC capable memory.
> >
>
> My motherboard's manual doesn't say anything about supporting ECC, so
> I'll assume that it doesn't.
>
> However, I plan on putting together a PC from scratch in the near
> future, so perhaps ECC support is something I should be looking for
> in a motherboard.
>
> In a nutshell, why is ECC capable memory more desirable?
"ECC memory provides greater data accuracy and system uptime by protecting
against soft errors in computer memory."
However, it comes at a price. It depends on what you're using your PC for
really. I have two PCs with ECC RAM and the rest without. IMO for
non-mission-critical machines its' not really needed.
--
TTFN
Igor wrote:
> On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 19:38:51 -0400, kony <spam@spam.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>>
>>>
>>> I'd also like some opinions on which brand of RAM I should get. Kingston
>>> and Samsung are ubiquitous where I live, so the choice comes down to one
>>> of those. Both brands are about the same price, with the Samsung being
>>> marginally cheaper.
>>
>> Which country do you reside in? Often buying online is
>> cheaper unless there's a particularly good sale or rebate
>> ongoing. Kingston's valueram tends to be lower spec, many
>> other name brand modules are better or cheaper for the same
>> specifications.
>>
>>
>
> I live in Canada. Which Internet-based retailers would you recommend?
>
> The more popular mailorder places in the U.S. won't ship to Canada, most
> likely due to import/export restrictions.
>
> I don't like eBay for a variety of reasons and will not do business
> through them.
>
> I looked at the prices at tigerdirect.ca and didn't find them to be
> appreciably better than the computer stores in my neighbourhood (a $3 or
> $4 difference, not counting shipping). Frankly, for such small potential
> savings, I prefer the convenience of buying locally.
After some good local retailers went bankrupt, I switched to NCIX in B.C.
Otherwise, there aren't a lot of Canadian options. The last time I ordered
from them, they used DHL for shipping, and they're OK.
Note that Canadians always charge a premium, so if you want deals, head
to the U.S. Yes, it is frustrating finding someone who ships to Canada,
which is why I went with NCIX.
You could also check Zipzoomfly.com in the U.S. and check if they still
ship to Canada. I never did complete a purchase with them, because I
wanted something the size of a computer case, and when we got into
details about shipping, their shipping method ended up being twice
as expensive as it should have been.
Due to the brokerage scams the shippers use in crossing the border,
you may find a deal in the States, isn't quite the deal you expected.
But because you cannot pick the shipper when you deal in the States,
sometimes you just have to take the brokerage scam like a man.
(This is one reason I cannot do business with anyone who uses UPS.)
A cost of doing business, as it were. If the order is big enough, you
might still come out ahead.
If you look at processor pricing, there can be a world of difference
between Canadian prices and U.S., in which case you won't dwell on the
NCIX page for very long.
On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 04:44:03 -0400, kony <spam@spam.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 02:54:49 -0400, Igor
> <donotreply@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 17:50:59 -0400, Paul <nospam@needed.com> wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>>
>>> If you tell us the motherboard make and model, we give better advice.
>>
>> I don't see how that information is relevant to my two primary
>> questions,
>> or even why it would be necessary to venture an answer to the third.
>> They're pretty general questions. Are you one of those guys who likes to
>> make everything more complicated than it needs to be?
>
>
> Paul does a good job of answering questions and posing
> details of variables that may matter. Sometimes the rest of
> us just make assumptions instead of putting forth as much
> effort. His point was good, that providing details of your
> hardware is a good idea, it allows a reply more applicable
> to specific hardware.
I didn't mean to jump on Paul, I'm sure he's a friendly and knowledgeable
guy, but why did he assume that I had wanted that level of detail in a
response?
If I had wanted a specific, tailor-made reply, I would've provided the
details of my hardware. In this case, I just wanted a simple reply, so I
didn't feel the need to provide such details.
I found the insinuation that I *should have* provided the make and model
of my motherboard, that not doing so was an oversight on my part, and that
my questions couldn't be properly answered as I had posed them, just a bit
patronizing.
On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 05:38:58 -0400, Igor
<donotreply@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>I found the insinuation that I *should have* provided the make and model
>of my motherboard, that not doing so was an oversight on my part, and that
>my questions couldn't be properly answered as I had posed them, just a bit
>patronizing.
maybe, but on the other hand if you can't make the effort to
do that, why should others make the effort to guess about
what is likely, instead of knowing more certainly if you
have hardware upon which the details might be more likely,
and/or known problems?
On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 05:12:09 -0400, Paul <nospam@needed.com> wrote:
>
> After some good local retailers went bankrupt, I switched to NCIX in B.C.
> Otherwise, there aren't a lot of Canadian options. The last time I
> ordered
> from them, they used DHL for shipping, and they're OK.
>
> Note that Canadians always charge a premium, so if you want deals, head
> to the U.S. Yes, it is frustrating finding someone who ships to Canada,
> which is why I went with NCIX.
>
> You could also check Zipzoomfly.com in the U.S. and check if they still
> ship to Canada. I never did complete a purchase with them, because I
> wanted something the size of a computer case, and when we got into
> details about shipping, their shipping method ended up being twice
> as expensive as it should have been.
>
> Due to the brokerage scams the shippers use in crossing the border,
> you may find a deal in the States, isn't quite the deal you expected.
> But because you cannot pick the shipper when you deal in the States,
> sometimes you just have to take the brokerage scam like a man.
> (This is one reason I cannot do business with anyone who uses UPS.)
> A cost of doing business, as it were. If the order is big enough, you
> might still come out ahead.
>
> If you look at processor pricing, there can be a world of difference
> between Canadian prices and U.S., in which case you won't dwell on the
> NCIX page for very long.
>
Thanks Paul, and sorry if I was ill-tempered on the other post. I'll check
out NCIX.
I've been had by the brokerage scam as well. The only way around paying
brokerage fees that I've found is by insisting that the order be shipped
through USPS rather than by courier. However, it seems USPS have raised
their fees recently, so that option may no longer be worthwhile. I suppose
a computer case is too big to ship through USPS anyways. :(
On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 05:38:58 -0400, Igor
<donotreply@nospam.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 04:44:03 -0400, kony <spam@spam.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 02:54:49 -0400, Igor
>> <donotreply@nospam.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 17:50:59 -0400, Paul <nospam@needed.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> If you tell us the motherboard make and model, we give better advice.
>>>
>>> I don't see how that information is relevant to my two primary
>>> questions,
>>> or even why it would be necessary to venture an answer to the third.
>>> They're pretty general questions. Are you one of those guys who likes to
>>> make everything more complicated than it needs to be?
>>
>>
>> Paul does a good job of answering questions and posing
>> details of variables that may matter. Sometimes the rest of
>> us just make assumptions instead of putting forth as much
>> effort. His point was good, that providing details of your
>> hardware is a good idea, it allows a reply more applicable
>> to specific hardware.
>
>I didn't mean to jump on Paul, I'm sure he's a friendly and knowledgeable
>guy, but why did he assume that I had wanted that level of detail in a
>response?
>
Because it depends on the motherboard and chipset you are
considering for this upgrade.
>If I had wanted a specific, tailor-made reply, I would've provided the
>details of my hardware. In this case, I just wanted a simple reply, so I
>didn't feel the need to provide such details.
... but there is no simple reply, if there were there
wouldn't have been any further inquiry to what specific
system hardware/chipset it is.
>
>I found the insinuation that I *should have* provided the make and model
>of my motherboard, that not doing so was an oversight on my part, and that
>my questions couldn't be properly answered as I had posed them, just a bit
>patronizing.
If you can't bother to provide details of the system upon
which you try to upgrade the memory, you won't get the
correct answer because it depends upon the variables we
asked about (or else, we wouldn't have bothered to mention
it at all).
On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 06:03:21 -0400, kony <spam@spam.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 05:38:58 -0400, Igor
> <donotreply@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>
>>
>> I found the insinuation that I *should have* provided the make and model
>> of my motherboard, that not doing so was an oversight on my part, and
>> that
>> my questions couldn't be properly answered as I had posed them, just a
>> bit
>> patronizing.
>
>
> maybe, but on the other hand if you can't make the effort to
> do that, why should others make the effort to guess about
> what is likely, instead of knowing more certainly if you
> have hardware upon which the details might be more likely,
> and/or known problems?
>
Like I said, they were general questions, and all that was called for were
general responses (which you did, in fact, provide, and which you did, in
fact, say in an earlier post required less effort than the detailed
answers Paul likes to give).
"Igor" <donotreply@nospam.com> wrote in message news:op.tzl7q8aokkm7ou@a...
> On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 04:44:03 -0400, kony <spam@spam.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 02:54:49 -0400, Igor
>> <donotreply@nospam.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 17:50:59 -0400, Paul <nospam@needed.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> If you tell us the motherboard make and model, we give better advice.
>>>
>>> I don't see how that information is relevant to my two primary
>>> questions,
>>> or even why it would be necessary to venture an answer to the third.
>>> They're pretty general questions. Are you one of those guys who likes to
>>> make everything more complicated than it needs to be?
>>
>>
>> Paul does a good job of answering questions and posing
>> details of variables that may matter. Sometimes the rest of
>> us just make assumptions instead of putting forth as much
>> effort. His point was good, that providing details of your
>> hardware is a good idea, it allows a reply more applicable
>> to specific hardware.
>
> I didn't mean to jump on Paul, I'm sure he's a friendly and knowledgeable
> guy, but why did he assume that I had wanted that level of detail in a
> response?
>
> If I had wanted a specific, tailor-made reply, I would've provided the
> details of my hardware. In this case, I just wanted a simple reply, so I
> didn't feel the need to provide such details.
>
> I found the insinuation that I *should have* provided the make and model
> of my motherboard, that not doing so was an oversight on my part, and that
> my questions couldn't be properly answered as I had posed them, just a bit
> patronizing.
Igor, I'm sure you misinterpreted Paul's response. I've *never* seen
him flame anyone. Also, he may know of, say, some mobos that would accept
the different sticks and merely run both at the rate of the slower stick;
and at the same time know of other mobos which would balk from the get-go.
I've seen some ram spec'd as "known to work on the following ": see the
long list, somewhat fine print here:
I'm sure you will find your answers here on this ng. Sorry I could
offer no more than the "run at the rate of the slower", which I can only say
I've seen in several personal instances; I'd hesitate to extrapolate them to
be generally-expected results.
Thx and good luck and please remember to reply to posted questions any
info you feel helpful. s
On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 06:15:17 -0400, kony <spam@spam.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 05:38:58 -0400, Igor
> <donotreply@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 04:44:03 -0400, kony <spam@spam.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 02:54:49 -0400, Igor
>>> <donotreply@nospam.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 17:50:59 -0400, Paul <nospam@needed.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> <snip>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> If you tell us the motherboard make and model, we give better advice.
>>>>
>>>> I don't see how that information is relevant to my two primary
>>>> questions,
>>>> or even why it would be necessary to venture an answer to the third.
>>>> They're pretty general questions. Are you one of those guys who likes
>>>> to
>>>> make everything more complicated than it needs to be?
>>>
>>>
>>> Paul does a good job of answering questions and posing
>>> details of variables that may matter. Sometimes the rest of
>>> us just make assumptions instead of putting forth as much
>>> effort. His point was good, that providing details of your
>>> hardware is a good idea, it allows a reply more applicable
>>> to specific hardware.
>>
>> I didn't mean to jump on Paul, I'm sure he's a friendly and
>> knowledgeable
>> guy, but why did he assume that I had wanted that level of detail in a
>> response?
>>
>
> Because it depends on the motherboard and chipset you are
> considering for this upgrade.
>
It does, eh? Funny how you didn't seem to have any trouble answering the
questions until now.
>
>> If I had wanted a specific, tailor-made reply, I would've provided the
>> details of my hardware. In this case, I just wanted a simple reply, so I
>> didn't feel the need to provide such details.
>
> .. but there is no simple reply, if there were there
> wouldn't have been any further inquiry to what specific
> system hardware/chipset it is.
>
This is circular logic.
And as I've pointed out, you didn't have any trouble answering the
questions until now.
>
>>
>> I found the insinuation that I *should have* provided the make and model
>> of my motherboard, that not doing so was an oversight on my part, and
>> that
>> my questions couldn't be properly answered as I had posed them, just a
>> bit
>> patronizing.
>
> If you can't bother to provide details of the system upon
> which you try to upgrade the memory, you won't get the
> correct answer because it depends upon the variables we
> asked about (or else, we wouldn't have bothered to mention
> it at all).
Bullshit. I got plenty of clear and useful replies to my questions,
including yours. The issues I raised are not nearly as complicated as you
now make them out to be. You're not discussing technical issues here
anymore, you're trying to turn this into a pissing contest.
Bottom line: I phrase my questions however I want to phrase them, I
provide whatever information I feel like providing, and if you don't like
it, you can move to the next thread.
On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 06:44:00 -0400, sdlomi2 <daniels_sam@bellsouth.net>
wrote:
>
> Igor, I'm sure you misinterpreted Paul's response. I've *never* seen
> him flame anyone. Also, he may know of, say, some mobos that would
> accept
> the different sticks and merely run both at the rate of the slower stick;
> and at the same time know of other mobos which would balk from the
> get-go.
> I've seen some ram spec'd as "known to work on the following ": see the
> long list, somewhat fine print here:
>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...MEWN:IT&ih=017
>>>>>>> <<<<<<
>
> I'm sure you will find your answers here on this ng. Sorry I could
> offer no more than the "run at the rate of the slower", which I can only
> say
> I've seen in several personal instances; I'd hesitate to extrapolate
> them to
> be generally-expected results.
> Thx and good luck and please remember to reply to posted questions
> any
> info you feel helpful. s
>
>
I feel no ill-will towards Paul, and I understand where he was coming
from, though I still feel that the questions being asked were general
enough that they could be answered without needing additional information.
In fact, I've already gotten the answers that I was looking for, several
times over.
This issue is closed AFAIC, unless kony wants to continue arguing that my
not providing the name and model of my motherboard was a violation of
netiquette. (Actually, if kony wants to do that, he can do it by himself..
I have better things to do.)
>CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> But, if the MB can handle it, ensure you get ECC capable memory.
>
>My motherboard's manual doesn't say anything about supporting ECC, so I'll
>assume that it doesn't.
>
>However, I plan on putting together a PC from scratch in the near future,
>so perhaps ECC support is something I should be looking for in a
>motherboard.
>
>In a nutshell, why is ECC capable memory more desirable?
Most people don't care, and most mobo's won't support it.
Igor wrote:
>
> I'm planning to add some memory to a PC. The motherboard supports "DDR up
> to 333 MHz (enhanced) memory bus."
333 Mhz is the maximum speed of the memory bus, not the maximum speed of the memory that will work.
> 333 MHz (PC2700) or slower DDR SDRAM isn't easy to find on today's market,
> and when you do find it, it's considerably more expensive than the DDR
> which runs at 400 MHz (PC3200). What would happen if I bought 400 MHz DDR
> RAM and installed it in a motherboard which only supports speeds up to 333
> MHz (PC2700)? Would it work? If it did work, would it work as well as the
> slower PC2700 RAM?
You can always use memory rated for a higher speed than the memory bus if it is the correct type, e.g. don't try to use DDR2 in place of DDR memory.
> I've gotten conflicting answers to this question. Two computer stores told
> me that it wouldn't work. Another store and a book I consulted said it
> would.
Never ask a salesman a technical question.
> I'd also like some opinions on which brand of RAM I should get. Kingston
> and Samsung are ubiquitous where I live, so the choice comes down to one
> of those. Both brands are about the same price, with the Samsung being
> marginally cheaper.
I have had good results with Kingston, never used Samsung.
> Finally, would a 128 MB stick of 266 MHz DDR RAM be able to run in the
> same computer as, say, a 512 MB stick of 400 MHz DDR RAM? If so, would
> using both at the same time degrade the performance of the faster RAM?
> Bottom line: I phrase my questions however I want to phrase them, I
> provide whatever information I feel like providing, and if you don't
> like it, you can move to the next thread.
With an attitude like that I've a feeling you'll be getting a lot less
answers to your questions in the future!
On 3 Oct, 08:55, Igor <donotre...@nospam.com> wrote:
> However, I plan on putting together a PC from scratch in the near future,
> so perhaps ECC support is something I should be looking for in a
> motherboard.
>
> In a nutshell, why is ECC capable memory more desirable?
It has additional bits used to store checksum information so that
errors can be detected and simple ones corrected. In short, it's a
reliability thing. Without knowing much about your set up, it's
impossible to be sure but at three or four times the cost of normal
RAM I doubt it will be a cost-effective way of improving
reliability. If you want to do that on most systems, you're better
off spending the money on things like fitting a UPS and RAID storage -
these cover much less reliable elements of the system.
Memory is fairly reliable provided you aren't recklessly overclocking
things so I'd consider ECC inappropriate on all but the most mission-
critical systems. Unless you are talking about a machine already
fitted out with a UPS, hot-swappable RAID, redundant power supplies
and preferably an secure, climate controlled machine room to put it
all in there are more important risk factors to consider.
On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 12:30:41 -0400, Andrew <andrews@sdf.lonestar.org>
wrote:
> On 3 Oct, 08:55, Igor <donotre...@nospam.com> wrote:
>> However, I plan on putting together a PC from scratch in the near
>> future,
>> so perhaps ECC support is something I should be looking for in a
>> motherboard.
>>
>> In a nutshell, why is ECC capable memory more desirable?
>
> It has additional bits used to store checksum information so that
> errors can be detected and simple ones corrected. In short, it's a
> reliability thing. Without knowing much about your set up, it's
> impossible to be sure but at three or four times the cost of normal
> RAM I doubt it will be a cost-effective way of improving
> reliability. If you want to do that on most systems, you're better
> off spending the money on things like fitting a UPS and RAID storage -
> these cover much less reliable elements of the system.
>
> Memory is fairly reliable provided you aren't recklessly overclocking
> things so I'd consider ECC inappropriate on all but the most mission-
> critical systems. <snip>
I don't plan on overclocking (recklessly or otherwise), so I'd say you're
right. I've been using a computer I had custom built a few years ago as a
DAW (digital audio workstation). All it has is a stick of cheap, non-ECC
RAM, and I've never had any problems.
If I had unlimited funds and I was trying to build the ultimate computer,
I'd spring for ECC, but in the real world, budgets matter, and I've been
getting fine without it so far.
On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 11:44:59 -0400, class_a <class_a@comcast.net> wrote:
> Igor wrote:
>
>> Bottom line: I phrase my questions however I want to phrase them, I
>> provide whatever information I feel like providing, and if you don't
>> like it, you can move to the next thread.
>
> With an attitude like that I've a feeling you'll be getting a lot less
> answers to your questions in the future!
Out of the dozen or so people who posted useful responses to my questions,
only two seemed to have a problem with how I asked them. Out of those two,
only one tried to make a federal case out of it. And you're the only
person who's felt a need to offer me a civics lesson.
I'm not losing any sleep over the prospect of a couple of sanctimonious
control freaks with delusions of grandeur putting me in their killfiles.
In fact, they'd be doing me a favor if they did; the fewer such people
that I need to deal with, the happier I'll be!
On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 06:08:46 -0400, Igor
<donotreply@nospam.com> wrote:
>I've been had by the brokerage scam as well. The only way around paying
>brokerage fees that I've found is by insisting that the order be shipped
>through USPS rather than by courier. However, it seems USPS have raised
>their fees recently, so that option may no longer be worthwhile. I suppose
>a computer case is too big to ship through USPS anyways. :(
I thought that Newegg started shipping to Canada a couple
years ago. At that time it was mentioned they'd use UPS and
that they might be able to leverage a reduction in brokerage
fees from UPS. You might pick a product at Newegg, put it
in your cart and enter shipping address during checkout to
see what they charge (IIRC, the brokerage fee is included in
the listed shipping cost once they have the Canadian
shipping address) before completing the order.
Questions about DDR RAM 