![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_light.png){kind=logo}
8GB RAM - The Final Thread.
- Thread starter Maximos
- Start date
I thought I'd give you a final update on my 8 gb ram problem. Swapping around seemed just fine, upping the voltage proved to difficult to do. For some reason, voltages were greyed out in the bios (AMI). I called Geil and asked them for ideas for other timings, but he seemed pretty clear that upping the voltage was the necessary action. I contacted MSI through their website and someone got back to me very quickly with a new bios to upload. Their instructions were to upload the bios, clear the settings, and load the optimal settings. Then, I filled all the banks of ram, and it worked.
Ironically, I can't seem to change the voltage for memory still in the new bios. It's still greyed out and inaccessible. I can change some of the other voltages, although they are still greyed out. Anyway, I got this new computer to use it, so I'm going to move on from tinkering with the ram since it works.
Thanks for your help.
I was under the impression that RAM that is normally quoted as working at 4-4-4-12 (cas 4) would overclock better than RAM at normal 5-5-5-15 (cas 5). This is because 444-12 could easily handle 555-15 (looser timings) at higher Mhz. Is there any real truth to the CAS 4 vs CAS 5 being better than one another in overclocking?
BinarySynapse
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2006
- Messages
- 15,103
Typically, yes. But that's not always the case. Some 4-4-4-12 ram might already be at its limit and loosening to 5-5-5-15 isn't going to net much more than a few MHz. Some 5-5-5-15 RAM has been known to push well past the next tier (e.g. DDR2-800 reaching past DDR2-1066 speeds).
(cf)Eclipse
Freelance Overclocker
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2003
- Messages
- 30,027
if they're both rated for the same speed, then the ram with the lower timings should hit higher mhz when both are set to the same timings.
hockeypro889
Gawd
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2007
- Messages
- 557
That's what we're here for. Glad that bios update worked. No idea why memory timings can't be changed. I know you're probably too experienced to make this oversight, but just to make sure, on some motherboards it's easy to miss the setting in the bios to change the memory settings from "auto", "optimal" or whatever, to "manual". Have you looked everywhere to see if there's something that needs to be changed to let you do this? I'm sure you probably already have, but I'm just double checking. I don't know why. It would be fun to push your ram. Geil makes good stuff, and if they say it can handle more voltage safely, you should be able to at least push the MHz up a little more, or maybe link it with your CPU???
Oh, I'm fully capable of missing something painfully obvious....In this case, however, I did check the those alternatives. Maybe there is some combination of factors. I also asked MSI as a follow-up question about it. Here is the reply:
I don't about you, but I think America is a lot safer now...
You have the MSI P6N Diamond, right? Listen to what MSI says about your board on their own website:
"Main Memory
Supports dual channel DDR2 533/667/800 and up, using four 240-pin DDR2 DIMMs
Supports the memory size up to 8GB
Supports 1.8v DDR2 SDRAM DIMM
Due to the High Performance Memory design, motherboards or system configurations may or may not operate smoothly at the JEDEC (Joint Electron Device Engineering Council) standard settings (BIOS Default on the motherboard) such as DDR2 voltage, memory speeds and memory timing. Please confirm and adjust your memory setting in the BIOS accordingly for better system stability.
Example: Kingston HyperX DDR2-800 PC6400 operates at 2.0V, 4-4-4-12.
For more information about specification of high performance memory modules, please check with your Memory Manufactures for more details.
For the best performance and commitment of convenience, please visit MSI approved memory module vendor list (MSI AVL), which provides the easiest, up-to-date memory configurations"
I just cut and pasted exactly what they typed. I believe the P6N platinum is a 680i, and supposed to be an overclocker's friend. You're supposed to be able to change voltages however the heck you want. Every 680i I know of was designed to be able to SPECIFICALLY AND PRECISELY tune your SLI graphics setup, CPU, AND your RAM. I have 680i, like some of my friends, and even those who have reference-based boards are able to adjust specific ram settings, including voltages, no matter what capacity or how many sticks they have in the machine.
I conclude that someone must be on crack, or MSI is confused on what motherboard they have. They themselves cite some memory as requiring higher voltage to run stable, and claim your mobo is capable to do it. I know for a fact the 680i can, reference board or not. In my bios there is a separate screen that takes a few keyboard clicks to nagivate to where you set your voltages for RAM, CPU, northbridge, southbridge, hypertransport, and CPU VTT. All of those voltage settings are on the same page in a "voltages" section. It's similar on EVGA boards from what I've read, even though EVGA's are a reference based board. Look for this screen and tell me if you're able to change ANY voltages there, not just your RAM's.
Hey there guys.
I'm making a new build with 8gb ram included. My question is, is this ram ok for the build ?
Corsair 4 Gb (Kit 2x 2Gb) DDR2-SDRAM PC6400 5-5-5-18 - TWIN2X4096-6400C5 G
The specs are: Maximus Formula, Q6600. It's hard to find another good pair of 2x2gb in my country.
I'm making a new build with 8gb ram included. My question is, is this ram ok for the build ?
Corsair 4 Gb (Kit 2x 2Gb) DDR2-SDRAM PC6400 5-5-5-18 - TWIN2X4096-6400C5 G
The specs are: Maximus Formula, Q6600. It's hard to find another good pair of 2x2gb in my country.
Yeah, Corsair's generally good stuff, and they're good about warranty too. I've heard that's not the most fantastic stuff for overclocking the ram, but it should run great at close to stock speeds. You might be able to push it a tad at 2.0v. It's good stuff though. Good performance, and Corsair is near or at the top for reliability. You'll probably be very happy with it. The only reason I didn't get Corsair is because I hate mail-in-rebates. I only send them in about %50 of the time ... my media center build has 3GB of corsair XMS2 in it, and it's great stuff, though.
Here is what the bios looks like in this section:
Code:
[FONT="Courier New"]
Current CPU Frequency 2413 Mhz
Current FSB Frequency 1067 Mhz
Current DRAM Frequency 800 Mhz
DOT Control choices(disabled, private 1%,
sergeant 3%, captain 5%,
colonel 7%, general 10%,
commander 15%.)
Intel EIST choices (enabled/disabled)
System Clock Mark choices(auto, linked, manual)
Advance DRAM Configuration [press enter]
separate page: choices set for overall manual or auto
if manual is selected, timing choices are shown as
auto or specific numbers for the usual tCL, tRCD, tRP, etc.
no voltage addressed there.
Adjust PCI-E Frequency 100 choices (100 -> 114)
CPU Voltage 0.00V grey/inaccessible
Memory Voltage auto grey/inaccessible
NB Voltage default (1.25v -> 1.5V)
grey but accessible]
SB Voltage 1.50 grey/inaccessible
FSB VTT Voltage 0% choices(1 -> max 20%)
grey but accessible]
Spread Spectrum Enabled
choices (enabled, disabled)
[/FONT]Formatting is a little ugly, but I don't know how to use tabs in this.
So, to be fair, there are a number of ways that the board can be tweaked, but so far, I don't see a way of hitting ram voltage. If you try such things as manual for timings, ram voltage still doesn't change. Since it's not showing what the actual voltage is for memory, I have to assume that the board is automatically adjusting.
One other interesting thing is that the MSI website says the max memory speed is DDR2 800. On the box it says DDR2 1066.
I'm actually pretty happy with the board. As long as it works, I will just use it. I got because my current computer was getting so bogged down. The only other flaw from my standpoint is that there really isn't much support for the x-fi sound in Linux. I probably wouldn't have bought it if I had realized that, but that's the way it goes. Eventually, it will get reverse-engineered.
I have a quick question, I'm new to more than 2 gigs of RAM and 64 bit OS's. I've read that Vista doesn't like more than 3 gigs of RAM installed until a hotfix is downloaded. Is this true for the 64 bit version too? If so, how should I proceed? I have (4) 2-gig sticks, so should I just plug in 1, boot to Vista to download the fix, and then install the rest of the RAM? If so, what is the patch/hotfix's name or number? Thank you all for the help. 
I have a quick question, I'm new to more than 2 gigs of RAM and 64 bit OS's. I've read that Vista doesn't like more than 3 gigs of RAM installed until a hotfix is downloaded. Is this true for the 64 bit version too? If so, how should I proceed? I have (4) 2-gig sticks, so should I just plug in 1, boot to Vista to download the fix, and then install the rest of the RAM? If so, what is the patch/hotfix's name or number? Thank you all for the help.
That's exactly what I did, and everything runs fine now. I just got done playin a couple of hours of BF2142 with medium-high to high graphics w/AA enabled. Rock solid stable, even with overclocked 4GB ram, overclocked processor, and overclocked video card, AND in Vista 64 bit. All my games work great so far. A few bugs and patches here and there, but now everything is smooth as butta...
1 stick to boot and install, then stick in the second after updates. Should work fine. I know not EVERYONE had this problem, but enough people did that I thought it best to err on the side of safety. You could run the Vista installer with 512 if you had to, so 2gb is plenty to install!
Update:
I just ordered my second set of 2x2GB a-data for $69 as posted in the Hot Deals section.
8GB YAY!!
I will update you all on how it works out as soon as I get the stuff...
dagon11985
Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2005
- Messages
- 562
Some people have uses for more than 2 gigs of ram.
Yep. I know I will definitely use it. To say it's useless is a silly generalization. Once I get my 4GB ramdisk going I'll run circles around your 3-4GB rig in photoshop & premiere. As my sig. stats, I use my rig for gaming and for actual work, because I do a lot of memory/graphic intensive work. This will set my adobe programs free!!!
(ok, that was kinda cheesy... but still true.)
Yep. I know I will definitely use it. To say it's useless is a silly generalization. Once I get my 4GB ramdisk going I'll run circles around your 3-4GB rig in photoshop & premiere. As my sig. stats, I use my rig for gaming and for actual work, because I do a lot of memory/graphic intensive work. This will set my adobe programs free!!!
(ok, that was kinda cheesy... but still true.)
LOL...RAM disk sounds awesome though
LOL...RAM disk sounds awesome though
Yeah, when I figure out how to do it, I'll post back on this thread, because that's definitely relevant to an 8GB thread. (unless someone here already knows how to do it...)
I'm going to have to switch to 8gig. Since I work with photoshop and maya and having firefox open, 8gig is the definite answer. Already these applications eating up almost 4gig. When rendering or having a heavy file, 4gig is a joke. With 8gig, I don't have to worry about closing other programs while working.
I'm going to have to switch to 8gig. Since I work with photoshop and maya and having firefox open, 8gig is the definite answer. Already these applications eating up almost 4gig. When rendering or having a heavy file, 4gig is a joke. With 8gig, I don't have to worry about closing other programs while working.
I really think programs like Premiere and Pinnacle studio would take off when 8GB of ram is available. Rendering would go much faster, especially if you need more than one of those apps open at the same time. I frequently have premiere+photoshop or pinnacle studio+photoshop running simultaneously, and eight gigs will speed that up for sure.
Apps like that love processing power too.
That's why I also have a quad core overclocked to 3.2GHz (and I'll probably be able to push it even higher than that....) This thing is gonna fly right out my window when I get done...
That's why I also have a quad core overclocked to 3.2GHz (and I'll probably be able to push it even higher than that....) This thing is gonna fly right out my window when I get done...
Your only using a 17" monitor?
If you had a f' load of money you could get two of these, a workstation board, and load of memory too.
Yeah yeah... I know I'm the ghetto overclocker.
But it's one of the best 17" EVER. Over 2 years of heavy use, work/gaming/wife surfing internet, even a little tv watching.. and not a single dead pixel yet!!
I've tried to select everything I have with the best bang/buck factor, and I feel like I'm succeeding pretty well so far.
AND, I'm not making a server or a real serious superexpensive workstation with "workstation" processors. I just like having a superfast machine to do my "semi-pro" work plus gaming on. I have a 13x19 borderless 6-color HP printer and CS3 design premium. I use it a lot for school and side jobs. I want it to be fast, stable and reliable. I also use it for gaming, so I need it to be fast, stable, reliable, and maintain good temps, hence the 900 case. I think I've got a pretty good setup going. It'll just get a lil' better with 8GB in it. And the 4GB kits are $69 bucks right now!!! Plus I did the intel retail edge deal for the processor, and I used 64-bit vista from last year's retail edge. I'm pretty darned happy with what I got .... (and I'm ECSTATIC right now because I just slapped in a brand new BFG 8800GT ... YAHOOO!!!)
Anyhow. My next monitor will probably be dual 22" LCDs. I am pretty fond of the ultrasharps. That 8GB of ram will come in very handy when I'm running one big adobe app in each window.... or "working" on something in one window while playing a favorite game in the second...
so don't be too hard on me.
I got the Dell Ultrasharp 2407WFP a while ago... it's so nice. It's on a huge sale right now for $599. link.
If you don't need a nice panel there are other 1920x1200 24"ers for cheaper.
Before that I've been using a Dell ultrasharp 17" for 4-5 years. It looked something like this. And before that I was using a 15" NEC Multisync XV15+ from the mid 90's. And around that time too I was using a couple Sony Trinitrons.
Oh, I remember those Trinitrons. They were fantastic, but they were tanks. I had a 19", then a 22". My dad gave the 19" to my cousin, who was having some trouble scaling video correctly on their 32" LCD tv that they were trying to use as a primary monitor for their computer. the 22" I donated to a local school.... took all I had to lift that thing. So long and heavy!
bobn4burton
Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2002
- Messages
- 722
OK...I just posted this in the OS forum, but then found this thread. Might be slightly more applicable here so I'll duplicate my post...
So I've been reading a little bit about RAMdisks. It seems you can improve the performance of your pc a bit by assigning some key portions of your system on the RAMdisk (pagefile, browser cache, etc.).
Well...then I started wondering...what if a guy got 8 gig of memory (now that its so dirty cheap) and assigned 4-5 gig worth to a RAMdisk. Then install a virtual pc on the RAMdisk? You could use the virtual pc for your normal everyday stuff (browsing, office, etc).
And yes I know there are limitations, problems such as you'd lose all data on ramdisk at shutdown. But you could back up the virtual pc image file to hard drive, and just keep your pc running 24x7. Anyways, assuming the obvious limitations were an acceptable trade-off...
1. Is it even possible to install a virtual pc on a RAMdisk (virtual drive)?
2. Would performance increase a lot (such as loading apps because you would have no hdd accessing)?
3. Has anyone tried anything like this before?
So I've been reading a little bit about RAMdisks. It seems you can improve the performance of your pc a bit by assigning some key portions of your system on the RAMdisk (pagefile, browser cache, etc.).
Well...then I started wondering...what if a guy got 8 gig of memory (now that its so dirty cheap) and assigned 4-5 gig worth to a RAMdisk. Then install a virtual pc on the RAMdisk? You could use the virtual pc for your normal everyday stuff (browsing, office, etc).
And yes I know there are limitations, problems such as you'd lose all data on ramdisk at shutdown. But you could back up the virtual pc image file to hard drive, and just keep your pc running 24x7. Anyways, assuming the obvious limitations were an acceptable trade-off...
1. Is it even possible to install a virtual pc on a RAMdisk (virtual drive)?
2. Would performance increase a lot (such as loading apps because you would have no hdd accessing)?
3. Has anyone tried anything like this before?
I would imagine performance increase is substantial. My intention is to use my extra 4GB as a scratch disk for photoshop. You lose your scratch disks when you close photoshop down anyway. I'll probably never run any apps on it. Wouldn't you have to reinstall or at least re-copy your entire OS or application onto the RAMDISK every boot? Perhaps there's a way to automate this, but you're bound to run into hurdles and bugs along the way. I plan to use it as a scratch disk, and maybe a pagefile. Both are wiped upon shutdown and you could designate a USB flashdrive to those if you wanted to. I've used USB flash drives as scratch disks on laptops before, so I imagine your RAMDISK would work the same way when dealing with pagefiles and PS scratch disks. Hoping so anyways.
Hi, guys.I'm thinking about getting 8GB of RAM for my new system.Which one would you recommend?Corsair XMS2 DDR2 4GB (2X2GB) PC2-6400 (800MHZ) CL5 or G.Skill DDR2 4GB (2X2GB) PC8000 1000MHZ DUAL CHANNEL KIT?
I can get the corsair for 110(euros) and the g.skill for 125.Is it worth paying 15 more for the g.skill?Which one would be better for a system with 8GB?Anyone using any of the kits?
I can get the corsair for 110(euros) and the g.skill for 125.Is it worth paying 15 more for the g.skill?Which one would be better for a system with 8GB?Anyone using any of the kits?
What motherboard are you getting? Not all motherboards support the faster RAM. Certain intel chipsets only allow 800MHz ram, and others will support above 1000MHz.
I love Corsair, and I love G.Skill. Haven't had problems with either brand of product or either company for support. It's win-win whomever you choose. Need to know what mobo you're using though.
But then what happens to your game when you restart? Gotta install/copy files again after boot, hence taking away the speed advantage because every time you want to play you have to wait for the install/copy process to happen again. Better to use as a swap/page file for windows or a scratch disk for adobe or other programs that render. Maybe DivX could utilize more ram? It's really processor intensive, though.
I have had 8GB of ReaperX PC8000 (1000MHZ) running at 5-5-5-12 @ 1066 on my system, but I was getting instability problems and errors in Memtest.
I did some tests and found that one pair can run those specs at 4GB, while the other can't. So now I've got 4GB installed and it's running great and I really don't notice much of a difference. I sincerely doubt I would ever need to run Crysis and Photoshop and Firefox at the same time...
I was unsure about the performance issue, and whether I would notice a difference running 4GB 5-5-5-12 @ 1066 MHz or 8GB 5-5-5-15 (or 18) @ 1000 MHz (which should run ok according to the specs, although I haven't tested).
The only other activities I might need a lot of RAM for is when I edit home videos and make DVDs.
Specs are ~Q6600 G0 @ 3.6 GHz~Asus Maximus Formula Bios 0907~4 GB OCZ ReaperX HPC PC8000 1000MHz @1066 5-5-5-12~CoolerMaster Extreme Power 650w~
~EVGA 8800 GTX @ 626/1500/2000~Soundblaster Fatal1ty XtremeGamer~Samsung SyncMaster 245b 24"~Vista Ultimate 64
~WD Raptor 150 GB~WD 500 GB~LG DVDROM~Samsung DVD/RW~Thermalright Ultra120~
I did some tests and found that one pair can run those specs at 4GB, while the other can't. So now I've got 4GB installed and it's running great and I really don't notice much of a difference. I sincerely doubt I would ever need to run Crysis and Photoshop and Firefox at the same time...
I was unsure about the performance issue, and whether I would notice a difference running 4GB 5-5-5-12 @ 1066 MHz or 8GB 5-5-5-15 (or 18) @ 1000 MHz (which should run ok according to the specs, although I haven't tested).
The only other activities I might need a lot of RAM for is when I edit home videos and make DVDs.
Specs are ~Q6600 G0 @ 3.6 GHz~Asus Maximus Formula Bios 0907~4 GB OCZ ReaperX HPC PC8000 1000MHz @1066 5-5-5-12~CoolerMaster Extreme Power 650w~
~EVGA 8800 GTX @ 626/1500/2000~Soundblaster Fatal1ty XtremeGamer~Samsung SyncMaster 245b 24"~Vista Ultimate 64
~WD Raptor 150 GB~WD 500 GB~LG DVDROM~Samsung DVD/RW~Thermalright Ultra120~
Bummer about that one set. Right now I've got all 8GB of mine stable (for now) at 1000MHz with stock 5-5-5-18 timings on 2.0v. I'm very impressed that this cheapo ram can do that..... Only .2v above stock voltage. I'm comfortable with that now that I have a good memory cooler on top of my 4 sticks. Should be ok. So far everything's running great.
Well I got mine up and running last night, 8gigs of RAM are hard on a motherboard when you overclock.
That's what I ended up doing. I can do 1000MHz at stock timings with only 2.0v on mine, but I like the stability and lower heat levels of the lower linking ratio. I won't burn out my ram as fast, either.
Sounds like you got a good set of "cheapo" RAM there.
My other issue is the heatspreaders on the ReaperX. It was a hard time to get them into the slots and after reading more on the OCZ support forums it sounds like I was lucky not to damage my motherboard.
I am now looking into an alternative set of memory from OCZ which looks like it has the same specs as the ReaperX PC8000 but with their normal heatspreaders. OCZ DDR2 PC2-8000 / 1000 MHz / 4GB Platinum Edition
I am thinking I might be able to run them together, and they would be more likely to fit and not strain the memory slots.
I'll probably go for the abit IP 35 Pro or one of the P35 based Gigabyte mobos, unless Intel decides to release the Q9450 soon but that seems unlikely.
Well, if you only need 640K of RAM, why get 8GiB?
Seriously: it could be a waste, depending on what you do with your PC. I am glad I have 8GiB and very happy that I upgraded my server to 6GiB, since MySQL loves memory.