My system is two years old. Q9550 @ 2.83Ghz with 4GB of Dominator 1066 (5-5-5-15) and HD4870.
Originally when I began the build two years ago, I started out with 2GB Kingston HyperX 1066 (5-5-5-15). Then about 3 months later, I decided to swap them out with 4GB Corsair Dominator 1066 (5-5-5-15). By the way, I got them on a very good sale at that time for 64.00 - 30.00 mail-in rebate = 34.00.. I decided not to get a second set because the rebate was only 1 per house hold.. which I then said i'll just get the second set later on. But for now the 1 set is good enough.
Oh how stupid me...... now it is two years later........ The availability of the 4GB Corsair Dominator 1066 (5-5-5-15) DDR2 is sparse AND the pricing now has been floating around 145.00 !!!!! it once had gone up as far ast 175.00 .... Freaking bastards... So I have been waiting for this particular set to drop down a bit but I dont think it will go any further and it will just become extinct soon. I have been waiting on this particular set just so to have a complete matching set...
So..... no hope of this particular set of going down to below the 100 mark, I have decided to install my original set of 2GB Kingston HyperX 1066 (5-5-5-15) along with the 4GB Corsair Dominator to make a total of 6GB of main memory...
So far everything is going well... timings and speed are set accordingly and I have ran memtest86+ a couple of rounds and it all passes.... Next test is to play BFBC2 for an extent rounds to see if it holds out.
The question is.....
With the mix dimm size of 2GB and 1GB.... will memory performance be the same, faster, or slower with going from 4GB to 6GB vs..... if I had all matching dimm size for a total of 8GB... As mentioned, memory speed rating and timings are the same before and after the install.
Let me just tell ya something G.G. Your still system is still a corker! And you aint missing
out on anything like CPU or RAM wise just yet. I still haven't got my new parts yet,
but it makes me wonder, cos since I've had the GTX480 the performance is not tainted
for the CPU or RAM. No bottlenecks!
I have about the same system. I had 2x2 gigs for over 1 year. (ddr2)
Now i am running 2x2 gigs and 2x1 gigs for a total of 6gigs. I have not noticed any performance hit at all. But now my Adobe products have a little bit more room to breath.
GA-Z68X-UD3H-B3, 2600k @ 4.0
16 gig Corsair Vengeance
Evga gtx 260 216, samsung 2253lw"
Baracuda 7,200.12 CoolerMaster 212 +
Win 7 64, fsp fx700-gln, Razer DA,G15
Evil is powerless if the good are unafraid
Silence in the face of evil is it's self Ev
Like micro, I had something similar, and then I went ahead and upped the 2nd pair of memory from 2GB to 4GB, and as long as I gave the 6GB memory a lot of "headroom" with regards to apps, I didn't see much difference at all. But my conclusion here is completely subjective. I did not run benchmarks on the 6GB config and then rerun those same benchmarks under the 8GB config.
I suppose there could be also a noticeable difference depending on whether the mobo is Intel or AMD-based. Mine was also AMD.
Seeing any differences might also depend on how one manages things between the multiple cores, and the ability of the applications to take advantage of advanced CPU/memory architecture. I'm hypothesizing here, as I didn't do any evaluations to find out and my knowledge is pretty weak on recent advances in memory architecture, particularly when multiple CPU cores are involved...but it seems possible.
I was in the same boat a couple of years after I bought my 939 rig in late 2005. At the time, I bought 2x1GB of DDR-500, which rocked. It was spendy, so I figured I would just buy the other 2GB (for 4GB total) down the line. Oh, what a bad idea.
A couple of years later, I couldn't even find a kit of my same DDR-500. I had to sell it (on HWA) and settle for 4GB of DDR-400 like a common peasant.
I've learned my lesson now. I bought 8GB for my ThinkPad (which will max out its memory) right off the bat. Not for general performance, though ... I bought it because I'm going to be making heavy use of virtual machines.
Just woke up about 45mins ago (13:40hr). God im tired... yesterday afternoon about 10mins after I posted the thread, I had to take off out of town 2hrs away for a schedule down time at a customer site to do a large upgrade........ well, I didnt get home till 07:30hr this morning.... geezzz... a 17hr job stint... getting too old for this junk... body dont bounce back like it use to or as quickly.. no I am going to grawgy all rest of the day.
Thank you for the replies all... so far I havent felt any perceivable quirks.... and all seems as normal.. Just more memory available. Kinda funny to look at my CPU usage side bar widget to see the used/free memory usage increased for both... lol... Prior to the increase, it would read 1.3gb used and 2.7gb free..... now after the memory increase, the widget reads - 1.6gb used and 4.4gb free... I am using Vista 64bit.. lol i guess the OS says to itself " Oh boy, more space.... i can increase my foot print and stretch out just a bit more, ahhhhhhh !! ". lol.....
One thing for sure, on my next build...... whenever that would be who knows, especially the financial difficulties each of us have these days..... I need to re-think about memory purchases as in get as much as you can up front or at least if you think you will upgrade your memory down the road in that one needs to do it soon and not later if you want an exact matching set because as the cases describe above in mine and McFly's scenario, pricing and availability can become an issue.
Ok.... off to do some BFBC2 to wake myself up.... heres to upping the volume on my Z-680...