AMD 64 - Sorting out the truths and advantages (1 Viewer)

[Vlad D]

Based on that picture, the second bank does indeed look empty. So you should be fine by ordering 2 modules of 256 each.

 

[Wayne Bundrick]

Ron, it's hard to tell from the edge-on view but that looks like two resistor modules in the second bank, ready for upgrade with a pair of 256MB modules.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Thanks, guys. Just ordered the 2x256 modules

 

[Patrick Larkin]

Memory is your friend.

 

[Jeff Blair]

I have an Opteron system. Right now I wouldn't try the 64-bit Windows. There aren't that many drivers out there for it. But, you can install the 32-bit version of XP with no problem. I have Linux installed, and it is running in 64-bit mode. When I put XP-64 on there it did seam a lot faster. Another thing to keep in mind with a 64-bit system is that you can't use normal memory on most boards. It has to be registered. For now, just keep with more memory. When XP-64 comes out, it should be "ready for prime time".

 

[Marko Berg]

While it is certainly a good idea to have enough memory in the computer with a little to spare, the actual performance boost will depend on the application(s) you use. I recently read in a computer magazine that Microsoft Excel, for instance, is incapable of using more than 64MB of RAM (Office 2000 version) or 128MB (Office XP version) under any circumstances. I presume if you work with large files that will cause the application to require more RAM than this, the data will be stored in a swap file.

64-bit computing will be nice eventually, but for now, there are just too many bottlenecks involved in both legacy software and hardware to make it work as intended, especially if your computing requires frequent use of several different applications. YMMV.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

My main concern with memory is this....

I have at least a dozen programs that are in
my computer startup.

It is my hope that adding another 512 on top of the
512 I have already will allow me to run those programs
(and more) without taxing my system.

Is my theory on this correct?

I don't want to be spending $350 for nothing in return.

 

[JasonALL]

Ron,

Just as this forum has helped educate me about home theater products, I have a few places I recommend for gaining knowledge about computers...

tomshardware(dot)com is an excellent source about computer hardware and peripherals.

tomcoyote(dot)org (edit: site not working right now) is an excellent place to learn about security and to keep your computer protected from spyware, browser hijackers and the like.

I hate to see you burn good money after this problem. Your system if set up properly should be fine the way it is. Just like I have learned about properly calibrating my tv, you just probably need your computer "calibrated" to run optimally. I will look for a good optimization site and post it here, I just cannot remember what it was. (edit: the site is www(dot)blackviper(dot)com/WinXP/servicecfg(dot)htm) This site is somewhat advanced about disabling unecessary services. I recommend having someone knowledgable help you with this until you are comfortable.

Some backup software can really bog your system down no matter how much memory or processing power you have, think about just how necessary they may be to have running all the time.

Jason

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Jason,

I will check out that site now.

I take very good care of my computer. I defrag
it monthly and remove all temporary files weekly.

 

[JasonALL]

Personally I would get a whole new system rather than pay for $400 worth of extra memory that may have a 10% increase in performance. Dedicate that system to burning cd/dvd's. For $600 you can either build your own or buy one. But I bet if you disabled the windows backup, and did it manually now and then, instead of auto backing up, and so forth, it would solve a lot of problems. Typically autobackups and other things that constantly access the hard drive bog a system down. For instance, fastfind for office is one of the first programs I disable, because it is constantly accessing the hard drive to rearrange files. Can totally interrupt a good game!

Of course all of this is coming from a guy that spends about $300 every 8 months to have the latest greatest video card... I always look forward to the next game that will push my system to it's limits!

 

[SethH]

I respectfully, completely disagree with this. Reading the original post, Ron has a P4 3.06 processor. So honestly even upgrading to the latest greatest processor would not yield much more than a 10% performance increase.

 

[JasonALL]

Perhaps I did not properly set that up.

Ron stated that he did not like to shut down all of his running applications to burn cd/dvd's. I do not think the performance boost of more ram than he has, or a faster processor would be as cost effective as just having a cheap second system to burn dvd's. Thus eliminating any need to shut down all of his background apps like weatherbug and IM programs. I agree that a faster processor would only yield a 5 to 10% increase as well. (Not worth it in my mind) But a seperate system (somewhat inexpensive perhaps) would eliminate the need to shut down the apps.

However I still think his current system should be just fine with some tweaking

 

[Rob Gillespie]

With a processor of that speed and the amount of memory we're talking about, there's no way you should have to be shutting down applications to burn a CD or DVD - unless it's extremely processor intensive like video encoding or something that chews up a lot of IDE bandwidth.

I would be checking the IDE device layouts before anything else. Going 64bit will be a waste of money.

 

[Bob_Bo]

Hey Ron,

As Rob mentioned, with the machine you have now, you shouldn't be having a problem.

Adding more RAM is a good thing, but may not be the root of the problems you're having.

I'm not very familiar with those start-up programs you have running, however if you open the task manager (right click on the task bar and select task manager or just ctrl/alt/del), after a normal start up, and click on the processes tab, that will show you all the programs using RAM at the moment. Add up all the Mem Usage. If it is over half of your physical RAM (256), then I'd say that adding more RAM will offer a noticeable improvement.

Another thing worth checking is your virtual memory settings. Right click on My Computer and select Properties. Select the Advanced Tab and then click on Settings under the Performance box. Select the Advanced tab again and see what the setting there are. Processor Scheduling and Memory Usage both should be set to Programs, and your Virtual Memory Page file should be at 768 MB (with 512 MB of RAM).

While you're there you can select the Visual Effects tab and shut off some of the fancy effects Windows has deemed necessary, if you choose to.

The only other thing that I can think of at the moment is that mail checker thing you have running. If that program decides to check and download mail while you are in the process of burning a dvd, I would imagine it being the cause of some hang-up in the system since it probably has a higher priority when competing for CPU cycles and Buss use.

 

[Wayne Bundrick]

In my first response to this thread I said there was speculation that this week Intel was going to announce support for AMD's 64-bit extensions, and indeed they have. The first chips for servers will be available next quarter and chips for desktops could follow soon after and be available by the time 64-bit Windows XP is finished.

Anyway, I still think that an upgrade from 512MB to 1024MB, especially with a 3 GHz processor, should go a long way toward procrastinating an upgrade until later this year or perhaps even this time next year.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Gents,

Reading this thread has been an enjoyable experience.

I have a lot of experience maintaining my computer,
checking regularly to see what programs are running
at startup, and making sure that I am getting the best
performance out of my desktop.

Let me clarify a few things....

I don't have to shut down programs when burning a CD.
What I do experience is a YIELD SIGN WARNING in my task
bar about my resources being taxed whenever I burn a
DVD using DVD_X_COPY. That is when I have to shut down
all my startup programs.

It's not worth paying $600 for a machine just to burn
DVDs. I'd rather spend the $350 on 512 worth of extra
ram if it means that my computer will run a little more
smoothly and allow me to add even a few more programs
to my startup.

I'm a gadget man. I love gadgets on my computer.
In addition to running GO BACK, NORTON ANTIVIRUS,
STYLE XP, MICROSOFT ACTIVE SYNCH (for my PDA),
WEATHERBUG, RAINLENDAR, TRILLIAN IM and MAILWASHER --
I also run a little animated SMART BUTLER that
announces all my incoming email and Instant Messages.

With ALL those programs running my computer still
runs extremely fast with just 512 ram. Windows XP
handles all these startups far better than Windows
98 did.

My problem is that there are times I run PHOTOSHOP
or some other memory-intensive program that starts
to tax my system to the point where I notice slowdown.

I'm just hoping additional memory will mean that I
can continue to add more STARTUP knick-knacks without
slowing down my system.

Am I expecting more than I should?

 

[JasonALL]

Ron,

While doing a search about DVD_X_Copy I came across a link for a program that is recommended for getting your system ready prior to burning, and devote resources to the burner, it's called WinTasks Professional 4.0 go to reviews(.)cnet(.)com/4505-5_7-20843233(.)html?legacy=cnet if you want to learn more. It says you can set the priority of programs that are running.

Having not used it, I cannot say if it will solve your problem or not. Other than that, the extra memory should solve some problems if you are getting low memory alerts while running the program. Sorry to make things more cluttered. But let us know how it works out in the end.

 

[SethH]

Ron,

I'm really hoping the extra RAM will work out for you. I thought of one other thing you could try if it doesn't completely solve your problem: What type of hard drive do you have? If you do NOT have SATA or SCSI, you might consider upgrading to SATA because this standard, from what I understand, does not use the processor to access the hard disk. Therefore you'd be freeing up more processor and more IDE bandwidth. I would think this would solve your problems, but it would be another relatively expensive upgrade (probably $200-$300 depending on what size drive you wanted).

 

[Wayne Bundrick]

Photoshop is going to love its new 1 gigabyte playground.

 

[Jeff Jacobson]

So would SATA be better at capturing video than IDE?