Maya for 3D Printing - Rapid Prototyping
In this course we're going to look at something a little different, creating technically accurate 3D printed parts.
# 1 18-05-2008 , 10:38 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 46

RAM speeds

Hi all,

Im currently running 4GB DDR2 667Mhz do you think it would it be worth my while upgrading to 1066MHz or something? My motherboard and everything supports it. Some of the files Im opening seem to load fairly quickly but then there is a fair pause before they are displayed on screen would that be a ram speed issue?

I mean I realise it would make a difference but would it be noticeable?

I'm also running a quad core 2.4ghz processor and an fx4500 graphics card if your wondering

Thanks
David

# 2 20-05-2008 , 09:17 PM
AikoWorld's Avatar
Subscriber
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: London
Posts: 429
no experience in that amount of mhz, i would suggest test it out if you have the money for it and let us know.

# 3 21-05-2008 , 03:50 AM
alexanderH's Avatar
Subscriber
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Mississauga, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 450
Well to get 4gb of 1066, provided your mobo and current hardware support it, your cost to performance ratio would be ridiculously high. You'd be better off to upgrade to 64 bit and spend the money to add 4gb to your system. Not that that really is an option I don't think.

The 333Mhz will give you a slight difference but it would be hard to identify and would most likely show up in your render times. But if you have the cash and can afford to do it without really thinking twice, the faster your computer can access the ram the better off you are.


Peace, love and Anarchy~~~~~~~
______________________________
Wip:
iMac
Full House Project
Arch Viz Reel

My Website is Finally Back up!

“Welcome to the Internet. Where the men are men, the women are men, and the children are FBI agents.”
# 4 21-05-2008 , 03:43 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: /dev/null
Posts: 891
If your files are taking a while to load, it is more likely that the hard drive is the cause. If you have two identical hard drives, put it in a RAID array, that should raise performance, or get a faster drive with more cache.


C. P. U. Its not a big processor... Its a series of pipes!
# 5 21-05-2008 , 04:47 PM
publicFunction's Avatar
Senior Software Developer
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Livingston, Scotland
Posts: 1,701
Defrag your system HDD and also the HDD the files reside on. I run 4Gb 500Mhz RAM and I get great performance, but I am using a x64 AMD Dual 6400+ Black Edition (3.2Ghz) Processor, which will run faster that the quadcore you currently have.

Putting data into a raid is not a solution I would use to resolve speed issues, but is better suited to resolveing redundancy problems to prevent Data Loss.

I think if your going to upgrade then upgrade ur processor to x64 and jump up the speed at the same time. With your quadcore ull not get 4x2.4 (9.6Ghz), its more likely you will get around 7 or 8 Ghz. This is due to the way the Intel Chip Architecture works.


Chris (formerly R@nSiD)
Twitter
When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will truely know peace - Jimmy Hendrix
Winner SM VFX Challenge 1
3rd Place SM SteamPunk Challenge (May 2007)
# 6 21-05-2008 , 04:58 PM
gster123's Avatar
Moderator
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Manchester Uk
Posts: 6,300

Originally posted by R@nSiD
With your quadcore ull not get 4x2.4 (9.6Ghz), its more likely you will get around 7 or 8 Ghz. This is due to the way the Intel Chip Architecture works.

And thats if the programmes that you've got running are multi core supported, always worth noting if you've not got the "latest" software.


"No pressure, no diamonds" Thomas Carlyle
# 7 22-05-2008 , 11:12 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: /dev/null
Posts: 891

Originally posted by R@nSiD
I think if your going to upgrade then upgrade ur processor to x64 and jump up the speed at the same time. With your quadcore ull not get 4x2.4 (9.6Ghz), its more likely you will get around 7 or 8 Ghz. This is due to the way the Intel Chip Architecture works.

Umm... you do know that multicore processors don't work like that, right? user added image


C. P. U. Its not a big processor... Its a series of pipes!
# 8 22-05-2008 , 11:43 AM
publicFunction's Avatar
Senior Software Developer
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Livingston, Scotland
Posts: 1,701
a common misconception is that they dont. Multicore porcessors do work like that, its dual/quad processor machine that will work in the way you are thinking.

A machine with more that 1 physical processor will not share its load until it has to. a processor with multi core will share is bandwidth increasing the speeds of the machines, letting intel and AMD to meet the 10Ghz speeds they stated they would be at by now.


Chris (formerly R@nSiD)
Twitter
When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will truely know peace - Jimmy Hendrix
Winner SM VFX Challenge 1
3rd Place SM SteamPunk Challenge (May 2007)
# 9 22-05-2008 , 11:52 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: /dev/null
Posts: 891

Originally posted by R@nSiD
a common misconception is that they dont. Multicore porcessors do work like that, its dual/quad processor machine that will work in the way you are thinking.

A machine with more that 1 physical processor will not share its load until it has to. a processor with multi core will share is bandwidth increasing the speeds of the machines, letting intel and AMD to meet the 10Ghz speeds they stated they would be at by now.

I'm afraid I have no idea what you mean by sharing the bandwidth. Doesn't the Core 2, Athlon X2 and Phenom only have interface to the memory, just like two or more physical chips contending for the same bus/controller/RAM?


C. P. U. Its not a big processor... Its a series of pipes!
# 10 22-05-2008 , 12:23 PM
publicFunction's Avatar
Senior Software Developer
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Livingston, Scotland
Posts: 1,701
No m8.

These chips were designed to allow Intel & AMD to push the processor past its limit by allowing it to share its calculations instead of working to its limit and then passing its overload to another processor (thats how dual/quad processor machines work). The multicore systems share out all the work evenly (or as evenly as it can) over both or all 4 processors within the chip. This then increases the abiltiy of the processors to handle calculations (bandwidth), therefore increasing the processor speed. Again x64 processors will process faster than x32.

The reason behind all this was they found that they could not safely push a single processor past the 3.5 or 4Ghz mark without it overheating and dieing, so the bright idea was to split them into various sizes and place 2 or 4 together to increase speed, the original old processor was old news and along cam Dual Core and Quad Core.


Chris (formerly R@nSiD)
Twitter
When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will truely know peace - Jimmy Hendrix
Winner SM VFX Challenge 1
3rd Place SM SteamPunk Challenge (May 2007)
# 11 22-05-2008 , 12:33 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: /dev/null
Posts: 891

Originally posted by R@nSiD
No m8.

These chips were designed to allow Intel & AMD to push the processor past its limit by allowing it to share its calculations instead of working to its limit and then passing its overload to another processor (thats how dual/quad processor machines work). The multicore systems share out all the work evenly (or as evenly as it can) over both or all 4 processors within the chip. This then increases the abiltiy of the processors to handle calculations (bandwidth), therefore increasing the processor speed. Again x64 processors will process faster than x32.

The reason behind all this was they found that they could not safely push a single processor past the 3.5 or 4Ghz mark without it overheating and dieing, so the bright idea was to split them into various sizes and place 2 or 4 together to increase speed, the original old processor was old news and along cam Dual Core and Quad Core.

user added image

You do know that I was just saying that a processor with two 2 cores clocked at 2.5 GHz does not equal a processor clocked at 5.0 GHz (these two processors being of the same architecture of course). user added image


C. P. U. Its not a big processor... Its a series of pipes!
Posting Rules Forum Rules
You may not post new threads | You may not post replies | You may not post attachments | You may not edit your posts | BB code is On | Smilies are On | [IMG] code is On | HTML code is Off

Similar Threads