Is 1 GB Dual channel better than 2 GB Non-dual?

[eandmwilson]

I currently have 1 GB (2x512) PC3200 in dual channel mode working just fine. I also have a set of old PC 2100 512s sitting around gathering dust. My MB is a Gigabyte K8NSC-939.

As I understand it, dual channel requires DDR400 memory to work. And, if I am correct, either all or non of the memory can be dual channel. So, if I pop the 2 PC2100 sticks in, I'll have 2 GB of RAM.

So, is 1 GB dual channel better than 2 GB of RAM? I will be doing some large video file manipulation, maybe some photoshop crap etc. No gaming to speak of.

Also, I'm not positive the PC 3200 sticks can go slow enought to be on the same speed as the PC2100. I think this is bad.

[ROF]

While there are a few factors that could effect this I'd say stick with your 400mhz PC3200 memory modules and forego adding the 2 extra 266mhz sticks. While you will be doubling your RAM amount you will be slowing down the speed to 266mhz(PC3200 will adjust). Your processor while it isn't capable of polling info as fast as your dual channeled RAM you'd surely be adding a bottleneck to it by adding the 266mhz RAM. It's better to have your RAM running faster than your processor rather the reverse of that especially at the capacities we're speaking of here.

[eandmwilson]

Thanks--that's what I was leaning towards--enough "faster" RAM is more betterer than too much "slow" RAM, where 1 GB is probably enough to do most jobs without being fully utilized.

[ROF]

Thanks--that's what I was leaning towards--enough "faster" RAM is more betterer than too much "slow" RAM, where 1 GB is probably enough to do most jobs without being fully utilized.

Exactly. If we were talking half the RAM here other questions or considerations might have made the factors switch but at 1GB you're already ahead of the game.

[smearbrick1]

"more betterer"?

Sorry, couldn't let it go.

End shameless threadjack

[eandmwilson]

More betterer is like gooder, but more betterer.