| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Rosso
Member
Joined: 24 May 2005
Posts: 81
|
 Posted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 7:01 pm Post subject: RAM: 1 X 8 Gb or 2 X 4 Gb, which is faster? |
 |
|
Hi everyone,
Can I ask which is a faster option, 1 X 8 Gb or 2 X 4 Gb? I'm looking for fast RAM. I'm currently plagued by the beach-ball of death on lowest spec 2012 mini. Thanks
_________________
Mac mini |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Bandit Bill
Veteran Member
Joined: 07 Jun 2005
Posts: 5805
Location: Edmonton, AB, Canada
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
2X4GB is faster.
Here is an excerpt from Crucial Memory explaining why.
Two channels handle memory-processing more efficiently by utilizing the theoretical bandwidth of the two modules, thus reducing system latencies, the timing delays that inherently occur with one memory module. For example, one controller reads and writes data while the second controller prepares for the next access, hence, eliminating the reset and setup delays that occur before one memory module can begin the read/write process all over again. Think of it like two relay runners. The first runner runs one leg while the second runner sets up and prepares to receive the baton smoothly and carry on the task at hand without delay. While performance gains from dual-channel chipsets aren't huge, they can increase bandwidth by as much as 10 percent. To those seeking to push the performance envelope, that 10 percent can be very important. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rosso
Member
Joined: 24 May 2005
Posts: 81
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 4:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bandit Bill wrote: | 2X4GB is faster.
Here is an excerpt from Crucial Memory explaining why.
Two channels handle memory-processing more efficiently by utilizing the theoretical bandwidth of the two modules, thus reducing system latencies, the timing delays that inherently occur with one memory module. For example, one controller reads and writes data while the second controller prepares for the next access, hence, eliminating the reset and setup delays that occur before one memory module can begin the read/write process all over again. Think of it like two relay runners. The first runner runs one leg while the second runner sets up and prepares to receive the baton smoothly and carry on the task at hand without delay. While performance gains from dual-channel chipsets aren't huge, they can increase bandwidth by as much as 10 percent. To those seeking to push the performance envelope, that 10 percent can be very important. |
Thank you very much. Have just ordered 2 X 4 Gb Kingston HyperX
_________________
Mac mini |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
philiparcario
Veteran Member
Joined: 19 Jun 2006
Posts: 4570
Location: Howell NJ USA
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 6:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Rosso wrote: | | Bandit Bill wrote: | 2X4GB is faster.
Here is an excerpt from Crucial Memory explaining why.
Two channels handle memory-processing more efficiently by utilizing the theoretical bandwidth of the two modules, thus reducing system latencies, the timing delays that inherently occur with one memory module. For example, one controller reads and writes data while the second controller prepares for the next access, hence, eliminating the reset and setup delays that occur before one memory module can begin the read/write process all over again. Think of it like two relay runners. The first runner runs one leg while the second runner sets up and prepares to receive the baton smoothly and carry on the task at hand without delay. While performance gains from dual-channel chipsets aren't huge, they can increase bandwidth by as much as 10 percent. To those seeking to push the performance envelope, that 10 percent can be very important. |
Thank you very much. Have just ordered 2 X 4 Gb Kingston HyperX |
one of my favorite ram choices. most of us only need the 8gb and kingston is the fastest.
_________________
2010 Mm 2.4 C2D oem 320gb hdd 8gb ram
2012Mm base 2.5 with 16gb ram diy fusion drive
2012Mm quad with 8gb ram oem 1tb hdd
promise pegasus r6 3x 3tb + 3x 4tb =21tb hdds
lacie little big disk 2x 512gb ssds
synology 2tb disk station |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rosso
Member
Joined: 24 May 2005
Posts: 81
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 6:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| philiparcario wrote: | | Rosso wrote: | | Bandit Bill wrote: | 2X4GB is faster.
Here is an excerpt from Crucial Memory explaining why.
Two channels handle memory-processing more efficiently by utilizing the theoretical bandwidth of the two modules, thus reducing system latencies, the timing delays that inherently occur with one memory module. For example, one controller reads and writes data while the second controller prepares for the next access, hence, eliminating the reset and setup delays that occur before one memory module can begin the read/write process all over again. Think of it like two relay runners. The first runner runs one leg while the second runner sets up and prepares to receive the baton smoothly and carry on the task at hand without delay. While performance gains from dual-channel chipsets aren't huge, they can increase bandwidth by as much as 10 percent. To those seeking to push the performance envelope, that 10 percent can be very important. |
Thank you very much. Have just ordered 2 X 4 Gb Kingston HyperX |
one of my favorite ram choices. most of us only need the 8gb and kingston is the fastest. |
Thanks for the recommendation Phil, you sir are a top man!
_________________
Mac mini |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search 
Memberlist 
Photo Gallery
Register
Profile 
Log in to check your private messages 
Log in 
