Re: RAM problems
I left the voltage at the standard 1.8. I would expect lower ram speed to
always work at default voltage? Maybe some ram is programmed for higher
voltage at its default speed, and when you switch to manual control you have
to manually specify higher than default voltage? Some utilities show the
ram's SPD programming. I use Lavalys Everest which shows the programmed
timings and the current actual timings. It also displays a value for ram
voltage, which I assume is the current ram voltage.
"Colin Barnhorst" <c.barnhorst@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:60B029A0-8448-47E3-8421-221530341405@microsoft.com...
> Yes, most of the buzz on the mobo forums on this topic involves discussion
> of where to set the dram voltage to get 6400 down to a speed that works.
>
> "Paul Shapiro" <paul@hideme.broadwayData.com> wrote in message
> news:%23v0yaHSVIHA.484@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>I got stable operation with 4 x 2GB of DDR2-6400 ram by setting the bios
>>to run it at 667MHz instead of the default 800 MHz. With an Intel 6850 cpu
>>which has a 1333 MHz bus, the performance difference between ram running
>>at full 800 MHz speed and reduced to 667 MHz speed was negligible. I'm
>>guessing that's because 667 MHz is 1:1 synchronous with the 1333 MHz
>>processor bus (one is quad-speed and one is double speed, so the basic bus
>>in both cases is 333 MHz).
>>
>> "Colin Barnhorst" <c.barnhorst@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:B1ED866E-8F18-4CEB-846D-7961AA8543E5@microsoft.com...
>>>I am using 3x2GB pc6400 in one box and seeing 6143mb of ram. The fourth
>>>stick prevents Windows from loading. The performance difference between
>>>3GB and 6GB on this box is dramatic in terms of hard drive activity.
>>>That 4th GB in your system would make a difference, believe me.
>>>
>>> "xiowan" <xiowan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>>> news:20F834AC-5AC0-4409-A95D-703853CEFCC3@microsoft.com...
>>>> Hello "Colin":
>>>> Thanks for the info! Wish I had read of that issue sooner. I just
>>>> purchased 4 512MB sticks of DDR2 800 Mhz RAM to get down to 3 GB on my
>>>> 2
>>>> Vista pcs! I have 4 leftover 1GB sticks of DDR2 667Mhz I used before
>>>> switching to Vista but don't think I will go to the expense of buying 2
>>>> 2GB
>>>> sticks of DDR2 800 Mhz to see if they will work with my board and
>>>> Vista.
>>>> Both Vista PCs are working beautifully with just 3 GB of 800 Mhz
>>>> although the
>>>> Task Mgr is showing Vista as using close to all of the memory but it
>>>> would
>>>> probably show the same result if I doubled the memory LOL! I wish
>>>> Intel had
>>>> warned of this issue before I purchased 3 motherboards they said
>>>> supported 4
>>>> GBs of DDR2 800 Mhz RAM. I was very careful to research everything
>>>> about the
>>>> board, including any possible memory issues and am disappointed that I
>>>> won't
>>>> be able to use the boards as planned.
>>>>
>>>> xiowan........in tucson
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Colin Barnhorst" wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> You are correct. It is the combination. pc6400 ram seems to be the
>>>>> type
>>>>> associated with this. Try pc5300 ram if you can and see. The issue
>>>>> appears
>>>>> to arise with a stick of pc6400 ram in the fourth dimm slot. It is
>>>>> not the
>>>>> amount of ram (it happens with 2GB sticks as well). If you want 4GB
>>>>> of
>>>>> pc6400, use a pair of 2GB sticks and you will be fine.
>>>>>
>>>>> "xiowan" <xiowan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:E226F2BF-7A55-4610-9B4C-A9EF9FBBB024@microsoft.com...
>>>>> > Hello "james":
>>>>> > I have an Intel Q6600 cpu on an Intel DG965WH board and the exact
>>>>> > same
>>>>> > thing happened to me. I tried the patch also with no help. I
>>>>> > replaced 2
>>>>> > 1GB
>>>>> > RAM modules with 512MB for a total of 3 GB RAM and the pc now works
>>>>> > beautifully. I'm sure if I spent hours and hours seeking a solution
>>>>> > to
>>>>> > the
>>>>> > problem of 4GB on Vista Ultimate, I might find the perfect solution
>>>>> > but
>>>>> > I'm
>>>>> > happy with 3GB's performance. I don't think your problem is with
>>>>> > the
>>>>> > memory
>>>>> > either. More likely the O.S./motherboard/RAM combination not
>>>>> > working
>>>>> > together as they should. I have yet to see a store ad for a
>>>>> > Quadcore pc
>>>>> > with
>>>>> > 4 GBs RAM.....they always advertise 3 GBs. Could be to hold down
>>>>> > the
>>>>> > price
>>>>> > or could be the same problem we have seen with 4GBs!
>>>>> >
>>>>> > xiowan..........in tucson
>>>>> >
>>>>> > "james" wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> >> To increase performance in pc i decided to upgrade from 2GB to 4GB
>>>>> >> but
>>>>> >> after
>>>>> >> start the computer and logging in i was having some performance
>>>>> >> issues
>>>>> >> which
>>>>> >> i had not had before and my proccessor (Q6600) was at 35%
>>>>> >> constantly. i
>>>>> >> updated my subscore and found that i had gone from 4.4 with 2GB to
>>>>> >> 1.6
>>>>> >> with
>>>>> >> 4GB also games that i could play before now have appaling frame
>>>>> >> rates.
>>>>> >> I am using 64-bit visita
>>>>> >> the RAM is matching 4x1GB 800mhz
>>>>> >> oh, and i have installed the visit 64-bit patch that is supposed to
>>>>> >> deal with it
>>
>