DRR2 clock speeds make a difference running apps

thank you everyone for your help!

I ended up getting the 2 gbs at 8 mhz instead of 3 gbs at 667mhz. maybe it was a mistake ?? I can always add another 2 bgs of ram later. the difference of choice was the the extra gb of ram was $100 more.
 
Quote from RiceRocket:

If you want the latest and best get DDR3. The difference between DDR2 667 and 800 will not be noticeable. But going with DDR3 will be. Also if you really want to see your system speed up, get a raptor 10,000 rpm hard drive. I've been using these for years. They speed up the clunkiest of systems. There is a very noticeable difference in boot up time and program click through.

rice rocket,

I did not know the hard drive made a difference

I just got a 320GB Serial ATA 2 Hard Drive (7200RPM) in my new comp.

are you using databases or are you using retail charting like TS Qt software?
 
Quote from RiceRocket:

If you want the latest and best get DDR3. The difference between DDR2 667 and 800 will not be noticeable. But going with DDR3 will be. Also if you really want to see your system speed up, get a raptor 10,000 rpm hard drive. I've been using these for years. They speed up the clunkiest of systems. There is a very noticeable difference in boot up time and program click through.

This is still generally untrue. While DDR3 is next generation, the performance still lags DDR2 because of the high latencies inside the memory.

I'd say go DDR2 with the following key thoughts in mind:

1) The optimal bandwidth performance is achieved if you have matched pairs running in dual channel.
2) The FSB to memory clock rate is set to 1:1. You can run the memory faster than the FSB in ratios such as 2:3 or 4:5, but you will not see any bandwidth improvement.
3) as a follow-up of 2), in general, the bandwidth of your northbridge chipset limits your overall system bandwidth. It serves as a sort of "switch" or traffic-handler between memory, processor, and other device chipsets (HDD, DVD, etc.)

RoughTrader
 
I have the wraptor also. I went with the 36 gig unit because my trading computer doesn't store anything exept my applications. The smaller the hard drive, the faster the seek times. The wraptor 10K is the best hard drive I've ever had.
Pretty quite too.

Runningbear
 
don't bother with ddr3 right now. it's barely faster than ddr800, and it's much more expensive. plus, the ddr3 motherboards are $$$ and still uncommon.

i agree with recommendation for the 10k rpm hard drive. i can't believe all these people who spend extra money on a raid-0 array of 7200k drives when a 10k is generally faster and more reliable for the same price.

if you don't mind ponying up the money, get a 15k rpm drive.
 
Quote from Runningbear:

The smaller the hard drive, the faster the seek times.

totally untrue.

are you saying an 80gb 5400rpm 2.5" drive is faster than a 300gb 15k rpm sas 3.5" drive?

i think not.
 
Quote from blackjack007:

totally untrue.

are you saying an 80gb 5400rpm 2.5" drive is faster than a 300gb 15k rpm sas 3.5" drive?

i think not.

No. I'm saying the 36 gig 10K wraptor is faster than the 72 gig 10K wraptor.

Runningbear
 
Back
Top