RAM Memory question

[Wicca who Wonta]

I own an Asus Eee Box 1501 and I need to buy new RAM memory to speed things up. The computer supports 2xSo-DIMM DDR2-800 (PC6400). I've been looking around for RAM memories and the question I want to ask is if the latency (CL) is important, and which value (i.e 5 or 6) is better. And are the value rams (Such as Kingston ValuerRAM) enough for most users as long as you're not a serious gamer?

I hope someone can give me some advice.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

A CL of 5 is 2.5 nanoseconds faster per memory access than 6. Unless you are doing some incredibly memory-intensive work, I don't think you're going to notice much of a difference, honestly.

The problem with value RAM is not that it's no good for gaming, but that it has a good chance of having bad bits. Bad bits will wreck damn near anything--crash your OS, corrupt your data, you name it. Crucial is a good brand. I've used Kingston, too, and never had issues with them. Never heard of ValueRAM. I would recommend reading reviews for whatever kind of RAM you pick, to make sure it doesn't have a high failure rate.

 

[Jadzia]

I own an Asus Eee Box 1501 and I need to buy new RAM memory to speed things up.

The Atom based computers are not particularly fast. The N330 processor used in this computer gives performance comparable with desktop PCs circa 2003.

Extra memory won't compensate for a slow processor. You may see a small improvement here and there depending on the application being used, but don't expect it make a big difference.

The computer supports 2xSo-DIMM DDR2-800 (PC6400). I've been looking around for RAM memories and the question I want to ask is if the latency (CL) is important, and which value (i.e 5 or 6) is better.

Latency is the time the computer has to wait for the RAM to do it's thing, so the smaller the latency the better.

And are the value rams (Such as Kingston ValuerRAM) enough for most users as long as you're not a serious gamer?

Given the slow speed of the processor, I don't think the latency or the brand of the memory is going to be a significant factor.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

Jadzia, although you're right about the CPU being slow, something you left out is that Windows Vista (and 7) make extensive use of application caching. An extra 2GB of RAM will indeed bear substantial performance benefits, if only because Windows can keep another 2GB of programs cached in memory for rapid startup.

She's already said she's not really a gamer so the CPU speed is not going to be her primary bottleneck. It has a decent graphics chipset and some extra RAM will definitely speed things up a bit, particularly in terms of program startup.

 

[Chaos Descending]

My Mom once worked for the Arizona DOR Department*. She was in charge of fining people for saying things like RAM Memory**.

Spoiler: Asterisks

* "Department Of Redundancy" Department.
** Random Access Memory Memory.

 

[Santaman]

RAM for netbooks doesn't have to be the ultimate in speed, just pick something from the mid range and from a well known manufacturer, that will give you enough speed and also the best chance that it will work with your machine and be reliable for a long time.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

It's not a netbook, it's a small form factor desktop.

 

[Santaman]

I always confuse my EEE's harware is quite similar though so my suggestion remains the same.

 

[STR]

My Mom once worked for the Arizona DOR Department*. She was in charge of fining people for saying things like RAM Memory**.

Spoiler: Asterisks

* "Department Of Redundancy" Department.
** Random Access Memory Memory.

Lemme go to the ATM machine to pay my fine, but first I need to buy a new cpu unit and a graphics GPU for my old gaming PC computer, cuz my Playstation PS3 is DOA dead.

 

[Chaos Descending]

That's perfect!

 

[Deks]

I own an Asus Eee Box 1501 and I need to buy new RAM memory to speed things up. The computer supports 2xSo-DIMM DDR2-800 (PC6400). I've been looking around for RAM memories and the question I want to ask is if the latency (CL) is important, and which value (i.e 5 or 6) is better. And are the value rams (Such as Kingston ValuerRAM) enough for most users as long as you're not a serious gamer?

I hope someone can give me some advice.

Hm ...
How much RAM does it have at the moment?
If I'm reading the specs correctly, it would be 2GB.
Upgrading to 4GB (because the specs indicate it supports that much) would be good, but you have to keep in mind that in that case, you will have to use an x64 OS in order to be able to see and use all 4GB (which isn't too problematic).
You can use your existing Windows 7 Home Premium key and install Windows 7 Home Premium x64 (upgrading x86 OS is not possible, you will have to do a clean install).
Keys are interchangeable between Windows versions (x86 or x64) but not editions.

Alternatively, you can upgrade to 3GB and keep an x86 (32 bit) OS installed.

As for what kind of a RAM type you should buy ...
Well, there aren't that many differences between 600 and 800Mhz ones.
At least as far as speed goes, you shouldn't notice any difference really (even with low latency sticks) because these days, RAM doesn't really affect speed that much, unless you have a ridiculously low amount of it.
The area where you will notice improvements should be in multitasking.
You will be able to keep more programs open at the same time without worrying to run out of RAM anytime soon.

However, for maximum compatibility, I suggest you install same RAM you have now (DDR2 800 - PC6400), albeit with a higher capacity.

So, if you now have 2 x 1GB for example, you can either get 2GB (on one stick) and take out one of the 1GB sticks to replace it, therefore resulting in 3GB;
Removing both current sticks and replacing them with 2 x 2GB sticks.
Or, if you already have 2 GB in just one stick with an empty RAM slot, simply get the 2GB in 1 stick and push it in.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

Deks, are you sure about the 2GB limit on Windows 7 32-bit? 32-bit architecture should go to 4GB, but no higher. Just don't want her to spend money on a 64-bit OS when it's not necessary.

 

[Jadzia]

Deks, are you sure about the 2GB limit on Windows 7 32-bit? 32-bit architecture should go to 4GB, but no higher. Just don't want her to spend money on a 64-bit OS when it's not necessary.

Even though 2^32 = 4GB, some devices reserve address space, so you get less for memory. 3.3 to 3.5 GB would be expected.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

Deks, are you sure about the 2GB limit on Windows 7 32-bit? 32-bit architecture should go to 4GB, but no higher. Just don't want her to spend money on a 64-bit OS when it's not necessary.

Even though 2^32 = 4GB, some devices reserve address space, so you get less for memory. 3.3 to 3.5 GB would be expected.

Yeah, I just wonder if the OS upgrade is really worth it to take advantage of the additional memory. The OS upgrade will cost more than the RAM upgrade!

 

[Deks]

The x86 OS is limited to about 3 or 3.5GB RAM (varies between those values), so you'd only be able to perhaps 'see' but not 'use' the full 4GB in x86 OS if it's been modified to do that.
Only x64 OS would be able to both see and utilize all 4GB.

My personal recommendation would be that you switch to x64 OS anyway.
It's the future for one thing, your hardware should be more than enough to handle it, and it's compatible with most 32bit applications (should be ok for your needs).
You would have to use a 32bit browser for being able to display flash content though, but that's just about the only issue I can think of.

Even getting infected with something would be a fairly low prospect because of the x64 architecture (although, I do recommend a free anti-virus for that ... MSE, Avira 10 or Avast5).

You can download x64 Windows 7 Home Premium off MS websites to my knowledge for free, and use your OEM key at the back of the laptop/netbook to activate it.
As I said earlier, OEM keys (the one coming at the sticker on the back of a laptop) are interchangeable between x86 and x64 OS-es, provided they are the same edition (such as Home Premium in your case).

Just backup your necessary files to a separate partition or usb dongle, download and burn Win 7 Home Premium x64 off the Internet, and just do a fresh install of it on the C drive (overriding the existing installation).

If you want to do this process and are uncertain of some details, feel free to ask questions (if you have any).

 

[Robert Maxwell]

Thanks for that, Deks. Very informative. Should be useful to anyone else who wants to upgrade to a 64-bit version of their OS.

Can we stop with the "x64" business, though? There is no such thing as "x64". It's x86_64.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

Thanks for that, Deks. Very informative. Should be useful to anyone else who wants to upgrade to a 64-bit version of their OS.

Can we stop with the "x64" business, though? There is no such thing as "x64". It's x86_64.

 

[Deks]

Thanks for that, Deks. Very informative. Should be useful to anyone else who wants to upgrade to a 64-bit version of their OS.

Can we stop with the "x64" business, though? There is no such thing as "x64". It's x86_64.

There is such a thing as x64 (used by Microsoft itself when you modify Windows install DVD to show ALL Windows for install ... only 'x64' is used to mark the editions)
Plus, where I go online (www.notebookreview.com), we usually use it to describe a 64bit OS (which is such by default, but we also keep in mind the fact the system contains 32bit folder for software written in that code - resulting in higher demand of hdd space compared to just the 32bit).
It's a valid way to segregate the two.
Even MS uses it.

But, let's dispense with minor technicalities and personal use of terms.


P.S. One final thing ... make sure you check that your cpu is x64 compatible. You can google it and seeing the specs (should be good though)

 

[Robert Maxwell]

Thanks for that, Deks. Very informative. Should be useful to anyone else who wants to upgrade to a 64-bit version of their OS.

Can we stop with the "x64" business, though? There is no such thing as "x64". It's x86_64.

There is such a thing as x64 (used by Microsoft itself when you modify Windows install DVD to show ALL Windows for install ... only 'x64' is used to mark the editions)
Plus, where I go online (www.notebookreview.com), we usually use it to describe a 64bit OS (which is such by default, but we also keep in mind the fact the system contains 32bit folder for software written in that code - resulting in higher demand of hdd space compared to just the 32bit).
It's a valid way to segregate the two.
Even MS uses it.

But, let's dispense with minor technicalities and personal use of terms.


P.S. One final thing ... make sure you check that your cpu is x64 compatible. You can google it and seeing the specs (should be good though)

I already checked when you first suggested it. The N330 has the 64-bit instruction set, so she's good to go.

I just find "x64" a rather nonsensical shorthand. Call me a pedant if you like. Just because Microsoft does it wrong doesn't mean everybody else should follow.

 

[Chaos Descending]

It's no more nonsensical than any other arbitrary nomenclature. Calling it "x86_64" is equally silly, since no one has used x86 architecture (8086, 80386, 80486) in many years.