I was looking at the pictures of your new computer this morning and noticed you installed the DIMM's in a non-dual channel configurarion. Was that on purpose? And if so, can you explain why? Otherwise, unless your ASUS board had different directions, the modules should be placed in A1 + A2(Black + Black)for dual channel operation. Your picture shows them in A1 + B1(Black + Yellow). Just an observation.
How-To Geek Forums » Windows Vista
Geeks New Computer, Memory Configuration not Dual Channel
(20 posts)
I miss spoke, the picture shows you populated A1 + A2, in section 2.4.2 of the manual A1 + B1 is the Dual Channel configuration if you only populate 2 of the 4 slots. But the point is moot if you are going to populate them all. Are you running Vista 64bit? or a Linux Distro? That thing should scream. Great site and Forum. I personally appreciate your work on the site. Thanks.
I looked in the manual, you are correct... I figured it wasn't too important since I'm just waiting for the rest to come in the mail =)
I'm running Vista 64-bit, and it's screaming fast... I wanted more memory so I can run more virtual machines at the same time. The quad-core is awesome... I changed the affinity so vmware runs on two CPUs, which keeps my regular system from slowing down while running the virtual machines
We were discussing dual channel memory in another thread and I went to Wikipedia to look for references. They have a pointer to an article from Tom's Hardware Group that says there is little benefit to dual channel memory configurations in the benchmarks they used:
http://www.tomshardware.com/20.....age11.html
It makes me wonder if the whole dual channel thing is a marketing scheme to get everyone to buy 2 DIMMs instead of 1. Have we all been duped? The idea of dual channel sounds good on paper, but I've seen plenty of sounds-good-on-paper ideas that are just hype.
With benchmarks it is like with statistics - you first define the result and then you pick the samples accordingly. Dual channels must be faster - but not neccessarily in all instances. It's like with my new Intel Q6600 quad. I thought it would be faster than a duo core in all cases - not so. For e.g. the installation of SP1 it took nearly twice as much time than my AMD duo core.
@InDiSent: I simply used task manager to set them... but you could modify the shortcut to run all of vmware with a separate affinity, I imagine:
http://www.howtogeek.com/howto.....ows-vista/
I haven't checked to see if that will run the virtual machines themselves that way. I need to look into this more... setting it manually worked out fine for me =)
I checked some of my processes. Affinity is always assigned to all 4 processors. Is it the task manager now that decides to which processor to assign a process and how good a job does it do?
BTW: Isn't it dumb that the processors (cores) always start counting with 0 and everybody else starts with 1.
Everything internally in programming terms starts with 0, although I suppose they could have changed the UI to be more user-friendly.
Windows determines all of the threading and processor usage allocation internally, you can just change some of the settings from task manager if you want.
Reply
You must log in to post.
