more RAM decreasing performance

[Serith]

So I decided to upgrade my ram for all the upcoming games over the next few months, going from 2 gigs, to 6 gigs because it is so cheap.

So I had 2 corsair 1 gig memory chips at 800hz, and I bought 2 more corsair 2 gig chips, same deal, just more memory each.

The new ones have a different latency, but my motherboard bios has a really good auto detect for that and I utilize that.

here's the deal.

That was my lowest score on my windows index (vista 64) at a 5.7. When I installed 3 times as much of the same memory, it actually dropped my index score to 5.4!

so then I tweaked a little, tried to change all the latency stuff to the new chipset... it started bluescreening with the new memory.... so I changed the virtual memory to 6300 (6 gigs plus 300 as per suggested.), and I got it back up to 5.6, and I kep tweaking here and there but I cant get it back to what I had with 1/3rd of the ram!

what the hell? anyone else experience this problem?

[Rosuav]

I don't know what this score is, but I'll assume for now that it's fair. What you might have is lower-speed RAM dragging the clock speed down. The mobo is autoadjusting to the lowest memory speed - and it'll have to use that speed even for the faster chips. Your original memory was clocking at 800MHz; what's your new? 667MHz? If so, you've probably just lost 133MHz off your original 2GB.

[Kerrida]

Ros is right on the money there.. as would be expected. One other thing is, do you have the memory that is alike on the same channels? I assume that it is a dual channel mobo. If so, look up the ifo on your mobo and find out exactly which channels are paired. That may help.

The other possibility is the different memory types not playing well together in that mobo. There are a lot of motherboards out there that will pitch an absolute fit if you mix ram. Even if it is the exact same type down to part number, it can throw things off due to differences in manufacturing materials. What I mean by that is they could have gotten a new shipment of, the chips could be slightly different. This is a problem I see a lot in my working with computers

Because of this, many times you are going to be better off buying fresh stuff when upgrading your ram. This helps to ensure that the manufacture dates are relatively close, so variances in the production are less likely to be much, if any, difference.

Hope that helps!

[Serith]

No, I bought all the same spec memory, all at 800, which is the max my mobo can bus. I have installed them paired right, and actually have tried every combination, and still it lowers the score.

the score is actually awesome, I think 5.9 is the max, or at least it was, but as a min/max'er at heart, I want 5.9 on my memory score god damnit!

As far as installing "fresh" memory, even if I take out the old 2 gigs completely, and put in the new 4 gigs, it lowers the score.

Again, same manufacturer, same speed, just different sizes. And Ive run memchecks and other diagnostics on the chips and they check out just fine.

I googled the issue and its an extremely common question with tons of people, there's just no good explanations or solutions out there that I can find!

Im suspecting this is a vista issue, on how it allocates processes to memory, and how it deals with virtual memory and stuff like that. Remember that Vista 32 wont even recognize any RAM past 3 gigs no matter what your system can use onboard. But again, there are very few vista guru's responding to the issue online..

[Loigan]

Yeah, I'd say it's a Vista Issue. It reminds me of the issue I heard about with the Graphics Card I bought...

I got the GeForce 9600 GT, and I heard that on a vista machine, it pretty much maxes out the Graphics Rating, however, if you upgrade to the newest nVidia driver, your rating drops significantly.

Doesn't effect me, I'm on XP still though.

[Deokoria]

I talked to a friend about this, and he said your real problem may be listening to the Vista benchmark system, which is a pathetic measuring tool. Instead grab a free third-party tool like SiSoft Sandra or PCmark and use them to run your tests. If they still are showing the original setup to be superior, tell Corsair you want replacements. Corsair is pretty top-notch - if you send them in records from Sandra showing the 2GB outperforming the 6GB (or even the 4GB), you shouldn't have any problems getting new chips. However, they're not gonna take those Vista results to mean anything.

[Serith]

sweet, Ill give those programs a whirl and let you know how it turns out.

[Rosuav]

Originally posted by Deokoria
I talked to a friend about this, and he said your real problem may be listening to the Vista benchmark system, which is a pathetic measuring tool.

Without any experience with it, I'd still be inclined to agree. Although it's a cascaded problem... the root problem is that you're using Vista.

[Loigan]

Yeah, just from the Service Work I've done on Vista Machines, I can tell you the whole rating thing is pretty usless.