RAM Upgrade advice please!

[Tyger]

So my PC has 12GB RAM, but can support max 16GB so looking to upgrade some of the RAM, used a website's scanner program to check my system, but it returned a few options, and I'm really not sure what the differences are.

My spec is i7 2600 @ 3.40Ghz running Win7 64 bit, 12GB RAM (apparently arranged 2/4/2/4), GTX 760 graphics card. Looking to swap out the 2GB cards with 4GB ones, I guess the ones I already have are pretty bog standard shipped with my Dell, so which of these might be preferable, also what is the best way to arrange the RAM eg. Stock/Stock/New/New, as all will eventually be 4GB?

 

[TB]

What speed (1600, 1866, etc) are the two 4Gb sticks you're keeping? If I'm not mistaken, RAM operates at the lowest speed of the group so short of "I'm planning on switching out the 4Gb later, too" there's no point in paying for faster memory.

I think.

 

[Tyger]

What speed (1600, 1866, etc) are the two 4Gb sticks you're keeping? If I'm not mistaken, RAM operates at the lowest speed of the group so short of "I'm planning on switching out the 4Gb later, too" there's no point in paying for faster memory.

I think.

That kinda makes sense, will check that then update =)

EDIT: That said, presumably I could still get 1866 and it might run 1600 overall for now, then I swap out the other two for 1866 later? That would offer me some nice flexibility. Or would they not co-operate at all if they are rated at different speeds?

 

[Harry6784]

Do you *need* more RAM? More ram doesn't necessarily make your computer faster, if that's your goal. Better to invest in a SSD as they are really coming down in price.

 

[RX-7_FD3S]

Not sure what you are doing with your computer but 12 gb should be enough.

 

[Tyger]

I eventually went for a full set of the 1600 1.35V sticks, as the stock ones I have now are 1333. I think I should see some improvement and didn't cost the earth. I am looking at getting an SSD also but have never installed/reinstalled Windows so there's that to consider. You guys will most likely say it's a breeze

 

[Grayfox]

You wont even notice a speed increase from 1333Mhz to 1600Mhz
As for SSDs.

You have 3 main types.

SATA based.
M.2 based
PCIe based.

SATA is the slowest of the 3 but still fast enough for daily work
M.2 and PCIe both run on the PCIe bus.

M.2 are the smaller devices which are normally screw into a M.2 port on the motherboard if it has it, but a PCIe drive that is 250GB is not all that expensive but will be pretty fast since it is going though the PCIe bus and not the SATA bus.

 

[Tyger]

Thanks for the info, the PSU I recently fitted (as I needed it for the GTX 760, which was an upgrade) had an additional SATA connection so thought it would just be a case of plugging it in then installing the OS. Now you tell me there are faster ways to connect so will need to see if mine has those. Presumably running windows and games off a SATA-based SSD will still be a lot faster than the regular HD I have now?

 

[AOS-]

Yes it will be faster. We'll know if you can take something faster than SATA SSD if you can identify what motherboard you have.

 

[Tyger]

Will look into it some more but I think I can only use a SATA connection. However, I do now want to go along this route as they have indeed come down a ton in price.

This leads to some more noobish questions, as although I've tinkered with my PCs in various ways over the years, I've never had to install or reinstall an operating system

I think my PC shipped with some slightly proprietary looking discs containing Windows 7, though possibly nothing at all, just preinstalled (I will dig around this weekend)

So if I want to install Win7 on the SSD, does this have to be done from media, or can it recognise I already have it and a licence key on my regular HD, allowing me to install it also on the SSD?

My plan is to get an SSD at around 450GB and run Windows from that, as well as certain games that need installation and will benefit from the speedier disc access. Can I effectively run the two drives in tandem, and each will have their "Program Files" folders and whatnot, or would I need to demote the older, larger HD to just storage only (I have a ton of music, movies etc so that wouldn't be a big hardship)?

Sorry for what might seem like simple questions, just not something I've ever had to do!

 

[Grayfox]

Will look into it some more but I think I can only use a SATA connection. However, I do now want to go along this route as they have indeed come down a ton in price.

So if I want to install Win7 on the SSD, does this have to be done from media, or can it recognise I already have it and a licence key on my regular HD, allowing me to install it also on the SSD?

My plan is to get an SSD at around 450GB and run Windows from that, as well as certain games that need installation and will benefit from the speedier disc access. Can I effectively run the two drives in tandem, and each will have their "Program Files" folders and whatnot, or would I need to demote the older, larger HD to just storage only (I have a ton of music, movies etc so that wouldn't be a big hardship)?

If you have a spare PCIe 4x slot you can get this sort of thing.
It is not that expensive when you compare it to the other PCIe type SSDs
https://www.pccasegear.com/products/31655/kingston-hyperx-predator-pci-express-480gb-ssd
There is also a 250GB option

To install windows on an SSD, treat it as any normal HDD.

Put in windows discs, boot off DVD, and tell it to install on the SSD.
It is best to disconnect any other drive to prevent any issues.

 

[Sanji Himura]

EDIT: That said, presumably I could still get 1866 and it might run 1600 overall for now, then I swap out the other two for 1866 later? That would offer me some nice flexibility. Or would they not co-operate at all if they are rated at different speeds?

It is for precisely that reason that I would recommend that you replace all of the RAM (including the 4 GB sticks as well) for faster RAM all at once if you can afford it. Memory prices are getting relatively cheaper, especially DDR3 RAM, so you could easily get all of the RAM that you would need at a relatively affordable price (~£65 for the 1866)

 

[Tyger]

It is for precisely that reason that I would recommend that you replace all of the RAM (including the 4 GB sticks as well) for faster RAM all at once if you can afford it. Memory prices are getting relatively cheaper, especially DDR3 RAM, so you could easily get all of the RAM that you would need at a relatively affordable price (~£65 for the 1866)

See my post a few above, that's exactly what I did, though the stock sticks were 1333 so swapped them all out for 1600 4GB sticks. With the other upgrades I've done recently (and a defrag which always helps boot up speeds, for a while at least) I am noticing the difference, though once I've installed the SSD it should be a significant step up again.

 

[Grayfox]

See my post a few above, that's exactly what I did, though the stock sticks were 1333 so swapped them all out for 1600 4GB sticks. With the other upgrades I've done recently (and a defrag which always helps boot up speeds, for a while at least) I am noticing the difference, though once I've installed the SSD it should be a significant step up again.

Just make sure you never defrag an SSD or do those "Optimisations"

 

[Tyger]

Just make sure you never defrag an SSD or do those "Optimisations"

Thanks for the heads up, I did read that someplace but would otherwise would probably not have known, yikes.

 

[Grayfox]

Thanks for the heads up, I did read that someplace but would otherwise would probably not have known, yikes.

Reason is an SSD has so many writes it can perform to the memory modules.
Since a Defrag will move a file from one part of the drive and then back to another, the extra writes will end up shortening the life span of a drive much faster and you wont notice a nano second in performance increase as the drive just calls for the files starting from sectors x-x,y-y,z-z, ect all at once.
And if you look at the layout of an SSD you will see files all over the place which is normal for an SSD as well as the SSD controller will write equally to the NAND flash modules inside so they all wear at an even rate.

 

[BobK]

Besides, a defrag accomplishes nothing whatsoever on an SSD (other than unnecessary wear as @Grayfox points out). That's because the purpose of defragging is to minimize head movement (to put it very simplistically; in actuality it's more complicated than that). An SSD has no heads to move; having just read sector #1 for example, it can then select sector #124823 as quickly as sector #2.

 

[Darla Starch]

Also remember to leave around a tenth of the drive capacity empty.....I think. Am I right?

 

[BobK]

Also remember to leave around a tenth of the drive capacity empty.....I think. Am I right?

Indeed you are.

 

[Grayfox]

Indeed you are.

I push mine to 2% free space.
LOL.

 

[Tyger]

Thanks for the tips all, makes sense that an SSD doesn't struggle to "find" data as a magnetic disc might, hence the data on it can be all over the place.