256MB@133Mhz or 384MB@100Mhz?

[Undertow]

What would be better? I have a 128MB PC100 DIMM and next week will have a 256MB PC133 DIMM, would it be best to mix them and run at 100Mhz, or just the 256 running at 133Mhz?

[Barney]

Ofcourse,you could TRY what will work better/faster!

Ronald

[Stan]

Hi...

Well, it all depends on what you want to do and the spec of your system...

If you are running Windows 98/ME, then stick with 256MB. You will not see any difference between 256 and 384.

Now, if your system is based on a 100MHz FSB (and if you are not o'clinkg it), you will not see any gain by using 133MHz SDRAM.

Please give us more info re: your system and how you use it !

Thanks

Stan

[seti]

There's very few situations where the average 9x user won't have wasted his or her money by buying over 128mb of ram.

I got about a 10% boost in performance by using 128mb pc133 2-2-2 over 256mb pc100 3-3-3.

[Warthog]

I heard that Windows has trouble handling memory higher than 128mb. That means that the speed difference between, say, 64mb and 128mb will be greater than between 128 and 256 or 256 and 512.

Warthog

[Erap!]

I dont think you'll see any difference between having 256 or 400 ram. just buy 7ns or 7.5 ns ram and stick to 100 mhz (bx440 chipset motherboard of course) cuz the transfer rate is a lot better. the 133mhz via chipsets arent really that good.