Memory performance: CAS2 & CAS3

[coyote]

Currently I have 2 backs of PC133 Mushkin rev 1.5 2-2-2 ram, adding up to 256 MBs. As cheap as ram is now, it would be a shame not to up the amount.

The question is, which would yield higher performance:
1. Add additional 256MB of CAS2 ram (same type)
2. Add additional 512MB of CAS3 ram

Regarding the last item...the point here is, will adding more slower memory boost the performance more than less memory at the same CAS rating of 2-2-2.

[coyote]

Ok, maybe I was a little wordy. I guess the basic question is for PC133 ram:

Is it better to have 512mb of CAS3 versus 256mb of CAS2 @ 133mhz.

[The Highlander]

Its better to have 256 cas2. Windows 9x will never use anything above 256 and 256 should be enough... I ran my pc with 128mb a LOOOONG time, till I bought a 1600x3200dpi scanner and there i needed more... but anyways I was using win2k pro that does use more than 256

Cas2 is a lot faster than cas3

Unless you need it badly the total mem I'd suggest you go with 256cas2

[Molochi]

Win98SE will use 512mb just fine. Though 98se goes a little nuts with disk cache, this is pretty easily fixed. Using more than 512mb with w98se is discussed in the ms knowledge base, and is not recomended.

Most programs, however don't need that much (more than 256mb) memory. Keeping your memory running at Cas2-2-2 with 256mb means that any time you don't need the extra ram your system will run faster and any time it does need more than 256mb it will swap to your HDD.

Going with 512mb Cas3-3-3 means that your data throughput (and by extension benchmarks/fps) will be a little slower but your system will almost never use the swapfile.