generic ram...

  • Thread starter Thread starter johnnypraze
  • Start date Start date
If you're using a system that's using PC133 EDO RAM, I'd say stop wasting money on RAM and save up for a new computer!

You're spending money on an extremely outdated system.
 
Im not sure what EDO means...?

Im running XP, so I need more ram.

All I know is my PC (compaq 1.2 athlon) has slots for PC100 SDRAM...

So is my PC "outdated" or did I post a link to the wrong Ram...?
 
The question of upgrade or new is a tricky subject. It usually boils down to what you want to do with it.

I have both high end and low end PCs. I find good uses for each. Low end PCs are slow, but a little memory and they can make good file and print servers, as well as a local web host or mail server.

If however you're doing software development, then you need horsepower and RAM is not enough. Music recording is also an intensive task based approach, and power really does help.

Ed
 
Its funny, 2 years ago when I bought my PC it was right at the top concerning performance, and if you had 1ghz+ you had all the power you needed for home recording.

Now that we're in the day of 3ghz+, a 1.2 ghz PC can no longer achieve the same results it did 2 years ago...???

Ive never had a problem when recording with this system, and I thought itd just be nice to have the extra headroom with 512MB of RAM vs. my current 256. Im certainly not gonna buy a new PC every year.

So....

Does a cheaper brand of RAM, like the one posted above, affect performance to the point that I need to spend twice as much?
 
I've never had any problems with generic (no brand) RAM.
The problem with your computer is it's using PC100 SD ram which is pretty slow by today's standards (dual channel DDR RAM upto around 400MHz, which is PC3200).

If you are still happy with your computer's speed then just upgrade the RAM. If you're complaining about latency and dropouts then think about replacing the whole thing.

Last year before I built my current PC I was using our old Compaq 2255 for uni work. It has a 300MHz cpu, only 32MB of PC66! ram and a 3.2gig hard disk. I bought another 32MB of RAM for $12 Australian from ebay and a faster 20gig hard disk and it made an unbelieveable difference in the speed of the thing. Only costed AU$142 which I think was worth it for what I was using the computer for.
 
johnnypraze said:
Its funny, 2 years ago when I bought my PC it was right at the top concerning performance, and if you had 1ghz+ you had all the power you needed for home recording.

Now that we're in the day of 3ghz+, a 1.2 ghz PC can no longer achieve the same results it did 2 years ago...???

Ive never had a problem when recording with this system, and I thought itd just be nice to have the extra headroom with 512MB of RAM vs. my current 256. Im certainly not gonna buy a new PC every year.

So....

Does a cheaper brand of RAM, like the one posted above, affect performance to the point that I need to spend twice as much?
Click to expand...

The general rule of thumb is that if clock speeds are now twice as fast as what you currently have, its time to upgrade.
 
The purpose of computers is to run software. If you are happy with your software and its performance, you don't need a new PC.

I'm running a 750MHz machine w/256MB RAM, and Win98SE. It can do everything I need it to. Since it ain't broke, I won't fix it. But if I could slap some more RAM and disk space for not much $, I'd do that.

I'll upgrade when I need to do something I can't do now.
 
brzilian said:
The general rule of thumb is that if clock speeds are now twice as fast as what you currently have, its time to upgrade.
Click to expand...

This is a good measure of when the difference might matter, but not when to upgrade.

As apl said, it bolls down to what you do, what you need, and whether what you've got can do that or not.

A old friend said it well: "Better is the enemy of good enough...".

The processing power and efficienty of a PC is not affected by the availability of other better gear.

Ed
 
The problem (or not a problem) is that with the development of new processors and new OS's etc, comes the development of software that is designed to run on more powerful processors and OS's.

Take a look at the minimum requirements these days on new software and then look at the recommended requirements of that software....In my experience, I'd want my system to be closer to the recommended requirements than the minimum, or else I'm going to have performance issues.

But like apl said..If your happy with what you got then that's fine.

But not upgrading your hardware is going to limit your software choices in the future.
 
All true. However the average PC user rarely adds much software to their system after the first month or two of use.

It's surprising how many only do a handful of things like Web, EMail, and word processing.

Since modern PCs come with all these tools pre-installed, many leave it that way for the duration of ownership.

Where this really changes is with kids, and the never ending cycle of PC games.

Ed
 
As apl said, it bolls down to what you do, what you need, and whether what you've got can do that or not...

...All true. However the average PC user rarely adds much software to their system after the first month or two of use.
Click to expand...

Uh, hello????

Since when are the members of this forum "average" users?

We are all here because we use our PC with highly specialized software and hardware that the "mainstream" doesn't.

Anyobdy who doesn't realize that and wants to do DAW work witout making somekind of investment into their system is only setting themselves up for lots frustration and most likely failure.

Where this really changes is with kids, and the never ending cycle of PC games.
Click to expand...

Are you trying to tell me DAW work is less demanding than gaming? Give me a break.
 
No, not a all. Just discussing PC use in general, which came up earlier.

Clearly DAW folks are not normal in this area, and DAW use is much more intensive.

Ed
 
Hey, the PC fits the use and application. If someone's happy running Cakewalk 1.0 on a 486 then fine. Specing a PC before the software is putting the cart before the horse.

Yeah, if I was running 40+ tracks, MIDI, plug-ins out the wazzoo, I'd need more computing horsepower. But I don't. So I can run my very run of the mill PC with very acceptable results.

Again, my application and use drives the PC decision.
 
In reply to your upgrade question, if it ain't broke don't fix. By quality memory, generic memory is not worth the potential problems and potential time lost to troubleshooting. I have to upgrade often because i have a commercial studio. Dude, like you don't have a trippin' G5? But for home don't worry unless you've hit a performance ceiling. I know people still running atari computers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top