[PLUG] Memory configuration question

[John Meissen]

kingbeowulf at gmail.com said:
> 
> I agree with Rick.  Just pop in 3x4GB sticks into the empty slots.  You
> won't notice the speed mismatch. BUT...
> 
> More importantly, performance will be governed by how your kernel was
> compiled for memory utilization (memory paging).  If using a 32-bit
> kernel compiled as a desktop, you most likely were not ever using any
> memory above 4GB.  However, you may want to investigate the following
> before buying RAM:
> 
> 1. The bigger bang for you buck is to first convert everything to
> 64-bit.  That way, you will use all your available memory.
> 
> 2. Consider a modern GPU, such as Nvidia, to off load video processing.
>  Modern GPUs encode/decode one hell of a lot faster than any CPU.
> 
> 3. If you are using UBUNTU, well...let just say pure Debian, Mint, and a
> few other Debian distros are much faster.
> 
> 4. Consider larger, faster Hard drives, maybe even SSD.  No matter how
> much RAM you have, you will still be HD speed limited. Optimize your
> HD/partition scheme: I use a second SATA drive for storing/processing.
> 
> 5. Use hdparm/sdparm to optimize your hard drive.
> 
> 6. File system: ext2/3/4 vs XFS vs BtrFS.  Remember, HD partitions do
> not need to be all the same file system.
> 
> I am surprised by you statement the 64-bit video processing was not
> available when you bought the core-i7 920.  That CPU was released end of
> 2008.  I was running full 64-bit before 2005 on an Athlon64 single core
> - All audio and video processing was in 64bit.
> 

We're getting WAY off-track now. I just need more memory. Period. I'm just 
trying to figure out the best way to do it.

You notice I never mentioned the OS. It's 64-bit Windows, not Linux. I had my 
reasons. I've been a hard-core Linux user since something like 1995 (and Unix 
before/since), but that doesn't mean I exclude other systems.

You can argue Linux/Open Source all you want, but those video tools weren't 
and still aren't mature enough. I want plug-and-play. Trust me, I spent a 
lot of time looking at all the options (Windows/Mac/Linux/Open Source/
Commercial). 

64-bit Windows applications were available then, but I also had (and still have)
a budget. Back then the 64-bit software was the pro versions that cost as much
as or more than the hardware I put together, so I had to compromise. But now 
the consumer version of the software I have is 64-bit, so I have the 
opportunity to take advantage of the extra memory.

Everything else I have is currently "fast enough". The software is 
multithreaded, and uses all 8 processor threads. And the 1366 core-i7 with the 
triple-channel memory is still a kick-ass system. If I need more, I can
upgrade the GPU since the newer software now has hooks to use the later GPUs
for mpeg encoding. But that's also a trade-off.... I have the card I use 
now specifically because it's fanless - I spent a lot of time/money trying 
to make these systems as quiet as possible since at the moment I have 5 
desktop boxes and a laptop sitting here. I don't recall seeing any current-gen 
graphics cards that use passive cooling.

I suppose it's not worth spending much more time thinking about. I have a 
coupon code for 10% off memory at NewEgg, so I guess I'll just go ahead and get 
the 3x4G of 1333 RAM, and see if I can find a home for the old 1066 sticks.

Thanks for all the feedback and comments.

john-