First off, I submit to the forum that Stonez was right. 1 Gig is a lot better then 512Mb. Put it in your sig

After reading tarentinos upgrade thread I decided to upgrade the Ram in both my fiance's and my own computers. I did some basic benchmarking afterword to see if I actually spent my money well. Of coarse, using my system for 10 minutes surfing the web ( I usually have about 30 tabs open at any given moment), has already proven it was WELL WORTH THE UPGRADE.

I am not a professional reviewer nor a benchmark gamer. So I just used games I play a lot. I went from 2x256 Corsair XMS 2-2-2-5 DDR333 to 2X512 Corsair Value Select 2.5-3-3-8 DDR400 (at DDR33 speeds though). For the benchmarks I reduced the latency of the XMS to the same as the Value Select.

Rig: AthlonXP 2600 Throughbred, Asus A7N8X Deluxe, WD Raptor 74GB, 9800PRO 256bit 128MB AGP card.


Resolution 512MbFPS/1GBFPS 4XAA/8XAF 512MBFPS/1GBFPS

Doom 3 Ultra TimeDemo1

640x480 37/49 4XAA/8XAF 35/39
1024x768 27/30 4XAA/8XAF 19/22
1600x1200 11/16 4XAA/8XAF 9/10

Doom 3 Medium TimeDemo1

640x480 61/62 4XAA/8XAF 46/46
1024x768 47/47 4XAA/8XAF 27/27 (odd, I know)
1600x1200 20/21 4XAA/8XAF 12/12

I rounded the decimals off because I simply don't care. But basically the benchmarks only tell one small part of the story. The game ran MUCH more fluidly. The stutters that were present with 512MB vanished with the RAM upgrade. The game smoothed out more then the number suggest.

Unreal Tournament 2004

Resolution 512MbFPS/1GBFPS 4XAA/8XAF 512MBFPS/1GBFPS

UT2004 UTMARK Torlan w/ 12bots on Highest Graphics settings

640x480 61/66 4XAA/8XAF 56/66
1024x768 65/66 4XAA/8XAF 60/60
1600x1200 25/26 4XAA/8XAF 25/26

These numbers don't seem to show that much of gain. But again, what you don't see is how much smoother the game is. There simply WAS NO STUTTERING in the 1GB system. Seriously, it was much much much smoother. I recall seeing minimum frame rates of 1 and 2 FPS on the 512MB system. The 1GB rig has minimums were between 8 and 10. Much better.

Some of you might be saying that the Cas 2 512MB might be faster then the Cas 2.5 1GB. So I ran the numbers same setting as before.

640x480 54/61 4XAA/8XAF 61/56
1024x768 64/65 4XAA/8XAF 60/60
1600x1200 24/26 4XAA/8XAF 26/25

Again, the numbers don't show the gain of smoothness going to 1GB. Let me say this now, in actual play, Cas 2.5 1GB absolutely smokes Cas 2 512mb. Again the minimum frame rates mirrored the previous benchmark

I did game level load tests with BF1942. Here I can simply tell you that number don't lie. I loaded a single player level with max bots and AI.

LEVEL 512MB Load/ 1GB Load (in seconds)

El Alamen 42/19
Stalingrad 36/17

Read the numbers. Nuff said.


I also upgraded my fiance's from 256MB to 512MB of Corsair Value Select Cas 2.5 DDR400. Huge benefits here.

Rig: Barton 2500 @3200, Shuttle AN35ULTRA, Ti-4200 64MB, 30GB 7200RPM HD.

Resolution 256MBFPS/512MBFPS 4XAA/8XAF 256MBFPS/512MBFPS

UT2004 UTMARK Torlan w/ 12bots on Highest Graphics settings

640x480 42/72 4XAA/8XAF 22/30
1024x768 36/50 4XAA/8XAF 10/11
1600x1200 20/23 4XAA/8XAF 06/06


If you haven't upgraded, do it. It's the best $99 you'll spend. Multitasking is MUCH smoother, games load much faster and play more fluidly, and everything from OpenOffice to Windows load more quickly.