OT - tech help Upgrade Q6600

Back to post

Comments

vicmilt wrote on 5/12/2010, 2:07 PM
Wow... what a lot of information and knowledge.

Well I took all proffered advice and here's what they have installed:
2 pair of matched sticks for a total of 8GM RAM
PC 6400 (whatever that means, but I think it's good)

Now I just have to finish the job that's already in the machine, and then I'm replacing my OS drive with a 500 SATA and installing Windows 7 64 bit.

Since that's essentially the same rig as my buddy (as in I've actually SEEN HIS FACE!) John Roman, I have high hopes.

Thank you one and all for advice and a wonderful education. Even after all these years, moving from 8x10 Black and White photography (because that was basically the main "professional" gear available - to 35mm color, to 35mm movie stock, to 1" C, to BetaSP, to AVID "offline", to MC4000, to DV (and Vegas 3 enters here) - to the present - yikes - it's been a long trip - well, even after all of that - I'm STILL interested in the technology - although we're a LONG WAY from "reticulated film stock".

What a wonderful time we all live in.

v
srode wrote on 5/13/2010, 4:21 AM
I wouldnt' worry about RAM Speed - my experience with Vegas it make zero difference on anything - at least not noticable - the total size of your RAM matters, not speed.
Kevin R wrote on 5/13/2010, 5:52 AM
@srode,

I would simply argue that it's a waste to put in 800 MHz or 1066 MHz RAM if you're going to leave in your original 667 MHz RAM which will slow down your new RAM.

I've seen a lot of people here advocating for crazy amounts of RAM (>8 GB). Has anyone actually used Task Manager or Process Explorer (sysinternals.com) to see under what conditions Vegas x64 will take advantage of that amount of RAM? I'm certain it is possible, but question what sort of use actually calls for such a system. And I'd prefer to hear that someone has actually verified it, not just believes it.

Does RAM usage skyrocket more with heavy effects, lots of tracks, compressed render codecs, or high bandwidth sources? I rendered the HD render test and it only used 800 MB at its peak.
craftech wrote on 5/13/2010, 6:30 AM
I would simply argue that it's a waste to put in 800 MHz or 1066 MHz RAM if you're going to leave in your original 667 MHz RAM which will slow down your new RAM.

Kevin,

What he said was:

2 pair of matched sticks for a total of 8GM RAM

In other words four 2 GB DDR2 800 sticks. They obviously removed the 667 MHz ram as there are only four slots.

John
Kevin R wrote on 5/13/2010, 7:45 AM
John,

I think the 4 x 2GB decision is solid.

I was responding to srode saying not to worry about RAM speed. That's a fair statement, but you should worry about it enough to understand that if you leave existing slow RAM in your system it will negate the addition of faster RAM.
srode wrote on 5/13/2010, 5:21 PM
Kevin, I guess my point was when starting from scratch, don't spend a bunch of coins for high speed ram thinking you will see benefits in Vegas as you won't, maybe in other applications it will help but not here. I think it's always nice to match RAM - for sure pairs should be matched, but I also think it's important to match exact sticks of 4 or 6 when you can too.

As for where the extra ram helps, it's when using 64 bit Vegas and building dynamic ram preview - a person can get proportionately longer ram previews with more ram. 8GB of ram will allow 2x what 4GB of available RAM will, 24Gb of RAM will give 6X what 4GB will etc. Dynamic Ram preview is helpful with seeing realtime previews with lots of effects or complex transitions. I use my 8GB often for this and wish I had more, but haven't wanted to spend the money ..... yet
Kevin R wrote on 5/13/2010, 8:16 PM
srode, How many seconds of preview do you get for 8 GB? If you change the project to 8-bit for editing do you get more preview time?
srode wrote on 5/14/2010, 4:17 AM
with AVCHD going to HD 1080 60i non-progressive scan I get 25 seconds in 32bit and 66 seconds in 8 bit.