Vista - Experience Index of RAM extremely low

A week or two ago - after upgrading my 2.0GHz PIV HP Vectra that 'had' 1.5GB
RAM - I questioned here why I only had a 1.8 experience index for memory
(RAM). Someone responded that "perhaps it is because the RAM is old" - and I
thought - OK - I have had it for several years and although I've never heard
of it "getting old" - I decided to replace it with 3 1GB DIMM modules (I
bought the ones recommended by HP for this machine). Today I switched from
the 'old' 1.5GB DIMM to the 'new' 3 - 1GB DIMM modules (total of 3GB now) -
rebooted the PC and updated my Experience Index and - it didn't change at all
- still a 1.8 Subscore for memory. So, what else comes into play here to give
me such a lousy subscore on memory with brand new 3 GB DIMM modules?

Dennis wrote:
> A week or two ago - after upgrading my 2.0GHz PIV HP Vectra that
> 'had' 1.5GB RAM - I questioned here why I only had a 1.8 experience
> index for memory (RAM). Someone responded that "perhaps it is because
> the RAM is old" - and I thought - OK - I have had it for several
> years and although I've never heard of it "getting old" - I decided
> to replace it with 3 1GB DIMM modules (I bought the ones recommended
> by HP for this machine). Today I switched from the 'old' 1.5GB DIMM
> to the 'new' 3 - 1GB DIMM modules (total of 3GB now) - rebooted the
> PC and updated my Experience Index and - it didn't change at all -
> still a 1.8 Subscore for memory. So, what else comes into play here
> to give me such a lousy subscore on memory with brand new 3 GB DIMM
> modules?

That does seem like a strange score, rather lower than I'd expect.

I'd suspect/hope that when someone talked about the RAM being "old" they
were referring to it using an older and slower technology, rather than the
physical age of the particular items installed in your machine.

Do you know what type of RAM you're using? And the model number of your HP
computer? If you can post those then perhaps someone with experience of this
particular machine can comment (perhaps a bios setting is set at the wrong
level for good performance).

A quick search for HP Vectra with a 2.0Ghz PIV shows a "VL8" model from 2001
(http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,28619,00.asp). Is this the sort of
computer you have, or a similar one? If so then I'd suspect performance
problems might be due to the age of the computer and of the technology
inside it. A lot has happened to processors, motherboards, and memory since
then.

--
Robert Moir
http://www.rhymeswithgeek.com

Some memory types are faster if installed in pairs (and in the right
sockets - see your manual). 3 chips will have the same speed as one chip.
"Robert Moir" <robspamtrap@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:OPmWMJuUHHA.4872@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Dennis wrote:
>> A week or two ago - after upgrading my 2.0GHz PIV HP Vectra that
>> 'had' 1.5GB RAM - I questioned here why I only had a 1.8 experience
>> index for memory (RAM). Someone responded that "perhaps it is because
>> the RAM is old" - and I thought - OK - I have had it for several
>> years and although I've never heard of it "getting old" - I decided
>> to replace it with 3 1GB DIMM modules (I bought the ones recommended
>> by HP for this machine). Today I switched from the 'old' 1.5GB DIMM
>> to the 'new' 3 - 1GB DIMM modules (total of 3GB now) - rebooted the
>> PC and updated my Experience Index and - it didn't change at all -
>> still a 1.8 Subscore for memory. So, what else comes into play here
>> to give me such a lousy subscore on memory with brand new 3 GB DIMM
>> modules?
>
> That does seem like a strange score, rather lower than I'd expect.
>
> I'd suspect/hope that when someone talked about the RAM being "old" they
> were referring to it using an older and slower technology, rather than the
> physical age of the particular items installed in your machine.
>
> Do you know what type of RAM you're using? And the model number of your HP
> computer? If you can post those then perhaps someone with experience of
> this particular machine can comment (perhaps a bios setting is set at the
> wrong level for good performance).
>
> A quick search for HP Vectra with a 2.0Ghz PIV shows a "VL8" model from
> 2001 (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,28619,00.asp). Is this the sort
> of computer you have, or a similar one? If so then I'd suspect performance
> problems might be due to the age of the computer and of the technology
> inside it. A lot has happened to processors, motherboards, and memory
> since then.
>
> --
> Robert Moir
> http://www.rhymeswithgeek.com
>

might try adjusting the CAS latency down a little.
like from 3 to 2.5.
this is done in the bios.

mikeyhsd@sport.rr.commikeyhsd@sport.rr.com

"Dennis" <Dennis@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:8BB84821-8751-49DF-81F7-F2E87E165E47@microsoft.com...
A week or two ago - after upgrading my 2.0GHz PIV HP Vectra that 'had' 1.5GB
RAM - I questioned here why I only had a 1.8 experience index for memory
(RAM). Someone responded that "perhaps it is because the RAM is old" - and I
thought - OK - I have had it for several years and although I've never heard
of it "getting old" - I decided to replace it with 3 1GB DIMM modules (I
bought the ones recommended by HP for this machine). Today I switched from
the 'old' 1.5GB DIMM to the 'new' 3 - 1GB DIMM modules (total of 3GB now) -
rebooted the PC and updated my Experience Index and - it didn't change at all
- still a 1.8 Subscore for memory. So, what else comes into play here to give
me such a lousy subscore on memory with brand new 3 GB DIMM modules?

.. wrote:
> Some memory types are faster if installed in pairs (and in the right
> sockets - see your manual). 3 chips will have the same speed as one
> chip.

Yes, but as I said in my reply to the poster, the question is what kind of
memory is in the machine. I suspect from the speed of the processor and the
type of computer mentioned that the user is running a system that uses
RDRam, which isn't a subject for the faint-hearted.

It may not be the memory, but the memory bandwidth. You may be using PC2100
RAM with a dated motherboard. The RAM will only run as fast as the
motherboard allows it. If the bus speed is 400 (100 quad pumped for the P4),
then your memory will be held back.

You might check Sandra SiSoft (free download) for memory scores compared to
others.

--
Dustin Harper
dharper@vistarip.com
http://www.vistarip.com

--
"Dennis" <Dennis@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:8BB84821-8751-49DF-81F7-F2E87E165E47@microsoft.com...
>A week or two ago - after upgrading my 2.0GHz PIV HP Vectra that 'had'
>1.5GB
> RAM - I questioned here why I only had a 1.8 experience index for memory
> (RAM). Someone responded that "perhaps it is because the RAM is old" - and
> I
> thought - OK - I have had it for several years and although I've never
> heard
> of it "getting old" - I decided to replace it with 3 1GB DIMM modules (I
> bought the ones recommended by HP for this machine). Today I switched from
> the 'old' 1.5GB DIMM to the 'new' 3 - 1GB DIMM modules (total of 3GB
> now) -
> rebooted the PC and updated my Experience Index and - it didn't change at
> all
> - still a 1.8 Subscore for memory. So, what else comes into play here to
> give
> me such a lousy subscore on memory with brand new 3 GB DIMM modules?

On Sat, 17 Feb 2007 14:00:07 -0800, Dennis

>A week or two ago - after upgrading my 2.0GHz PIV HP Vectra that 'had' 1.5GB
>RAM - I questioned here why I only had a 1.8 experience index for memory
>(RAM). Someone responded that "perhaps it is because the RAM is old"

RAM doesn't get slower with age, or as a result of failures the way
that a failing HD slows down due to retries.

But older RAM standards can be expected to be slower than new ones.

Generally, it's the motherboard and processor that determine how fast
the RAM is used, but RAM may limit how fast it can work and cause
motherboard chipset to run it more slowly, e.g...
- slow RAM in mobo
- mobo queries RAM speed via SPD
- mobo slows down access to match SPD's stated capabilities
- fast RAM with slow mobo/CPU
- mobo queries RAM speed via SPD
- mobo speeds access to match SPD's stated capabilities
- but this is limited to max base speed of mobo and CPU

>bought the ones recommended by HP for this machine). Today I switched from
>the 'old' 1.5GB DIMM to the 'new' 3 - 1GB DIMM modules (total of 3GB now) -
>rebooted the PC and updated my Experience Index and - it didn't change at all
>- still a 1.8 Subscore for memory. So, what else comes into play here to give
>me such a lousy subscore on memory with brand new 3 GB DIMM modules?

The memory system includes...
- the RAM subsystem:
- RAM
- motherboard/CPU timing
- motherboard cache (historical)
- CPU L1 and L2 cache
- CPU core clock as applied to L1 and L2
- the virtual memory subsystem:
- HD speed
- motherboard's speed of interfacing with HD
- head travel required for pagefile access
- modifying effect of ReadyBoost
....and may be impacted by the adverse effect of co-running software.

What I'm unsure about, is which of the above are accounted for within
the Vista memory performance index.



>--------------- ---- --- -- - - - -
Saws are too hard to use.
Be easier to use!
>--------------- ---- --- -- - - - -

In article <8BB84821-8751-49DF-81F7-F2E87E165E47@microsoft.com>, Dennis
says...
> A week or two ago - after upgrading my 2.0GHz PIV HP Vectra that 'had' 1.5GB
> RAM - I questioned here why I only had a 1.8 experience index for memory
> (RAM). Someone responded that "perhaps it is because the RAM is old" - and I
> thought - OK - I have had it for several years and although I've never heard
> of it "getting old" - I decided to replace it with 3 1GB DIMM modules (I
> bought the ones recommended by HP for this machine). Today I switched from
> the 'old' 1.5GB DIMM to the 'new' 3 - 1GB DIMM modules (total of 3GB now) -
> rebooted the PC and updated my Experience Index and - it didn't change at all
> - still a 1.8 Subscore for memory. So, what else comes into play here to give
> me such a lousy subscore on memory with brand new 3 GB DIMM modules?
>
The data transfer speed of the RAM has more to do with the score than
how much you have.

--
Conor

Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright
until you hear them speak.........