512MB of 1066 for 1GB of 800 RDRAM

Which is better...mostly gaming, some office/production apps.

Not sure if I fully understand your question but things like "PC3500" "PC3200" "PC4000" are what you want for gaming. If this is a PC1066 thats only good for Office work, and just everyday internet surfing. How ever what I'm saying is for DDR, now RDRAM is for high graphical things, heres a quote of what it is.

"(Rambus Dynamic Random Access Memory) This type of memory can deliver data at speeds of up to 600 MHz. Currently, RDRAM is only used in certain high-performance graphics workstations, and it is also used in the Nintendo64. Intel is licensing RDRAM technology for its future motherboards, but this type of memory requires a special motherboard architecture."

Here's a site on it: http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/R/RDRAM.html

Personally I don't know enough about it to say, but stick with DDR.

"Double data rate is a type of SDRAM in which data is sent on both the rising and falling edges of clock cycles in a data burst. It is usually referred to as DDR as opposed to DDR SDRAM."

"Double Data Rate. A type of SDRAM (as defined below) that delivers data at double the rate for a given clock frequency. The bandwidth in a PC of DDR PC266 parts with 64-bit bus using a 133MHz clock is over 2 GBytes/second."

So the ram RDRAM has been used in 1997 so farley old..

Just my 2cents, hope I helped!

Thanks for your input. I built my computer back in 2000, and at that time RDRAM 1066 was the fastest RAM around. I only purchased 512MB (remember, back then 512MB was A LOT) and now I've been given 1GB of RDRAM 800. The question really is this, will 1GB of slower RAM be better than 512MB of faster RAM. Right now I run GW at 1208x1024 and I'm not having any problems, but was wondering if the extra 512MB would help things along a little, even though it is slower. And yes, I know that the video card has a great deal to do with my resolution, but my CPU stays at a steady 50% while playing.

I would add it along, what damage would it do? However the 512 alone wouldn't beat out a DDR 512 3500, ect.. and up.

However, like many people say. If it isn't broke, don't fix it.

Now if you get your 512mb 1033 vs's the 1gb 800, it might be faster. I would test it to see, however I doubt it.

Trust me, if my wife would let me upgrade...I would. An AMD/DDR setup would be great, but yes, you're right, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

i'm using 512 ddr it's good enough for me

Good enough can always be better

Just add a cherry on top and it's all good!

mmmmm....cherries.

Do you have 3D mark, or some other Benchmark tool?

That is one definative way to tell which goes faster. If you have a temperature sensor equiped that can help as well.

I would try swapping that 1G in and see what happens. If it is functioning properly, I would speculate that itwould go faster. In my OPINION, your 512m would have to be 2 times faster than the 1G setup to make up for it's lower capacity.

I could be wrong, but I see no harm in trying it.

BTW, does anyone have 512-1G of PC3200 to give me?

Yes, it's in the mail! Why would you ask for free ram lol!

Lucky guy.

Mother board determines what type of memory, Rdram, DDR, DDR2, etc.

Rdram has much greater front side bus but and is designed for stream not bursting. Example Rdram is great for multi-media like conversion of audio / video and large data streams. Rdram is not so good on applications that like "bursting" and will have latency issues... games love to burst.

Rdram is not really used much in pc's (but can be found easily in servers) and fell out of favor due to low yields, lower then expected performance (Sdram was faster in some way) when it 1st came out and the legal issues of Rambus allowing DDR standard to form, become common then try to exort money for paitent violation later did wonders too.

Don't get me wrong the idea behind Rdram is solid and there is a lot of cases where it very nice to have, gaming is generally not one of them.