need more memory

If you go to the first link you provided and go to the top and click on "Memory" you'll find:

DDR SYNCH DRAM Non-ECC Memory It is not necessary to add memory in pairs. Memory upgrades are accomplished by adding single or multiple DIMMs of the same or varied sizes. This chart does not represent all possible memory configurations. The Intel 865G chipset supports non-ECC

266MHz (PC2100), 333MHz (PC2700) and 400MHz (PC3200) DDR memory. For best performance, add in pairs, add in same channel, and do not mix speeds. For dual-channel performance, DIMMs must be same size, same DRAM technology, same DRAM bus width, and either all single-sided or double-sided DIMMs. Brand and timing specs are not an issue. If speeds are mixed, default will default to the slowest DIMM.

Art

This is a good place to check, and sometimes to buy:

Those are high, I would check second-hand computer dealers for better prices on used RAM. Supposedly memory should be matched for better performance, though I've read that the improvement may be hard to see. I haven't seen a problem mixing speeds and sizes. Faster memory will run at the speed of the slowest stick or the bus speed. For example this PC has a 1G and a 512M stick of PC2-5300 which would operate at 333MHz if on a faster bus, in here they run at 266MHz.

These are good info tools to show you the hardware details.

jsw

>

Yeeeouch! That price is really high. PC2700 has been around a while and I scored 2 used sticks of 512M off of Craigs List for $10. Both of them pass MS's memory test utility with flying colors and work in my computer just fine. Beware of the ECC type as it will not work in many computers. Art

THANKS for pointing this out. I had some PC2100 256 in the scrap box. First time didn't work. Then I put the small ones in the first two slots and the 512 in slot 3. JOY and 0 cost. My kinda fix.

I also need a graphics card with 128 memory. Scored an Nvidea on fleabay for $13 with shipping.

Karl

From specs, it looks like that memory part will work. (Spec says: "It is not necessary to add memory in pairs. Memory upgrades are accomplished by adding single or multiple DIMMs of the same or varied sizes. ... the 865G chipset supports non-ECC 266MHz (PC2100), 333MHz (PC2700) and 400MHz (PC3200) DDR memory. For best performance, add in pairs, add in same channel, and do not mix speeds. For dual-channel performance, DIMMs must be same size, same DRAM technology, same DRAM bus width, and either all single-sided or double-sided DIMMs. Brand and timing specs are not an issue. If speeds are mixed, default will default to the slowest DIMM.")

In other words, different sizes work together ok, but may run slower because dual-channel access won't work with different sizes lined up. (See picture of two yellow and two orange slots, one of each per channel. You didn't say if you have Minitower D530, which has 2 channels and

4 DIMM slots, or Ultraslim Desktop D530, which has 1 channel and 2 DIMM slots. With only one channel, "dual-channel performance" isn't possible anyway.) If you are running low-end apps on small data sets on an obsolete computer, dual-channel performance probably won't matter. 32-bit MS Windows XP maxes out using 3GB even if your computer has 4GB RAM installed. It might not be worth the money to get 4GB but

for $22.35 or or

for about $45 would get you up to 2GB (or 2.5GB if you have 4 slots), which helps XP run faster and more reliably.

SDRAM comes in 168-Pin single data rate, 184-Pin DDR, 240-Pin DDR2, and 240-Pin DDR3. For a comparison of DDR with DDR2 and DDR3 parts see

from . Per picture, the DDR notch is at about 73mm from one end of stick, if you want to double-check what you have.

Here's what's happening behind the curtain:

When the CPU doesn't find the memory address it wants in its built-in superfast cache memory it loads in a new block of addresses from the RAM sticks. I think the double, triple, quad data widths speed up the block transfers rather than access to a single random location, so the perceived memory speed really depends on subtleties of the hardware and software.

A compiled integer FOR loop runs at half the CPU clock speed, much faster than system RAM access time would permit, showing that it executes from the instruction and data caches. No one has paid me to write timing tests that trigger cache misses.

For the user the PC either is or isn't fast enough and the only real choice is to replace it. I sometimes hit that limit recording HDTV on a 2.2GHz machine with a too-small L1 cache. Its 3GHz replacement loafs along at 30% CPU useage.

In simple terms the cache contains the tools and parts you have out on your small workbench, RAM is those in the bigger cabinet and the hard drive holds the stuff in the huge warehouse.

jsw