"Martin C" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:XaZTf.15208$(E-Mail Removed)...
> The post title basically says it all.
>
> I want to get 2 x 512MB of DDR2 PC3200 sticks to go into a new PC. The
> question is, are there any real differences between equivalent sticks from
> either Crucial, Corsair or Kingston (or any others that any of you feel
> that
> I should be considering)? Or are they all basically the same?
>
> The obvious reason that I ask is that there is a difference in prices -
> which could mean something, or course, but equally I could be just paying
> for the brand name.
>
> Opinions?
>
> Thanks
> Martin
You should look at OCZ and Geil, also. I'd personally go with OCZ,
Kingston, Geil, Crucial or Corsair, in that order. Oh, and go for one stick
of 1GB instead of 2 X 512MB.
It has always been true, and still is, that systems run more stable with
fewer sticks of RAM, to a point. Yeah, there are systems that run RAM in
dual-channel mode, but they really aren't significantly faster that way. I
think it's a scam to get you to buy more RAM, and more often. The reason I
think so is simple:
If you buy (2 X 512MB) for example, and want to upgrade to 2 GB later, the
only reasonable way to do it is to replace both of your RAM boards with new
ones. If you have 3 RAM slots, you can add a 1GB stick, but that will nix
the dual-channel (if you were using that). If you have 4 RAM slots, you can
add (2 X 512MB), but this will give you 4 total RAM boards.
It's best to keep your total number of RAM boards to 2 or less, for
stability reasons. Many mainboards (not all) have a problem running stable
with more than 2 sticks of RAM. Also, the more sticks of RAM, the more
likely that one of them will go bad, so the KISS principle applies. If you
end up with a bad RAM stick (quite common, btw, even if your RAM is a good
name brand) in a system with 4 RAM sticks, good luck figuring that one out.

-Dave