Jump to content

Welcome to Geeks to Go - Register now for FREE

Geeks To Go is a helpful hub, where thousands of volunteer geeks quickly serve friendly answers and support. Check out the forums and get free advice from the experts. Register now to gain access to all of our features, it's FREE and only takes one minute. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more.

Create Account How it Works


  • Please log in to reply



    New Member

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 3 posts
I get this tip when I run system test I have 1023 mem DDR SDRAM I'm guessing this would be a def kind of mem that I would need to use.

I dont notice any prob that I'm aware of is this anything that would make a deff I Built PC for Gamming.

The way it reads is I must be using Plain Modules and If I change I would need to Use ECC/Parity and not to mix the two.

I have 4 sticks of 256 DDR SDRAM and 256 of DDR on Video Card So if I change The Modules I would also have to change the Video Card.

Is this somthing that would make a deff or just somthing that would make a deff on pocket Money.

Thanks scott

Tip T2546 - Large memory modules (512 or greater) should be ECC/Parity. Since the probability that a bit will be corrupt is the same or increases with module density, the bigger the module, the bigger the overall probability that you will get one or more corrupted bits. While these modules add an extra delay on partial writes (e.g. less than data width) as parity for the whole line must be re-calculated, the stability will be worth it.
Fix: If you plan on adding more memory, consider replacing the modules with ECC/Parity modules. Do note that running plain and ECC/Parity modules will turn off ECC/Parity for the whole memory array.

SiSoftware Sandra Help File
  • 0


Similar Topics

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

As Featured On:

Microsoft Yahoo BBC MSN PC Magazine Washington Post HP