topic Re: quad core or dual core which would be best for AC12? in Installation & update

quad core or dual core which would be best for AC12?

Anonymous — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 22:20:24 GMT

Does anyone know which combination would provide best performance
and speed in AC12?

quad core at 3GHz or dual core at 3.33 GHz
and the other question would be the option of 8 GB ram @ 633 MHz Vs.
4 GB ram @ 800 MHz.

Thank you

Re: quad core or dual core which would be best for AC12?

Laszlo Nagy — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 15:06:11 GMT

Jonathan wrote:
Does anyone know which combination would provide best performance
and speed in AC12?

quad core at 3GHz or dual core at 3.33 GHz
and the other question would be the option of 8 GB ram @ 633 MHz Vs.
4 GB ram @ 800 MHz.

Thank you

ArchiCAD can use 4 cores so that should be a better choice than dual-core, even if at a lower frequency.
Since AC can use only 2 GB of RAM under Windows 32-bit OSes (3 GB with the 3GB switch enabled in the OS) and 4GB of memory under 64-bit OSes (Mac OS and Windows 64-bit), 4 GB of 800 MHz RAM should be better.

Re: quad core or dual core which would be best for AC12?

Thomas Holm — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 15:48:04 GMT

laszlonagy wrote:
4 GB of 800 MHz RAM should be better.

Unless you plan to use some other app running at the same time as Archicad, like Artlantis- then more RAM memory is better. Even though 20% slower internally, it's many times faster than having the O/S paging memory out to the hard disk.

Re: quad core or dual core which would be best for AC12?

Anonymous — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 18:29:33 GMT

Thomas wrote:
laszlonagy wrote:
4 GB of 800 MHz RAM should be better.
Unless you plan to use some other app running at the same time as Archicad, like Artlantis- then more RAM memory is better. Even though 20% slower internally, it's many times faster than having the O/S paging memory out to the hard disk.

Thanks you guys,

Sense I wont be running two apps at the same time, sounds like the
quad core w/ 4 GB of the 800 MHz ram on 64bit vista ultimate would be
the best choice because AC won't utilize over 4GB of ram, right?

Re: quad core or dual core which would be best for AC12?

Laszlo Nagy — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 18:45:54 GMT

Jonathan wrote:
Thanks you guys,

Sense I wont be running two apps at the same time, sounds like the
quad core w/ 4 GB of the 800 MHz ram on 64bit vista ultimate would be
the best choice because AC won't utilize over 4GB of ram, right?

Correct, it won't.
AC is a 32-bit application, 2 on the 32nd power is 4 billion, hence the 4 GB limit.

Re: quad core or dual core which would be best for AC12?

Anonymous — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 19:07:25 GMT

laszlonagy wrote:
Jonathan wrote:
Thanks you guys,

Sense I wont be running two apps at the same time, sounds like the
quad core w/ 4 GB of the 800 MHz ram on 64bit vista ultimate would be
the best choice because AC won't utilize over 4GB of ram, right?
Correct, it won't.
AC is a 32-bit application, 2 on the 32nd power is 4 billion, hence the 4 GB limit.

Right, and the system (windows) needs to be 64 bit in order to recognize, or allocate the 4GB to AC, even though AC is 32 bit. Do I have that correct?

I sure appriciate the help laszlonagy.

Thanks again

Re: quad core or dual core which would be best for AC12?

Thomas Holm — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 19:10:00 GMT

laszlonagy wrote:
...AC is a 32-bit application, 2 on the 32nd power is 4 billion, hence the 4 GB limit.

For now.

Re: quad core or dual core which would be best for AC12?

Laszlo Nagy — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 19:15:34 GMT

Jonathan wrote:
Right, and the system (windows) needs to be 64 bit in order to recognize, or allocate the 4GB to AC, even though AC is 32 bit. Do I have that correct?

I sure appriciate the help laszlonagy.

Thanks again

Yes, because the 32-bit version of Windows will allow only 2 GB for any application while keeping the other 2 GB for the system.

Let me correct myself a bit because Thomas is right: if you run AC under Vista 64-bit and you think AC will use 4 GB then there will not be any left for the system and some other programs you will inevitably run (mail, browser, Skype etc.) In that case 8GB sounds to be a better choice: 4 GB for AC, 4 GB for all the rest. Vista will probably need about 1 GB, plus the others.

Re: quad core or dual core which would be best for AC12?

Laszlo Nagy — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 19:17:48 GMT

Thomas wrote:
laszlonagy wrote:
...AC is a 32-bit application, 2 on the 32nd power is 4 billion, hence the 4 GB limit.
For now.

Yes, the eventual switch to 64-bit seems rather inevitable to me.

Re: quad core or dual core which would be best for AC12?

Anonymous — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 21:46:57 GMT

laszlonagy wrote:
Jonathan wrote:
Right, and the system (windows) needs to be 64 bit in order to recognize, or allocate the 4GB to AC, even though AC is 32 bit. Do I have that correct?

I sure appriciate the help laszlonagy.

Thanks again
Yes, because the 32-bit version of Windows will allow only 2 GB for any application while keeping the other 2 GB for the system.

Let me correct myself a bit because Thomas is right: if you run AC under Vista 64-bit and you think AC will use 4 GB then there will not be any left for the system and some other programs you will inevitably run (mail, browser, Skype etc.) In that case 8GB sounds to be a better choice: 4 GB for AC, 4 GB for all the rest. Vista will probably need about 1 GB, plus the others.

So, even though its @ a slightly lower frequency than 800MHz more is better.
Maybe that explains the huge diff in price.

4GB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 800MHz - 2 X 2048MB [+$55.00] Requires 64-bit edition of Windows Vista

8GB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 667MHz - 2 X 4096MB [+$845.00] Requires 64-bit edition of Windows Vista

Re: quad core or dual core which would be best for AC12?

ci-JoshOs — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 23:33:25 GMT

So, even though its @ a slightly lower frequency than 800MHz more is better.
Maybe that explains the huge diff in price.

4GB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 800MHz - 2 X 2048MB [+$55.00] Requires 64-bit edition of Windows Vista

8GB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 667MHz - 2 X 4096MB [+$845.00] Requires 64-bit edition of Windows Vista

4Gb sticks are still absurdly expensive, that's why there's a huge price difference. Why not get 4x2Gb-800 sticks though?
It wouldn't cost much more and because they would be in 2xDual-Channel configuration, they would run faster than 2x4Gb-800 anyway.
Then just run Vista-x64(which is really very good, don't believe the naysayers) and your machine will scream along.

Re: quad core or dual core which would be best for AC12?

Laszlo Nagy — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 23:59:20 GMT

Jonathan wrote:
So, even though its @ a slightly lower frequency than 800MHz more is better.
Maybe that explains the huge diff in price.

4GB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 800MHz - 2 X 2048MB [+$55.00] Requires 64-bit edition of Windows Vista

8GB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 667MHz - 2 X 4096MB [+$845.00] Requires 64-bit edition of Windows Vista

I think the reason for the huge price difference is that a 4096 MB module is much rare, therefore much more expensive, than the 2048 MB one.
Check if it is possible to put 4 X 2048MB to achieve the 8 GB, should cost you much less.

Oh, I just notice henrypootel was faster than me... But only by a hair... half an hour or so.

Re: quad core or dual core which would be best for AC12?

Anonymous — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 01:45:32 GMT

laszlonagy wrote:
Jonathan wrote:
So, even though its @ a slightly lower frequency than 800MHz more is better.
Maybe that explains the huge diff in price.

4GB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 800MHz - 2 X 2048MB [+$55.00] Requires 64-bit edition of Windows Vista

8GB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 667MHz - 2 X 4096MB [+$845.00] Requires 64-bit edition of Windows Vista
I think the reason for the huge price difference is that a 4096 MB module is much rare, therefore much more expensive, than the 2048 MB one.
Check if it is possible to put 4 X 2048MB to achieve the 8 GB, should cost you much less.

Oh, I just notice henrypootel was faster than me... But only by a hair... half an hour or so.

Took me a little while to realize there was a second page.
Good points you guys, I will ask Sager if this is possible (the 4 2048 sticks)
and I am wondering why 8GB of 800MHz is not possible, they only have
the two options I posted earlier on the web site

You have all been very helpfull

Best Regards

JP

Re: quad core or dual core which would be best for AC12?

Thomas Holm — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 08:25:20 GMT

Jonathan wrote:
...So, even though its @ a slightly lower frequency than 800MHz more is better.
Maybe that explains the huge diff in price.

4GB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 800MHz - 2 X 2048MB [+$55.00] Requires 64-bit edition of Windows Vista

8GB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 667MHz - 2 X 4096MB [+$845.00] Requires 64-bit edition of Windows Vista

Considering the price difference, if 4gig modules is your only choice to get more than 4gig in total, maybe it's better to get just 4 gig now. Prices will drop. Within a couple of years, you'll be able to upgrade much cheaper.

Or consider a machine with more memory slots, and do what Henry or Lazlo say.

Re: quad core or dual core which would be best for AC12?

Anonymous — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 15:00:37 GMT

Jonathan wrote:
Took me a little while to realize there was a second page.
Good points you guys, I will ask Sager if this is possible (the 4 2048 sticks)
and I am wondering why 8GB of 800MHz is not possible, they only have
the two options I posted earlier on the web site

You have all been very helpfull

Best Regards

JP

So this is going into a laptop. That makes sense then, you are limited to two slots.

Here's my input:
DDR2-667 vs DDR2-800 may offer a 17% boost on paper, but your real-world performance may not be tangible. Real-world applications only see about a 2-5% gain from it. The real benefits come from overclocking, achieving those higher multipliers requires memory capable of higher speeds. I doubt you'll be overclocking your laptop (although some companies do it). See this Anandtech article comparing the very best 667 and 800 modules. The systhetic benchmarks seem impressive, but not much gain from actual use.

Overall, the benefit of running Vista64 is that AC will be allocated the maximum amount of memory it can use while allowing the operating system itself and your other applications the freedom to use the remaining memory unhindered. If you do ANY multi-tasking, I would argue that more RAM is going to benefit you over the miniscule speed increase that DDR2-800 offers.

Have you considered buying 8GB (2x4GB) of DDR2-667 from Newegg and installing it yourself? Only $300:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231210

In summation, buy the "slower" 8GB RAM and install it yourself. Order your laptop with the least memory possible to save even more money.