ECC Question - Did I Make A Mistake?

[guptasa1]

Hey guys!
Here's the deal. Ordered a new P4 PC (don't have it quite yet), and since memory is fairly cheap right now and the PC has a lot of heavy use I got 1 GB RDRAM. At the time, I decided to go with non-ECC Samsung PC800 RDRAM (4X 256MB), because it's faster and this isn't a server that stays up (it shares some files over a network sometimes, but that's it). I'm wondering if I made a mistake and should have gone with ECC instead? I read somewhere (post-purchase) that with bigger amounts of RAM, non-ECC memory is more prone to problems, and I also read somewhere that RDRAM is more prone to problems than other types of memory. Any take on this, or should I be fine? The system is used for the internet/network, office applications, games, file sharing, and other common home/workstation applications and will be running Windows XP. I also generally shut it down at night and do a fresh reboot every day. If ECC wouldn't benefit me, I may as well stick with the performance gains, but if I'm going to be unstable, I may as well try and replace it. Comments?

Thanks,
guptasa1

 

[flamethrower205]

Nah, you don't need ECC. Nor do you need 1Gb RAM. Go down to 512 RAM. It will be more than enough- belive me. 1 GB is rediculous for what you are doing. It will also sooth your worries, as my friend has 512RD w/o ECC and is fine.

U got a problem?! Then dial 1800-328-7448!

 

[ycs46241]

if you are not doing critical caluations where memory is important. than non ecc is better. and 1gb is ok but do not go more than mob recomends.

 

[AMD_Man]

1GB maybe overkill now but in 6 months, it'll be standard. You can never have too much RAM.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor

 

[girish]

Hi Mr.Gupta,

For your work, a non-ECC RAM is perfectly okay, in fact the only viable choice. ECC part is pricey as well as slow, and you dont really need it. In fact, you have already purchased a part you dont need - the P4!

Not to comment on your decision, but AthlonXP+DDR is a far better choice than the P4, as it stands right now.

Anyway, your rig wont go unstable, especially due to temp isses, since the P4 has a built-in feature that slows itself down when it starts heating up. ECC memory would correct errors only in the system memory, and those could be caused by overclocking it, exposing it to too high EMI, the tiny radioactive particles in the plastic package the silicon is put in. In your case, nothing of this (except the radioactive thing) is on. Any crash you experience will be purely random, and rare.

BTW I guess you are an Indian, good to see one here.

girish

<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>

 

[guptasa1]

Thanks a lot for the responses guys. Glad I went with non-ECC. Considering better processes to make RDRAM (and RAM in general), I'm guessing these ECC functions are being needed less and less anyway, and speed's always good. Just wanted to make certain it was the right decision, and thanks for all the needed input! I decided to go with 1GB because right off the bat Windows XP uses a lot of memory, and I assumed within a few months it'd become more standard since some places 512 already is. As far as the Pentium 4, I don't want to start an AMD/P4 war in here - just felt better about a P4 personally if that makes any sense (and I want to upgrade to Northwood later since my mobo's Socket 478). And yup, I'm half Indian! ) Nice to meet you!

Thanks again,
guptasa1

 

[bum_jcrules]

ECC just adds another latency... If you bought it you can turn off ECC. But as the other guys have stated...If you are not doing data critical stuff it won't matter.

<b>Oh Mrs. Green...I'm looking at you...You wore green so you could hide - Caddyshack</b> :lol:

 

[girish]

so where do you stay, in India or US?

<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>

 

[AMD_Man]

I completely understand what you're talking about. Get an Intel machine or get an AMD machine, it doesn't matter, it's all about personal preference as there aren't any clear advantages or disadvantages in one over the other.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor

 

[flamethrower205]

Woah, 256 is the standard righ tnow. 512 is overkill, and 99% of users will never even go near using it. 1GB is serious overkill, and since RD is kinda expensive, imo not a great idea. I'd seriously bring it down to 512MB. In teh future, 284 will be standard. 512 is ridculous- even I don't use my 512 a lot, just when rendering (in which case I actually can use up to 2GB RAM).

U got a problem?! Then dial 1800-328-7448!

 

[AMD_Man]

512MB is not overkill. I mean if you like doing a lot of things at once like me (30+ windows open) then you NEED 512MB RAM. 1GB will probably be standard in 6 months - 1 year anyway so you might as well get 1GB today.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor

 

[guptasa1]

I think I'll stick with 1GB since I just got the system. Love it. I don't really want to sell the extra RAM, and I have a feeling it may come in handy someday. Considering how much Windows XP uses now, who knows how much might be used in the future?
Girish, I live in the US. I've never actually been to India - my dad was from there though.

Thanks again all,
guptasa1