[SOLVED] Newbie question Ram 16 X 2 or 8 X 4 ? F

Sep 13, 2019
22
9
15
0
First attempt to configure a computer. Will be an intel i9700K. Have 16 meg ram now and doesn't do the trick. Need help. Any thoughts?
 
Sep 14, 2019
68
13
45
3
Primary Hard Drive: 512GB Intel 660P M.2 NVME SSD + 3TB SATA III Hard Drive Combo (Combo Drive)

Secondary Hard Drive: 1TB WD Black SATA-III 6.0Gb/s 7200 RPM HDD (Plus 16GB Intel Optane Memory HDD Acceleration 18X Faster (Secondary Storage Drive))
Hi, as I mentioned in a previous reply, since you're getting an SSD + HDD combo as your "primary" hard drive, you don't need a "secondary" hard drive (unless you want 3 total drives). What they are calling "Secondary" would actually become your third drive.

The 3TB HDD would be your secondary hard drive.
 
Reactions: PC Tailor

PC Tailor

Distinguished
Herald
Welcome to the forums my friend!

16GB doesn't do the trick?
What are you running? Is it consuming all 16GB?
What is your motherboard? 4x8 will only really be useful running quad channel.
If it's a dual channel board, 2x16GB is best.
 
Sep 13, 2019
22
9
15
0
A prebuilt Dell from Amazon many years ago and a mistake; Computer takes forever to load as does simple task like Excel; When play games (what I call counter based) Like Strategic Command ot even older games like Advanced Tactics Gold or the Civ games I'm not joking when I say it can take 8 minutes to do a turn. Sent many a question to other gamers and the manufacture and besides a better CPU (I have an icore 6700) the common answer was to try more ram
 

PC Tailor

Distinguished
Herald
Well more RAM is only the issue if your current RAM is being used up.
RAM does not equal faster performance - UNLESS you need it.

If you have 8GB of RAM, and you use 7GB of it. That means you've got 1GB sitting idle doing nothing.
If you add another 8GB of RAM to that, you'll just have 9GB sitting idle doing nothing.

IF however you are regularly using more RAM than you have (and therefore using more virtual memory) then an upgrade can help as it will allow there to be more data transferred to the RAM ready for usage, rather than being stored on slow storage drives.

RAM doesn't "process" anything, it is more like the kitchen cabinet that gets everything important together ready for you to use it, you only need a bigger cabinet, when you are filling up the one you currently have.

If you are a gamer, 16GB should more than suffice. I'd be monitoring your component usage when you are having these slowdowns to confirm it really is the RAM before jumping to buying more. Obviously this may differ if you have tons of background applications open consuming excessive RAM.
 
Reactions: brokeBuilder2019

PC Tailor

Distinguished
Herald
What is your full system spec including PSU make and model?
To clarify I play those games you refer to and load times are seconds.

Also if advanced tactics is taking forever to load, something else is probably the issue.
 
Sep 13, 2019
22
9
15
0
No on the SSD and fresh windows install; excellent information from each; I guess time to start reading again and learning more. Computer about 8 years old and several things have failed; sound card; DVD and now issues with commands. Go to open a file and get the blue circle for 5/6 seconds then it just quits opening the file. Do right click then open and same issue. Open a different file then go to the open file and it works. Should have mentioned talking about excel/word.

Finally took it to the only option in my area (Best Buy) and they advised system built with Windows 7 and cheap parts. Windows 7 will have areas no longer supported by Microsoft. Expect more things to fail and best use of my money is to buy a new computer.

As you figured out am not Mr. computer. I a senior and just want to get a good high end system. I hate "surfing" the net for information but other than a forum have no one to seek advise from. So that being said again thanks and any other information would be helpful.
 

PC Tailor

Distinguished
Herald
Frankly I think they're insane if they're advising you to buy a W7 cheap PC instead.
It could well be the RAM is faulty per chance. Or the storage, random things opening shouldn't be taking that long to open unless something else was an issue.

As you figured out am not Mr. computer. I a senior and just want to get a good high end system. I hate "surfing" the net for information but other than a forum have no one to seek advise from. So that being said again thanks and any other information would be helpful.
Nothing wrong with that, we all start somewhere :)
Just glad we can help.

I'll be honest it sounds like something else is the issue, and adding more RAM I strongly believe would allow the problem to continue, you would just simply have 20GB sitting idle instead of 4GB.

Have you run HD sentinel on your storage drive(s)?
Have you run memtest on your RAM modules?
Do you have latest drivers and BIOS installed?

The first two can help identify if there is indeed a hardware issue.
The last point is essential if you are encountering problems.
 
Sep 14, 2019
68
13
45
3
No on the SSD and fresh windows install; excellent information from each; I guess time to start reading again and learning more. Computer about 8 years old and several things have failed; sound card; DVD and now issues with commands. Go to open a file and get the blue circle for 5/6 seconds then it just quits opening the file. Do right click then open and same issue. Open a different file then go to the open file and it works. Should have mentioned talking about excel/word.

Finally took it to the only option in my area (Best Buy) and they advised system built with Windows 7 and cheap parts. Windows 7 will have areas no longer supported by Microsoft. Expect more things to fail and best use of my money is to buy a new computer.

As you figured out am not Mr. computer. I a senior and just want to get a good high end system. I hate "surfing" the net for information but other than a forum have no one to seek advise from. So that being said again thanks and any other information would be helpful.
Do you have the cash and are you willing to spend it on a new system ? If yes, and from the way you have described your issues, I would probably not waste time trying to fix/upgrade an 8 yr old system, especially since, as you say, you are kind of a beginner with computers.

And yes, Windows 7 support officially ends this coming Jan. I also use Win 7 and I get reminders about it. So, definitely don't buy a system with Windows 7 on it ! Sticking with older technology will limit your choices more and more over time, and less people will be able or willing to help you with old technology. For instance, if you were to Google "How to bla bla bla in Windows" today, your first search results would be relevant to Windows 10 (the latest version of Windows). Finding support for older systems like Windows 7 will get harder and harder over time. At any given time, most people are talking about contemporary technology.

If you are willing, you can get/build a decent low-mid range gaming computer for $1000 - $1500. This depends on which games you play, of course. I am not familiar with the games you listed, so I cannot be more exact.

Building your own computer is not out of the question, but will require a fair bit of research (which you mentioned you dislike) to make sure all your parts are compatible with each other. Also, the burden of returning faulty parts and long-term maintenance will fall entirely on your shoulders. I speak from some experience here.

My recommendation, given everything you've said:
  • Spend $1200 to $1500 and get a pre-built gaming computer. And pay attention to the following specs when buying:
  • When it comes to choice of processor, just keep in mind that the processor is central to the overall performance of your system and determines how "future-proof" a PC is. Systems with weaker processors may save you money now but then become irrelevant/obsolete years sooner than you are ready to buy your next new PC.
  • 16GB RAM should suffice for most gamers
  • The graphics card is a major consideration for gaming PCs. There are many kinds ... do your research. Keep in mind that more demanding games require more powerful graphics cards, and figure out what would be good enough for the games you play.
  • Ensure that the main drive is an SSD, not an HDD (this should not be a problem as almost all PCs these days come with an SSD)
Some amount of research will be required for this ^ as well, but this is the easier option. Of course, someone on this forum (more knowledgeable than me) can easily recommend a specific PC to you for your needs.
 
Last edited:
Sep 13, 2019
22
9
15
0
fIRST THANKS TO ALL FOR THE HELP; AGREE BEST TO BUY NEW; HAVE THE MONEY. LOOKING AT AN INTEL I7 9700K; MOTHERBOARD OPEN BUT LOTS OF GOOD ONES; A GeFORCE 270 VIDEO CARD ND BEST MAIN DRIVE I CAN FIND; SUGGESTIONS FOR A SECOND STORAGE DRIVE. FIGURE PROBABLY BEST TO WAIT UNTIL BLACK FRIDAY AND HAVE MORE THAN $1500 TO SPEND; $2500 OK.

REF OTHER ISSUES; DID THE MEMTEST AND ALL OK; RAN SOME TYPE OF WINDOWS TEST AS WAS SUGGESTED; TOOK FOREVER AND SAID WOULD GIVE TEST RESULTS ON A RESTART BUT NOTHING WAS THERE WHEN IT DID RESESTART
 
Sep 14, 2019
68
13
45
3
fIRST THANKS TO ALL FOR THE HELP; AGREE BEST TO BUY NEW; HAVE THE MONEY. LOOKING AT AN INTEL I7 9700K; MOTHERBOARD OPEN BUT LOTS OF GOOD ONES; A GeFORCE 270 VIDEO CARD ND BEST MAIN DRIVE I CAN FIND; SUGGESTIONS FOR A SECOND STORAGE DRIVE. FIGURE PROBABLY BEST TO WAIT UNTIL BLACK FRIDAY AND HAVE MORE THAN $1500 TO SPEND; $2500 OK.

REF OTHER ISSUES; DID THE MEMTEST AND ALL OK; RAN SOME TYPE OF WINDOWS TEST AS WAS SUGGESTED; TOOK FOREVER AND SAID WOULD GIVE TEST RESULTS ON A RESTART BUT NOTHING WAS THERE WHEN IT DID RESESTART
Look at some pre-built gaming PCs in your price range here (just to get an idea of what's out there):
https://www.newegg.com/p/pl?N=100897449 4114 4115&LeftPriceRange=1500 2500
 
Sep 13, 2019
22
9
15
0
Any feedback on what I put together?

CPU:Intel® Core™ Processor i7-9700K 3.60GHZ 12MB Intel Smart Cache LGA1151

CS_FAN:3X 120mm Case Fans for your selected case [+9]

ENGRAVING:None

EVGA_POWER:None

FA_HDD:None

FAN:Cooler Master Hyper 212 CPU Cooler w/ PWM fan - Efficient Cooling Performance [-5] (Hyper 212 EVO)

FREEBIE_SSD:None

HDD:512GB Intel 660P M.2 NVME SSD + 3TB SATA III Hard Drive Combo [+65] (Combo Drive)

HDD2:1TB WD Black SATA-III 6.0Gb/s 7200 RPM HDD [+92] (Plus 16GB Intel Optane Memory HDD Acceleration 18X Faster (Secondary Storage Drive) [+29])

HEADSET:None

IUSB:Built-in USB 2.0 Ports

KEYBOARD:None [-5]

MEMORY:16GB (8GBx2) DDR4/4000MHz Dual Channel Memory [+150] (Corsair Vengeance RGB [+75])

MICROPHONE:None

MONITOR:None

MOPAD:None

MOTHERBOARD:GIGABYTE Z390 AORUS ULTRA ATX w/ Intel 802.11ac WiFi, ARGB, USB 3.1, 3 PCIe x16, 3 PCIe x1, 6 SATA3, 3 M.2 SATA/PCIe [+167]

MOUSE:None [-3]

NETWORK:Intel EXPI9301CTBLK Network Adapter 10/ 100/ 1000Mbps PCI-Express [+34]

OS:Windows 10 Home (64-bit Edition)

OVERCLOCK:No Overclocking

POWERSUPPLY:800 Watts - Standard 80 Plus Gold Certified Power Supply
 
Sep 14, 2019
68
13
45
3
Thanks; what is the best type for the secondary hard drive?
By "secondary hard drive", I assume you mean the one other than the drive that has Windows installed on it.

These days, the common pattern is to have a super fast SSD (preferably NVMe M.2, not SATA) on which you would install Windows and all your apps, and your "secondary drive" would typically be a conventional mechanical drive used for "mass storage" (media). Unless you have money to burn, in which case, you can buy a 2TB SSD for a 2nd drive (nothing wrong with it except for the resulting hole in your pocket).

If you want to keep the cost reasonable, a good secondary drive, in my opinion, would be a 2TB (or more) Seagata Barracuda 7200 rpm drive or an equivalent drive by Western Digital.

Example: https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16822184773
 
Sep 14, 2019
68
13
45
3
CPU:Intel® Core™ Processor i7-9700K 3.60GHZ 12MB Intel Smart Cache LGA1151
Good choice. Should be plenty sufficient for you and is 9th gen. Better value for money than the i9-9900K.

CS_FAN:3X 120mm Case Fans for your selected case [+9]
Which case did you select ? Without knowing which case, I can't tell you anything about ^ these fans.

FAN:Cooler Master Hyper 212 CPU Cooler w/ PWM fan - Efficient Cooling Performance [-5] (Hyper 212 EVO)
While this cooler might suffice for your CPU, I would invest a few more bucks and get a better performing cooler like the Noctua NH-U14S. Noctua is probably the top fan/cooler maker right now.

I have learned through bitter experience that CPU cooling is something you should throw money at.

HDD:512GB Intel 660P M.2 NVME SSD + 3TB SATA III Hard Drive Combo [+65] (Combo Drive)

HDD2:1TB WD Black SATA-III 6.0Gb/s 7200 RPM HDD [+92] (Plus 16GB Intel Optane Memory HDD Acceleration 18X Faster (Secondary Storage Drive) [+29])
Your 3TB SATA hard drive listed under HDD ^ would be your HDD2. You don't need another HDD2. So, it would be like this:

SSD (Primary): 512GB Intel 660P M.2 NVME SSD (Windows and all apps installed here)

HDD (Secondary): 3TB SATA III Hard Drive (media/documents here)

MEMORY:16GB (8GBx2) DDR4/4000MHz Dual Channel Memory [+150] (Corsair Vengeance RGB [+75])
Anything over 3200MHz or so RAM speed will be a waste because your CPU only strictly supports up to 2666MHz. Buy 3200MHz RAM instead.

MOTHERBOARD:GIGABYTE Z390 AORUS ULTRA ATX w/ Intel 802.11ac WiFi, ARGB, USB 3.1, 3 PCIe x16, 3 PCIe x1, 6 SATA3, 3 M.2 SATA/PCIe [+167]
Yeah, that looks like a solid motherboard.

NETWORK:Intel EXPI9301CTBLK Network Adapter 10/ 100/ 1000Mbps PCI-Express [+34]
:)

Gone are the days of needing to buy a network adapter for (at least wired) Internet connectivity. Your motherboard comes with both Gigabit LAN (standard) and also built-in Wi-Fi (bonus). It also comes with Bluetooth 5 built in, which is nice for peripherals like wireless headphones or keyboards/mice.

POWERSUPPLY:800 Watts - Standard 80 Plus Gold Certified Power Supply
800 watts seems quite excessive for your build (for most builds, unless you have 2 or more graphics cards running together in SLI or CrossFire). I would get a 650W power supply. https://pcpartpicker.com/ will tell you how much power you will need for all your parts.

You didn't mention a graphics card. For your build and assuming mid-level gaming, I would recommend an Nvidia RTX-2060 (or 2060 Super) based card. That should give you good value for money.
 
Last edited:

PC Tailor

Distinguished
Herald
These days, the common pattern is to have a super fast SSD (preferably NVMe M.2, not SATA) on which you would install Windows
All I would add is asides cable management there is no real benefit to getting NVMe over SATA interface. Unless you are perhaps doing single large file transfers, other than that, they're only beneficial in artificial benchmarks, if a good quality SSD III is cheaper, I would just go for the cheaper option.
800 watts seems quite excessive for your build (for most builds, unless you have 2 or more graphics cards running together in SLI or CrossFire). I would get a 650W power supply. https://pcpartpicker.com/ will tell you how much power you will need for all your parts.
Agreed, just make sure it is a good quality power supply. Not just any 650W.
I would also probably generaly take the pcpartpicker wattage requirement with a (large) pinch of salt, there's no real benchmark behind the wattages it pulls, same as PSU calculators, some would argue you're better using a random number calculator!

You didn't mention a graphics card. For your build and assuming mid-level gaming, I would recommend an Nvidia RTX-2060 (or 2060 Super) based card. That should give you good value for money.
I would also undoubtedly choose a RX5700XT over the 2060 Super, basically better performance for less, unless you're streaming perhaps.

Other than, completely agreed with above :)
 
Reactions: brokeBuilder2019
Sep 14, 2019
68
13
45
3
All I would add is asides cable management there is no real benefit to getting NVMe over SATA interface. Unless you are perhaps doing single large file transfers, other than that, they're only beneficial in artificial benchmarks, if a good quality SSD III is cheaper, I would just go for the cheaper option.
Hmm. Correct me if I'm wrong, but some (or all?) NVMe M.2 drives are able to run in PCIe mode, right ? For example, https://www.newegg.com/samsung-970-evo-plus-1tb/p/N82E16820147743?cm_sp=SearchSuccess-_-INFOCARD-_-samsung+970+evo-_-9SIA12K8SS0241-_-1&Description=samsung+970+evo

This above drive could run in PCIe mode and be much faster than in SATA mode (provided the motherboard allows it ... which the OP's mobo does) ... no ?

The motherboard the OP chose lists this spec (note that it supports PCIe and SATA modes):

1 x M.2 connector (Socket 3, M key, type 2242/2260/2280/22110 SATA and PCIe x4/x2 SSD support) (M2M)
1 x M.2 connector (Socket 3, M key, type 2242/2260/2280/22110 SATA and PCIe x4/x2 SSD support) (M2A)
1 x M.2 connector (Socket 3, M key, type 2242/2260/2280 PCIe x4/x2 SSD support) (M2P)
Please see this thread where they discussed this:

https://forums.tomshardware.com/threads/what-is-the-difference-between-running-m-2-in-sata-or-pcie-mode.3061454/
 
Last edited:

PC Tailor

Distinguished
Herald
Hmm. Correct me if I'm wrong, but some (or all?) NVMe M.2 drives are able to run in PCIe mode, right ? For example, https://www.newegg.com/samsung-970-evo-plus-1tb/p/N82E16820147743?cm_sp=SearchSuccess-_-INFOCARD-_-samsung+970+evo-_-9SIA12K8SS0241-_-1&Description=samsung+970+evo

This above drive could run in PCIe mode and be much faster than in SATA mode (provided the motherboard allows it ... which the OP's mobo does) ... no ?
Correct, but in real world application, it makes practically no difference - for example loads times of OS or applications, you'll either not notice a difference or notice less than 1 seconds difference (which will be barely noticeable). the M2 form factor is just beneficial for cable management, then the PCIe interface is maybe only better for single large data transfer, for gaming for example, it's a complete waste if you pay much more for it.

Benefit is some NVMe M2 (like the Intel 660) is excellent value for money.

Yes the PCIe bandwidth is still much higher, but the application still has to be able to use it - In artificial benchmarks and in theory, significantly better, in actual application (such as gaming), not so. :)

If you're doing large file transfer between 2 fast drives, maybe there is benefit.

USAFRet one of the resident experts does an excellent example here:
https://forums.tomshardware.com/threads/nvme-vs-sata-iii.3500009/#post-21154076
 
Sep 14, 2019
68
13
45
3
Correct, but in real world application, it makes practically no difference - for example loads times of OS or applications, you'll either not notice a difference or notice less than 1 seconds difference (which will be barely noticeable). the M2 form factor is just beneficial for cable management, then the PCIe interface is maybe only better for single large data transfer, for gaming for example, it's a complete waste if you pay much more for it.

Benefit is some NVMe M2 (like the Intel 660) is excellent value for money.

Yes the PCIe bandwidth is still much higher, but the application still has to be able to use it - In artificial benchmarks and in theory, significantly better, in actual application (such as gaming), not so. :)

If you're doing large file transfer between 2 fast drives, maybe there is benefit.

USAFRet one of the resident experts does an excellent example here:
https://forums.tomshardware.com/threads/nvme-vs-sata-iii.3500009/#post-21154076
Ah, gotcha ... I see your point. Yes, I agree that a lot of benchmarks are meaningless in that way.

You were also looking at it from the value for money point of view. Makes sense. The return provided by the NVMe card over the investment may not be worthwhile (compared to a standard SATA SSD).
 
Reactions: PC Tailor

PC Tailor

Distinguished
Herald
Ah, gotcha ... I see your point. Yes, I agree that a lot of benchmarks are meaningless in that way.

You were also looking at it from the value for money point of view. Makes sense. The return provided by the NVMe card over the investment may not be worthwhile (compared to a standard SATA SSD).
Yes that's all - not shooting down all NVMe - just they're not worth the extra money if your application doesn't provide for it. But you're absolutely right that the 660p is excellent value for money, so with NVMe like that, there's often no reason to NOT get that :) it just won't bring any added benefit.

Just we see many spend EXTRA money for NVMe when they'd get the exact same performance from a SATA interface. And the shame is, the only real palce of benefit is when you're transferring large data from one NVMe to another NVMe so they can both have the same bandwidth, because even transferring it to another generic drive, you'll likely still be limited by the secondary drive's bandwidth!

All a bit of a shame more than anything!
If i had to choose between a good SATA and NVMe, i'd opt for the cheaper of the 2 practically every time.
 
Reactions: brokeBuilder2019
Sep 14, 2019
68
13
45
3
the only real palce of benefit is when you're transferring large data from one NVMe to another NVMe so they can both have the same bandwidth
... and ^ this is the only scenario in which the large sequential read/write speeds would actually come into play, right ? 3500 MB/s / 3300 MB/s for the Samsung 970 EVO Plus, for instance.

So, basically, copying huge files - either macOS Xcode app bundles which can be around 10GB or massive Windows installers or super high-res video files. Or cloning an entire hard drive / doing a full backup ... from one such NVMe to another ... quite an unlikely scenario.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: PC Tailor

PC Tailor

Distinguished
Herald
... and ^ this is the only scenario in which the large sequential read/write speeds would actually come into play, right ? 3500 MB/s / 3300 MB/s for the Samsung 970 EVO Plus, for instance.

So, basically, copying huge files - either macOS app files (like Xcode app bundles which can be around 10GB) or massive Windows installers or super high-res video files. Or cloning an entire hard drive / doing a full backup ... from one such NVMe to another ... quite an unlikely scenario.
Yes, maybe the other option is movie / advanced graphical editing which is moving large amounts of data for the program rapidly could benefit, but it wouldn't be huge from my experience, as the zero access time is across all SSD drives. But again as you say, it's the minority of people in that bucket.

Maybe one day there will be more usage of it, but as of now, not a fat lot!
 
Reactions: brokeBuilder2019
Sep 13, 2019
22
9
15
0
Wow; you guys are awesome; I could spend the whole days reading (internet) and I would not have collected this much super information. Just super/super thans. I'll have to re-read several times the primary hard drive 1 and 2 suggestions to get it right.
 

PC Tailor

Distinguished
Herald
Wow; you guys are awesome; I could spend the whole days reading (internet) and I would not have collected this much super information. Just super/super thans. I'll have to re-read several times the primary hard drive 1 and 2 suggestions to get it right.
Sorry, we may have sidetracked slightly.

To put it simply, when it comes to the storage drives, undoubtedly get an SSD - but I would generally say don't spend much extra on an NVME M2 drive as you won't notice a difference in your application. If it is the same price or only a tiny bit extra, then why not :)

I would personally opt for the RX5700XT over the 2060 Super (if the super was your option) as whilst it uses a bit more power, for straight gaming it will generally be better for probably less cost (the RX is much cheaper by me than the 2060S so it's a no brainer here).

And never - ever - scrimp on the power supply :)
That's one of the biggest mistakes I tend to see, if you want a bit more info, I created a custom build "less obvious" mistakes guide here: https://forums.tomshardware.com/threads/top-not-as-obvious-mistakes-made-when-selecting-parts-for-a-custom-pc.3510178/
 
Reactions: brokeBuilder2019
Sep 14, 2019
68
13
45
3
Wow; you guys are awesome; I could spend the whole days reading (internet) and I would not have collected this much super information. Just super/super thans. I'll have to re-read several times the primary hard drive 1 and 2 suggestions to get it right.
So you've decided to build as opposed to buy ?

About the storage drives, the debate was about - which drive type to use for your primary drive: i.e. NVMe M.2 (newer, more expensive, allegedly faster in some cases) vs SATA (older, more common, cheaper). Both are SSD types ... they just represent different interfaces through which data is transferred.

The conclusion of our discussion was that, in the context of daily computer use for most people, NVMe M.2 SSD drives are not always going to provide the huge speed advantage they advertise. In other words, their price/performance ratio isn't all that favorable for most people. So, don't buy an NVMe M.2 unless you get a good deal on one or the cost isn't too much more than a regular SATA SSD. A regular SATA SSD will be just as good for you, performance-wise, and a fair bit cheaper, if you don't find a NVMe M.2 on sale.
 
Last edited:

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS