«

[KrazeeXXL]

here is your answer Japo:

Originally Posted by Japo

...unfortunately Dell doesn't provide proper documentation at this level. I think it's a (possibly customized) Intel motherboard, but I'm not sure which one.

I could write an epic rant about Dell but it wouldn't be useful in any way. So I shorten it to: Dell is crap and I'd never use it as my hardware@home ever.

Sorry can't help you on this one.

[Kugerfang]

16 gig!? Are you insane? Even Bill Gates said that 640k ought to be enough for everybody!

[KrazeeXXL]

I'm kinda astonished that nobody mentionend a bios update before. (neither me )

had some trouble to get my 1866 RAM working on full speed but after the bios update I found an extra profile with the correct RAM-timings and since then it works like a charme...

edit: ok, just read you stated to already have the latest bios. in this case looking a bit around in that bios can't hurt. I found that profile in the bios of mine under d.o.c.p. (dram overclock profiles). auto-detect and memOK! didn't work and always set it back to just 1333...

[Dewfire]

At this date, any RAM over 8GB even with a Windows 7 x64 OS is wasted unless you have an application (not a game) that is specifically programmed to use that much RAM. Otherwise, most games, even the newest beasts such as Skyrim, will only use 4 GB and then switch over to the Page File.

Are you running multiple VM's or something Japo!? In a server instance running VM's is the only time I'd see the need for that much RAM.

[Japo]

Originally Posted by Dewfire

At this date, any RAM over 8GB even with a Windows 7 x64 OS is wasted unless you have an application (not a game) that is specifically programmed to use that much RAM. Otherwise, most games, even the newest beasts such as Skyrim, will only use 4 GB and then switch over to the Page File.

Yes but not quite, it's 2 GB usually and 4 GB if specifically programmed. But that's 32-bit applications, x64 applications get 8,192 GB:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778.aspx

Are you running multiple VM's or something Japo!? In a server instance running VM's is the only time I'd see the need for that much RAM.

Of course that much memory is useful only to share among several applications. You can always set up a virtual disk though. At any rate I don't have to worry about the performance bottleneck, no matter how many applications I'm running at the same time. And yes I can run VMs like there's no tomorrow. :P But really I'm just a nerd, and RAM is really cheap, I just wanted to max the computer out before the price of DDR3 started to go up with time after it's superseded and become rarer.

Well it's maxed out now. :P I realize I have 8 GB and just now retail "pro" computers are beginning to pack 6 GB. The whole point about this computer, that's almost four years old, was that I wouldn't go bankrupt buying it, but also because I don't plan to replace it for a looong time yet.

[hunvagy]

Originally Posted by Japo

Yes but not quite, it's 2 GB usually and 4 GB if specifically programmed. But that's 32-bit applications, x64 applications get 8,192 GB:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778.aspx



Of course that much memory is useful only to share among several applications. You can always set up a virtual disk though. At any rate I don't have to worry about the performance bottleneck, no matter how many applications I'm running at the same time. And yes I can run VMs like there's no tomorrow. :P But really I'm just a nerd, and RAM is really cheap, I just wanted to max the computer out before the price of DDR3 started to go up with time after it's superseded and become rarer.

Well it's maxed out now. :P I realize I have 8 GB and just now retail "pro" computers are beginning to pack 6 GB. The whole point about this computer, that's almost four years old, was that I wouldn't go bankrupt buying it, but also because I don't plan to replace it for a looong time yet.

Well a bit late, but maybe the ram is not compatible with your motherboard. Though if it's DELL, might be hard to find out what kind of board you have. Other idea is that the sticks you bought are paired up. Meaning that the first two have to be in 1-2, the second in 3-4, depending on how the RAM slots are Ganged. Third idea is going into BIOS, and adjusting the RAM timer manually.

[Japo]

No, by now the problem has been perfectly identified. There has been no problem since I cut back to 8 GB. I was just dumb enough to plan an upgrade without looking at the motherboard manual--and lucky enough that, even though it was designed for 2 GB sticks at most, 4 of them at most, it works with 4 GB sticks too (as long as you don't plug more than 2, of course).

As I said the motherboard is a Dell version of a particular Intel one, but I have no way of knowing whether it's been modified only to print Dell's name, or further. But the memory's been working without trouble for a long time now, and it was always well paired (sticks bought together)--not that it's necessary, the computer can also work in single or mixed channel without trouble. Of course I didn't buy it from Dell, they expect you to pay triple, but by now it's clear it works with my motherboard. Though now I understand why Dell's website offered no sticks bigger than 2 GB for my computer...

Also Dell's BIOS doesn't allow you to tweak anything, no overclocking, no manual memory timings, nothing. It's possible that the motherboard is so identical to Intel's non OEM version that Intel's BIOS worked, but I'm not going to find out. Specially since all works great now.