Ok, I'm looking at upgrading my system and I have an interesting question on Dual Channel vs Single channel that I can't even seem to find anyone else asking, much less an answer. The processor I am planning to get has an FSB of 1066MHz. Now, as I understand it, you have a bandwidth limitation on your FSB. Which in the case of a 1066MHz FSB would be (1066 / 4) * 8 = ~8.5GB/s You also have a bandwidth limitation on your memory. Everything I have been reading suggests using PC4200 (or in many cases, one step up to PC5400) when you have an FSB of 1066, this is because the bandwidth of the PC42 is ~4.2GB/s which is about half of 8.5GB/s Thus, by using Dual Channel technology you can get a total *peak* memory bandwidth that matches your FSB. I have an issue with this.. Yes you have a total peak bandwidth of 8.4 .. But what if all the data you are currently trying to access just happens to be stored on one of the sticks? Then do you get an actual bandwidth of 4.2? Basically, what I am looking for is a benchmark comparison between say, Dual Channel PC4200 and Single Channel PC8500. Or a definitive answer that paying the approx 2-3x as much for the PC8500 is going to give me or not give me a significant speed increase. (Or an explanation of why I am an idiot..., that would be cool too). The benchmark comparison would be the most helpful, an approximate % performance difference between the two would be nearly as nice. There is more I could say about this.. but I think I will wait and see what kind of responses I get before asking more questions..
