torch
New Member
Posts: 22
|
Post by torch on Aug 13, 2006 6:45:11 GMT 7
if I can get my unit up and stable, I have every intention of attempting some memory upgrades on this. It appears that it's a normal 256mb DDR. Anyone have any further info on this? Timing>?
Unbuffered?
once it's running it will be a simple matter of trying some different chips. It will either boot or not. we'll see.
|
|
|
|
Post by zendaver on Aug 25, 2006 13:33:17 GMT 7
I experimented a bit with my Thecus N5200's ram memory, but didn't do any testing to see whether I gained any performance. I had success with two 512MB SIMM modules and failure with two 1GB SIMM modules. All were non-ECC, unbuffered and DDR400 / PC3200 or better. I don't know what is really needed. See my "Compatible DDR Modules" post above for more details.
-ZenDaveR
|
|
|
|
Post by N2100Owner on Aug 25, 2006 20:48:18 GMT 7
Tom's Networkiong article has detailed test procedure. Perhaps you can run it and let us know the performance difference between 256 MB and 512 MB. 
|
|
|
|
Post by zendaver on Sept 6, 2006 15:14:45 GMT 7
I used IOZone as suggested in the TomsHardware link you sited, to test the default 256MB DIMM versus a 512MB DIMM. I tested with my 95% full, but not fragmented, RAID 5 - 5 x Seagate 400GB. I didn't test with ethernet jumbo frames (N5200 offers 4K, 8K, 12K & 16K).
My test PC plugged directly into the N5200BR switch:
Athlon 64 X2 4400+; Nforce4 chipset; Marvell Yukon Gbit ethernet; w/1 GB RAM (I robbed two DIMMS to test with one) on a clean WinXP Pro SP2 w/patches.
Ram tested on Thecus N5200BR, besides the default 256MB module, was a Kingston HyperX PC3200/DDR400 detailed on a previous post.
I did the "new" Tom's hardware recommended Read Performance tests with 64KB record sizes against files 32KB - 1MB. I ran the 256MB one twice because it spiked a bit funny. You can graph this yourself.
"File Sizes". "256MB Read KB/sec", "256MB Read re-test KB/sec", "512MB Read KB/sec"
32768, 36751, 42319, 42688
65536, 31482, 35656, 33319
131072, 38505, 37318, 31739
262144, 18673, 18308, 32969
524288, 20773, 23460, 21045
1048576, 22303, 19853, 22704
Really, I'd say there is nothing compelling about upping the ram, at least not for a RAID 5 setup like mine.
Another performance test that might have more meaning to some. I backed-up my N5200 to an Athlon 64 3200+, Nforce3 mb, nforce Gb; w/4xWD 400GB to onboard SiL SATA RAID 0 (software RAID) under WinXP. I think the write speed was my bottleneck.
1243.59GB (159898 files) copied in 16:41 hrs is about 20.7 MB/s
-ZenDaveR
|
|
|
|
Post by Arctra on Jan 24, 2007 18:40:17 GMT 7
Hi there. U don't happen to have a copy of that testing guide still do you? It seems to have been removed from Toms Hardware :-(
|
|
