600x Slower With Maximum RAM (576mb)?

[norm]

I just installed 2x256mb into my 600x and it seems a little slower than when I only had 1x256mb+1x128mb installed. Everything works ok, but it just doesn't seem as snappy as before.

Anyone notice anything similar? Is there a memory cache issue with the 440bx motherboard and >512mb ram?

The os is Ubuntu 7.10 and I wasn't running out of memory before (swapping) so I didn't expect any performance change at all.

Any ideas? I'm not in the mood pull the ram to run before/after benchmarks.

Thanks...
-Norm

[gator]

My 600X runs awesome with the memory maxed out ... Are all your RAM modules of the same speed?

[BillP]

Using the RAM benchmark in PC Wizard 2007, I see no difference between 576MB and 320MB in my 600X.

[Medicopter]

My 600X runs awesome with the memory maxed out ... Are all your RAM modules of the same speed?

Same here.

[norm]

The ram is a matched set of Samsung M464S3323CN0-L1L .

It must all be in my head then. Thanks for verifying everybody. I'm probably just worrying over nothing...
-Norm

[unrortit]

depends on how the bios utilises memory bank interleaving arrangments.for the record the 600 x score exceptionally well in memory benchmarks eclipsing intel 810,815+845 sdram banks
easy in ram int buffered reads,however lags behind in ram float buffered reads margins compared to a decent bx chipset desktop board,why i cannot comprehend other than the engineer responsable in that area did not maximise efficiency by a long shot.

Further tests revealed an identical chipset in the hp 4150 p111 laptops exceeded the 600x scores in both departments,which concluded why the 4150 was a better performer mghz for mghz
with out any embedded ram,maybe by chance you could try to disable the onboard ram,despite ibms bios supporting only 3-2-2 timings ,as opposed to hps 2-2-2 ,its better than 3-3-2 of norm,which by all accounts very retarded for the proven 2-2-2 bx chipsets indeed. (my only dissapointment with the 600x design)