Originally posted by reptromiki
DDR2-SDRAM PC2-0 (0 MHz)
Err... wth??? try running a test again, or look for a memtest program, you might have a dead stick of ram man...
btw, using 2 completely different kinds of ram isin't reccomended, although it should be ok as the faster ram stick should downclock itself to the same speeds as the slower ram (hah! I soo guessed it at PC2100. you all saw it, I rock.
So yeah, let's say you have a stick of pc2100 you bought for $30 (just making up prices hea), and then a stick of pc3200 for $60. Now, if ya put both in your comp? the pc3200 will act as a pc2100 in order for your system to work fine with both sticks of ram at the same time. So technically you won't be getting full ram potential. Thus, it's actually more cost-effective to buy 2 of the same instead of one slower stick and a faster stick. better off 2 same speeds. Yep. Kindof like a 3 legged race eh? you can only work as fast as the person you're stuck with, you need to work in synchonization, or else you stuble n' crash.
To answer your question of why his comp might be loading faster is cause your (maybe) bummed stick of ram. Another reason would be your bud has a lot less to load. You're loading high-rez textures, high-rez shaders, high-quality pixel shader effects, high-poly geometry.. while your bud's loading low rez textures, maybe basic shaders, and basic pixel shader effects.
Now for textures, I can give you a prime example for loading speeds. now low rez textures are like 128x128. the filesize would probably be ~50KB's eh? but think, on games like bf2, how many different textures you see? ground, grass, walls, doors, fences, player arms, hands, guns, water, sky... you get the idea, a helluva lot. so 50KB's x (ballparking it here) 200 different textures is 15000KB's worth of textures, or 14.6MB's (bytes of memory is in measurements of 1024, NOT 1000) of textures.
Now you on the other hand with higher-rez textures, most likely 512x512 or larger, that's maybe ~170KB's a texture file. Times that by (again ballparked) 300 textures is 51000KB or 49.8MB's. As you can see, the size diff is quite huge. Now my guestimations are just minor, the actual texture sizes and amounts will vary huge, especially nowadays since everything's much more complex.
So yeah, the less to load, obviously the smaller loading times. In the end, waiting an extra 20 seconds for great visuals and a good framerate to go with it, ain't it worth it? your bud may flaunt his faster loading times, but for the next 10+ mins of gameplay you'll get to be like "wow that tree looks soo real in high-rez man! come look, It's like I can almost reach out n' touch it... hey, how comes along your realisim gaming there buddy?" yep.
Oh btw, another reason is probably your cpu man. It's the bottleneck of your system now that you have a 6600GT in there. The faster the cpu the faster the loading times. Of course if you loaded low rez stuff too like your bud, most likely your system would load faster since I'm guessing your cpu's probably stronger than your buds. It's plenty good for loading small files, but for those more demanding gaming? obviously it'll demand more from your computer... anywho, enough of me rambling, you probably get the idea.