The results are in and the performance is interesting. I ran 2 tests five times on each of the ram configurations. Here are the averages of the results . Super Pi lower times in seconds is better Xbench score# out of 100% 512MB PC-133 512MB PC-100 512MB PC-133 Super pi ~ 229 seconds Best Run 225, don't know how i got this before but i got it as a single result before. Xbench ~ 34.29 score # 512MB PC-133 --------------------- 512MB PC-133 Super pi ~ 233 seconds Xbench ~ 34.62 score # 512MB PC-133 128MB PC-133 512MB PC-133 Super pi ~ 237 seconds Xbench ~ 34.21 score # So there is no significant performance penalty it seems the 33 Mhz does not make much of a difference. One thing of note is that the 512MB PC-100 Ram branded Crucial is rated on the side as PC133 but shows up as PC-100 in the System profiler. I wonder if that is a labeling mistake from Crucial? OLD QUESTION: ------------------------------------- Does anyone know from a past experience how much of a performance penalty is achieved by doing something like this. With all the talk of memory on here lately PC-133 Vs PC-100 ,etc. I decided to do some checking of my own and discovered to my surprise a PC-100 module. My computer is a Power Mac G4 Quicksilver 867 Mhz and it can take full advantage of PC-133 memory with a 133 MHZ system bus. Well, anyway I was wondering if anyone knew of how much of a real world performance penalty I am causing myself. To my understanding this computer slows all of the other ram to 100 Mhz if a PC-100 module is used. I will do the test myself next week of pulling out the PC-100 module , but for now i am just wondering how much if any of a speed- boost will be noticed. Now I am running: 512MB PC-133 512MB PC-100 512MB PC-133 Plan to test it without the PC-100 chip, and also with a 128 MB PC-133 chip. I wonder what I might get for results.... If I will need to buy a 512 MB PC-133 or not.... I plan to do performance testing using xbench and Super Pi I will post the result next week sometime. Too busy now with Finals, etc... Daniel J. Brieck Jr.