64GB RAM - 2x32, or 4x16?

Hi. Which of these RAM configurations would be better for a Dell Precision 7740 laptop with i7-9850H processor?

I'm not bothered about keeping slots free for upgrading - just looking for best performance now.

Thanks

 

Depends on your workload. In theory, having all 4 populated will give you the best performance, as it maximizes parallel throughput. Also, using 2 row RAM vs 1 row also increases throughput. 16GB modules should be dual row, as are 32GB ones.

 

ARK says that processor supports 128GB, so without a doubt 2x32GB - you can upgrade later cheaper and faster.

2 modules will use less power and generate less heat than 4.

Performance difference is unnoticeable, you only have 2 channels.

Resale value of 32GB sticks is higher.

From experience, upgrading 4x4GB to 4x8GB sticks was a pain, had to replace all modules, and sell the old ones. Always good to have just empty slots - decide you want more RAM? Pop in a new module or two.

 

A new 3700x build had 2x8GB to start, and was running great - VM was system managed set to 16GB on 2TB boot SSD (Corsair MP600), and I thought I had enough memory...

Then it was time to start building VM's so I found: Corsair CMK64GX4M2E3200C16 Vengeance LPX 64GB (2 X32GB) 16-20-20-38 DDR4 3200 on sale for $290 @ Central Computers
https://www.centralcomputer.com/cor...2gb-ddr4-3200-1-35v-desktop-memory-black.html

And it's running great, with the 64GB to work with the system running my normal daily setup is showing I am using 15GB++ before I start loading VM's.

I've got 2 slots left, and I wouldn't be surprised to see a need for another pair of 2x32GB's in my future when I start loading up VM's... I hope CC keeps the price low.

It looks like you have 4 slots and plenty of configuration options, how those slots are spread out can make expansion a pain from the stock configuration if you are doing it on your own, if you can configure it on order with a full boat (all 4 slots filled) that would be best.

If you get 2 slots filled by Dell (or reseller), then later you have to find the same memory make / model / batch to be sure it's compatible. Always get pair or quad packs of matched memory rather than try to get disparate batches of memory to work together. It might work, but it might not.

Price is a factor too, the prices are low now and buying all 4 is cheapest in a long time. Kinda trying to talk myself into picking up another pair while CC has them in stock so I can swap for another pair if the 1st 2nd pair I get isn't compatible.

So if you can swing it get 4x 32GB now...

Memory Table 1. Memory specifications
https://www.dell.com/support/manual...a070cc-7772-48fd-bddc-84b148afe28e&lang=en-us

 

I recommend 2x32GB if price isn't an issue.

You can always upgrade in the future if needed by adding another 2x32GB.

4x16GB will mean you need to buy 4x32GB in the future.

 

Thanks guys. The difference in price between 2x32 and 4x16 is negligible (one is £695 and one is £672).

I appreciate the upgrade issue (i.e. 2x32 is better in that respect, and the point about having to match modules in the future etc), but I'm purely after advice on the performance differences between the two configurations. The upgrading issue I can decide on myself. Doubt I really need 64GB anyway, so pretty sure I'll never need 128.

Reading the answers above, it seems that in theory 4x16 is better, but in reality it's negligible?

Thanks!

 

You won't see any noticeable difference in performance between 4x16GB and 2x32GB.

Here's where the importance comes in....speed and latency.

Higher speed and lower latency will be better. So if we are looking at like 4x16GB 3200Mhz vs 2x32GB 2666Mhz etc then I'd choose the faster 3200Mhz.

 

It varies by motherboard implementation. You'd need someone that owns that make / model / configuration to actually try it to see if there is a difference in performance. And, your specific application needs will make a big difference in whether you'll notice differences in configurations.

Generally 2x will get higher performance and lower latency than powering 4x, but that can vary too based on DIMMS used.

The 2x32GB C16 3200mhz is the fastest I've found in 32GB DIMM's, but there are C14 16GB DIMM's at even higher speeds.

You'll have to do more digging for some owners reports, and / or test it yourself. Buy 2x16 / 4x16 at highest speed / Cas at best price and same for 2x32, and test it on your applications.

You can always sell the memory you don't need / want to keep - or return it for a full refund - make sure there's no re-stocking fee for returns where you buy it - and do the testing quickly so you can return it within the return window - usually 7 days to 30 days.

Please come back and let us know how it works out.

 

Thanks. 3200Mhz is available but is hugely more expensive than 2666, so I've already decided to stick to 2666.

If there's no noticeable difference in performance, makes sense to go for 2x32GB just in case I ever do want to upgrade to 128GB (I'd say extremely unlikely but you never know...)

Thanks

Thanks. Probably won't get the opportunity for testing, but my needs are photoshop editing (large files - I've maxed out the 32GB on my current laptop a few times) and 4k video editing. Also 3D CAD work.

"Generally 2x will get higher performance and lower latency than powering 4x, but that can vary too based on DIMMS used." - that is just another case for 2 x 32 rather than 4 x 16.

Looks like 2x32 is the way to go then. Thanks guys

 

If you've maxed out 32GB, you will likely need more RAM sometime in the future

Performance difference will not be noticeable, if at all different, assuming same clocks and timings.

4K video work alone can eat up your 64GB, the processor used to be a bottleneck, but that 9850H is a beast and will handle it.

Remember when 16GB was more than you'll ever need? Good times

 

Still running an AMD 9950 Black with *4GB* and Vista - from a time when 4GB was "massive". Runs fine, in fact I can do the same work on it as I can on the 3700x + 64GB... up to a point...

From the same "era" I've got a 24GB DDR3 980x x58 build still running aok, and that memory was *expensive* back then, 24gb DDR3 back then was almost 3x as much as the 64GB DDR4 bought last week.

The jump in cores + throughput is going to open lots of opportunities to fill memory, if you have the need.

16GB was the standard, I'm thinking 32GB base is a good size for new builds now.

 

Yep - def need more than 32 so going for 64. Based on advice I've got here I'll go for 2x32 then I can upgrade to 128 if I ever need to.

Glad to hear the i7-9850H is a beast - I think that'll do me - I won't bother with the i9 or the xeon. But that's another topic.... (feel free to comment on that though!)

 

Based on your workloads below, the 128GB option is what you should be buying today at the low RAM prices we're enjoying.

Buy all 4 identical sticks and be comfortable in the knowledge that they won't present a compatibility issue for your platform.

As mentioned, the platform you have can easily support the higher capacity.

Is this paid work or personal?

In either case, the time savings of effectively negating the RAM 'wall' is worth it for me, you can see between 20% to 40% decrease for a given (fixed) workflow, not to mention the ability to continue using the platform for more mundane tasks while it crunches the data without affecting the actual work (significantly).

 

The paid part of my work probably only needs 16GB RAM (mechanical and electrical CAD related stuff). The massive photoshop files and 4k video editing are a hobby. Although 128GB would be nice, I can't justify the extra £800 it costs. I haven't actually done much 4k video editing before (because my current PC can't handle it) so not entirely sure how much I'll need, but I'd feel a lot more confident with 64GB than 32GB, so the 64GB is easy to justify. I'll take the advice from here and get 2x32 so I can always add another 2x32 if I ever find I do need to...

Thanks

 

Wow, these prices are outrageous. On eBay, 2x 32GB Samsung DDR4 2666 SO-DIMM modules cost $266 total, shipping included. I believe you'll save a noticeable sum, even after expensive UK taxes.

 

@jack574, thanks for replying. You know your budget best.

What I know is that your workflows already point towards that 128GB RAM capacity, but you'll be prepared for an easy upgrade at the very least.

That 4K video editing that you're avoiding currently will still be an issue at 64GB, I would buy 4x 32GB sticks now and return two if your workflows really don't require them (and you may be able to get away with 3x 32GB SODIMMs, for example, even if they're not optimally matched in Dual Channel mode, the capacity may be all you need, today).

Let us know how this upgrade goes for you.

I didn't notice those prices (£695)!

Yeah, time to have them shipped in...

 

I'm configuring a new dell on their website:

RAM prices:



The thing is, I've had several Dells before and all have had issues and needed warranty work, so I'm reluctant to buy RAM separately in case there's any issue with it. I also want to make sure it's matched optimally to the system I'm ordering, and I don't have enough knowledge to do that myself...

Really? Surprised to hear that - my mate edits videos professionally on a macbook with I think either 8GB or 16GB RAM (although tbh I couldn't be sure he does 4k - thought he does but could be wrong). Interesting. I really can't stretch the extra £800 now so I'll prob do it the other way - stick with the 64GB and if it's not enough buy more from Dell...

Thanks

 

@jack574, I can't understand why you continue to buy Dell then?

Today, matching RAM is not an issue. I certainly wouldn't buy RAM from Lenovo for my ThinkPAD's... highway robbery.

If you're set on buying this Dell, buy it with 8GB RAM and upgrade it immediately. Keep that original stick for 'warranty' work.

As for the 4K editing, a little different between PC vs. MAC... It also depends on the type and quantity of edits you'll be doing and the software you use too.

If he really is doing 4K editing with 8 or 16 GB RAM on a MacBook day in and day out, professionally, he has the patience of a saint... and/or very minimal editing is needed for his projects.

 

Dell tends to overcharge for memory as do most mainstream notebook makers. I'd recommend you get the minimum and upgrade yourself, as others have noted. Dell has good service manuals that explain how to replace the RAM modules.

Upgrading yourself will not affect your warranty. However, Dell may request you return the notebook to its original configuration before doing any service work, so keep the parts you take out and just reinstall them if it needs service.

2x 32GB is the way to go (versus 4x 16GB). The way I look at it is that it's two points of failure versus four.

Charles

 

Good question about still buying Dell - basically I don't want an HP or Lenovo, and although I've had a lot of issues with Dell laptops, each time they've visited me on site the next working day to fix the issue, and when they haven't been able to they've just given me a brand new current equivalent laptop. I bought an M70 about 20 years ago and since then I've had an M6500, M6600 and M6700 without spending a penny more than I paid for my original M70! My M6700 has issues now, but worked flawlessly for nearly 7 years.

How do I choose the RAM to get then? Will any recognised brand DDR4 module work?

Could I use these?

Samsung 32GB DDR4 2666MHz RAM Memory Module for Laptop Computers (260 Pin SODIMM, 1.2V) M471A4G43MB1 https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B07N124XDS/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_ESq8Db8QPKKXD

Thanks a lot

Thank you. If i end up buying my ram separately, maybe i will just get the 128 now... If not, will def go for 2x32 over 4x16.

 

Yeah, those DDR4 SODIMMs will work. And we just saved you ~£75 and you get 2x the RAM as a Xmas bonus.

I don't know how you spent once on Dell and went from n M70 to an M6700, but that is great!

What don't you like about Lenovo (HP; I understand...)?

For me, they have some of the best workstations available today and they also offer next day on-site service which I haven't needed to use in a very long time (because the products are better).

 

Great! No performance reduction or anything by using non-Dell RAM?

Basically each time my laptop went wrong, they tried to fix it, and 3 times (once each for the M70, M6500 and M6600) they ultimately gave up and just replaced it. I can't even remember what the issues were now. Unfortunately, the M6700 worked perfectly so I don't get a free 7740!

Lenovo - I'd actually already placed an order for a P73 but then read reviews saying it overheated and had problems with throttling the GPU and the CPU significantly. I looked into it more and went on discussion forums and loads of people said they'd eventually got their P73s working well, but each one of them had had to reinstall Windows from scratch and mess about with drivers and removing specific parts of Lenovo's software. I really couldn't be bothered to do all that with a brand new PC out of the box, so I cancelled my order. I didn't find a single forum post where people said they'd had no issues and it worked perfectly first time.

https://forums.lenovo.com/t5/ThinkP...P73-high-CPU-temp-and-throttling/td-p/4581947
https://forums.lenovo.com/t5/ThinkP...-Thermal-Power-Throttling/td-p/4528377/page/3
https://forums.lenovo.com/t5/ThinkP...6c-Xeon-32GB-ECC/td-p/4521862/highlight/false
etc...
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Lenov...ed-down-by-poor-heat-management.445929.0.html

Hence the Dell!

 

There is no such thing as Dell RAM.

Yeah, the P73 is not what I would pick. But that P53 is a powerhouse (I don't consider the 's' versions).

Also, having to do a clean install is what I do by default. No OEM software installs for me...

 

I've just found this website that is cheaper than Amazon (always like to find an alternative to Amazon)
https://www.mrmemory.co.uk/contact
They sell memory for the 7730 but don't list the 7740 - I'm guessing the same memory will work, it's just that the 7740 is so new they haven't listed it yet.

I really need a 17" screen, hence the P73.... A lot of those throttling problems were related to the P53 too...

Really? Do you not need the OEM software in general? If you do a clean install from a Win10 ISO on a memory stick, does it pick up the OEM licence key from the motherboard?

Thanks!

 

The password is stored in the BIOS/UEFI, in the ACPI table, Windows 10 look for a valid key when you do an install, and it even knows what version to install, if you have Win 10 Home, it installs Win 10 Home, you have Win 10 Pro, it auto install the Win 10 Pro version.

 

Yeah, it will 'pick it up' from the UEFI (Bios). Just download the latest ISO as a file, use Rufus to create the UEFI (not MBR) installer. Disable Secure Boot in the UEFI, insert the USB installer you created with Rufus and install as clean an image as possible on your new system. Many Dells have been 'saved' by me by doing just this - even if I still wouldn't use them myself.

On the Lenovo systems, after all the Windows updates are complete, install Lenovo Vantage and make sure to check for any driver (and BIOS) updates required. Done.

If you're pushing the P73/P53 that hard that they throttle (and they do, in their very top configurations), I can't see how a Dell is superior? Even when throttled they push out the work faster (i.e. still more productive) than (almost) anything else you can buy.

As for needing a 17" screen? This is something that greatly increases the screen real-estate for me: ThinkVision M14 Portable Monitor.

See:
https://www.lenovo.com/us/en/thinkvisionM14/

A slightly bigger screen (only ~1.4" bigger from a 15.6") will always lose to a 2 monitor setup when actual productivity is needed.

 

According to those forum posts the Lenovo Vantage was causing a lot of issues... Regarding the throttling - as you can tell I don't know a lot about PCs - I just read a lot of reports about poor heating and throttling due to heat and due to Lenovo software issues. Couldn't find any such reports about the Dell - only good reviews.

Another advantage over the Dell is that it has 2 more m.2 slots than the P73 (4 vs 2).

I work between two places - in each place I have 2 external monitors, with a space between them for the laptop in the middle to make up 3 monitors altogether.

 

Yeah, the P53 has 3 M.2 slots with the 'right' GPU (any RTX GPU) installed too.

I can't say that 4 slots could ever be fully utilized on any mobile platform we have today?

See:
https://forums.lenovo.com/t5/ThinkP...-Throttling/m-p/4597579/highlight/true#M85249

The second post on that page is a good read.

The Lenovo Vantage utility isn't the issue. Its what it suggests to install...

 

Yeah, I saw that post. I really can't be bothered to buy a brand new PC and have to mess around like that as soon as I get it out of the box. Regardless of those CPU bugs that the reinstall fixes, I also read loads of stuff about how to get the best performance out of the P73 it needs to be lifted off the desk to improve the airflow, and the fans need controlling with a 3rd party app.

All those things together put me off the P73. Hopefully the Dell will be more straightforward...

"I can't say that 4 slots could ever be fully utilized on any mobile platform we have today?" - what do you mean by that?

Thanks again

 

I just wanted to point out to do the same with the storage device too. Order it with a 500GB HDD if you can. Remove it upon receipt (I've stopped even booting up new systems with the drives as delivered). Store for 'warranty' purposes, indefinitely.

Then, buy the biggest and highest performing SSD that is best suited for your usage and expectations and use the Rufus created Windows installer and see what the platform is really capable of.

I wish you the best with the Dell, but there hasn't been one that has outperformed my ThinkPADs.

As for the 4 M.2 PCIe x4 SSD's, there are not enough PCIe lanes available on a mobile platform today to fully utilize that kind of storage firepower. Like painting flames on a Chevette, if you know what I mean. Sure, you can have the capacity, but the (total) performance decreases with each M.2 drive added.

You may find that the latest AMD thread rippers (desktop) might have that kind of capability (the possibility to use it would be something else though, even on a desktop).

'Being bothered' to properly set up a new PC isn't a buying decision. It's what needs to be done to get the most out of your chosen platform.

 

Ah ok. Yeah, I did think about that, but the saving wouldn't really be enough to make it worth me messing around with reinstalling windows. Although I appreciate what you're saying about always doing a clean install on a new PC anyway - why is that, if you haven't encountered any problems, out of interest?

(I'm learning a lot today - thanks)

"As for the 4 M.2 PCIe x4 SSD's, there are not enough PCIe lanes available on a mobile platform today to fully utilize that kind of storage firepower. Like painting flames on a Chevette, if you know what I mean. Sure, you can have the capacity, but the (total) performance decreases with each M.2 drive added."

Oh right - that's double dutch to me, but I get the drift! Does the performance decrease significantly?

And if you wanted a 17" screen rather than a 15", would those threads and reviews about the issues the Lenovos have not put you off them?

128GB for less than the price of 64GB from Dell - thanks guys!

 

The 128GB of RAM will give you total freedom for 4K video editing, you'll have no hesitation about doing it now. To me that peace of mind would make the investment worthwhile.

I usually run Windows' built-in memory diagnostic to verify the RAM is working without basic errors. It's not as thorough as memtest86+ but it works for a quick analysis. Open Start menu > type 'Windows memory diagnostic' and click on the app and follow the instructions.

On a semi-related note, I'd recommend you get familiar with Throttlestop. You can squeeze more performance out of that Core i7-9850H and make your notebook run cooler.

I think what tiller was referring to is that there is only so much bandwidth available on the PCIe lanes. Let's say out of 100% of the available PCIe bandwidth to the storage drives, one drive might be able to use up to 33% of it, which would mean you can fully utilize three such drives. (That is, there's enough PCIe bandwidth that three drives wouldn't have to share it if they are all being fully utilized. Utilize = read/write at maximum throughput.) Adding a fourth drive to that scenario would mean there is less maximum bandwidth available to each drive (25%) if maximum performance is being simultaneously demanded from them, thus your total possible read/write performance across all drives would be no different with three drives versus four or any larger number. I don't think that's an everyday scenario for most users but it's a limitation worth noting.

Charles

 

What I was also thinking about the RAM is if I upgrade in the future, I need to make sure the new modules exactly match the ones I've already got (I think?). Easier to buy a whole matching set of 4 x 32GB now.

Throttlestop - thanks for the recommendation but that looks a bit hardcore. As you can tell I know only the basics about computers. I don't think I'll get to tweaking the processor etc. I'll prob just use it as it is. Interesting though, I'll have a look.

Regarding the PCIe lanes - that makes sense, and if I'm understanding correctly would only be relevant if I was trying to read or write to all drives at their maximum rate simultaneously. My most likely configuration will be 1 drive for OS/programs, 1 drive for general file storage, and 1 for temp files for rendering videos etc (and maybe as the photoshop scratch drive etc).

Thanks a lot

 

I do 4K video editing in Final Cut Pro X on my 2013 MacBook Pro.

It has 16GB of RAM. I have seen up to 12GB max ever used so far [during strictly only FCPX open]

The 4K video is from a Nikon Z50 though so not RAW or ProRES.

I've edited hundreds of Nikon D800 (36MP sensor) images as well at the same time and I have gotten to 23GB used on my 24GB M18xR2 but that was stacking hundreds of pictures from a telescope session.

I think 64GB should get almost anything needed done.

 

Yup, you can do it because the tools have to work within the technology that was available when written, and small memory with pagefil configurations are what most people have to run.

( @jack574 )

That's why I'm either way with getting 128GB now. I suspect he'll likely never fully use all of it - but it's cheap and that memory should give a long life and good resale value to the laptop when he wants to upgrade - or he can take the memory with him to the next laptop (don't forget to keep the original memory in the box to replace later when you want to sell the laptop).

I've used large memory configuration servers as donors to populate new servers that must come online before their memory upgrades arrive - it's good to have a pool of memory available for reuse in new systems, why not keep it in service instead of sitting in the storage lockup? He could pull 2 of the SODIMM's for use in another laptop should he find he can live with 64GB aok.

And, he can likely function fine with 32GB, even 16GB would work, and 64GB is a large enough pool of memory in which to swim for 99% of users.

Like I was describing I was working fine with 16GB, but after I installed 64GB I found my normal usage hovered around 15GB+, and until I install VM's I won't be pushing the limits much further.

When VM's or other work cause me to hit the next limit I can swap in another pair of 32GB DIMM's and if they aren't stable I can return those, sell my 64GB upgrade, and buy a matched set of 4 32GB DIMM's.

We can always talk ourselves into buying more memory with future needs, and historically I've always found way to use it, but not everyone will - so it's prudent to temper your memory purchase's with some kind of restraint.

Although it also is best to get matched pairs and quads of memory, you can always sell off the old memory upgrade (64GB or even 32GB) and buy a full matched set down the road, or try buying the same make / model of memory to fill the empty slots - often that works fine for me, and 10k's of servers I've been a part of upgrading over the years.

128GB @ $600GBP ($800 USD) is a lot of money, and if you can get by on 1/2 or a 1/4 of that cost for your memory, you can invest that spare cash in other things you really need now, and upgrade the memory down the road.

Sorry to add more decisions into the mix, but realistically 128GB is a memory realm few see need for, and really you should save that joy of relief for later when you really need it.

Unless funds aren't an issue, but time is. For some of us we check all the boxes and get it done all at once because we can when we can, not because it's the most prudent thing to do but because it can save valuable time in the long run to have the resources available immediately when needed.

 

Thanks guys.

The place I'm going to buy the memory from said the modules I'm buying will still be available for many years to come, so I'll prob get 2x32GB now (I know I def need more than 32GB) and leave space for another 2x32GB in the future if I need it - I'll be able to buy another two modules identical to the first two.

 

Would it be a bad idea to leave the 8GB RAM in that the laptop ships with, as I'd then have a mixture of modules (2x32GB, + 1x8GB)?

 

You would need to test it. It's gone both ways for me. First, 8GB is a small addition to 64GB, and dual channel might be disabled for both pair of sockets if one pair is unbalanced (1 SODIMM instead of 2), or it might work smart and only disable dual channel for that single SODIMM.

You need to try it to find out for sure.

Also, make sure that of the 3 sockets free you pick the 2 sockets that match up for dual channel support to plug in the 2x32GB SODIMM's.

You have to weigh whether the benefits of an added 8GB negates the performance loss of all 72GB - if any - and go from there.

If you aren't going to reach the top end of 64GB, then what's the point of burning battery power lighting up the 8GB "3rd wheel"?

 

Yeah, makes sense. I'll prob just take it out.

Thanks

 

Looks like you can't use 3 sticks anyway - needs to be one, two or four...

 

@jack574

Clean Windows Install:

• This isn't merely about saving $$$, this is about having the most stable O/S install for your platform.
• It also offers the most performance possible that your platform is capable of, without any 'helper' programs the manufacturer thinks you need.
• An even greater benefit is that if there are issues and you need work done on the system, your data never leaves your premises. Simply remove your drives and RAM and ship it back with the HDD and original RAM it shipped with.
• Have you not read about how many OEM helper software has been compromised and allowed user data to be collected by malicious actors?
• A clean install is not an option, it is a necessity, IMO.
• And of course, you don't buy a throwaway 256/512/1TB SSD to do the clean install onto; you buy a 2TB drive to get the most sustained storage performance possible.

Why 4x M.2 PCIe x4 SSD's is a waste of resources on a current mobile system when highest overall performance is the goal:

See:
https://ark.intel.com/content/www/u...9850h-processor-12m-cache-up-to-4-60-ghz.html

Look under the 'Expansion Options' section in the link above for your processor. There are only 16 lanes maximum the processor can use. With an M.2 PCIe x4 drive, it can power 4 of them and that is all. No GPU, no LAN, no USB C, Thunderbolt or other fancy ports. Are you starting to see the limitations of putting 4x M.2 x4 drives on a current mobile platform?

Of course, the M/B can also have extra lanes enabled (via an additional chip), but that will still create a bottleneck on the platform eventually if the workflow pushes the components fully (and 4x M.2 PCIe drives would do that on its own).

I would guess that if a workflow included a very heavy storage subsystem usage (with 4x M.2 x4 drives), very heavy GPU usage, and one or more USB C/Thunderbolt connections being fully utilized, the whole system would be running at less than 1/2 to 1/3 of its maximum productivity capacity vs. using just one (or maybe two) M.2 drives and the same workload.

I can imagine it would feel laggy and stuttering and seem it was ready to crash with 4x M.2 x4 drives instead of feeling like the powerhouse it should.


17" vs. 15.6" Monitors:

Why exactly do you need that extra 1.4" for and how exactly does it benefit you. I'm not questioning if it benefits you or not; just curious.

For a given resolution (1920x1080 or even 4K res), the small increase in the viewing area is effectively nil at least to my eyes. Buying a system with a quality monitor will give you better viewing/comfort results than increasing the screen size by ~1.4".

I don't read threads or reviews about Lenovos (and/or IBMs, originally) ThinkPAD's, I just use them. There have been many ThinkPAD's that have been used daily in my operations for a decade at a time. The only reason to retire/donate them was that the budget to buy newer platforms was approved.

The best notebook monitors are not the 17" variety; the 15.6" segment far and away dominate.


Future availability of (any) component:

I would recommend you buy the full/matched 128GB of RAM available to you today. Believing any reseller that they'll be able to supply you the exact model you buy today is like believing in the tooth fairy.

As mentioned; even if your workflows ultimately do not need the 128GB of RAM, you'll be able to use it in other platforms (or simply sell it/return it).

Buy what's offered to you today to max out your platform. Just don't believe that it will be available indefinitely, or even next year. Especially RAM with its many variations and internal configurations that may make it incompatible with anything you can buy today.

At 128GB RAM, you're already saving ~£164 off what Dell would have liked to squeeze from you with only 2x 32GB. The savings of ~£955 plus the productivity improvements that 128GB RAM will offer is not something to be lightly passed up.

 

If I saw that I'd have to try booting on the 2x32GB + 1x8GB = 3 SODIMM's - to see what happens.

I wonder what happens with only populating A/C?

According to the chart the 8GB is installed in B, so you could try installing the 2x32GB as A/C - if that works it would save you from accessing the other side of the motherboard to get access to the sockets under the keyboard... unless that model allows the keyboard to pop out easily?

That's another thing, if you have to disassemble a bunch of laptop components to get at B/D that makes it a whole 'nuther kettle of fish. Are you comfortable with that level of DIY?

 

@tilleroftheearth - to answer your questions (and thank you for such a detailed response):

Clean Windows Install:

• This isn't merely about saving $$$, this is about having the most stable O/S install for your platform.
• It also offers the most performance possible that your platform is capable of, without any 'helper' programs the manufacturer thinks you need. Are these programs not sometimes needed?
• An even greater benefit is that if there are issues and you need work done on the system, your data never leaves your premises. Simply remove your drives and RAM and ship it back with the HDD and original RAM it shipped with. Fair point, but my warranty is next business day on site so should never be without my system.
• Have you not read about how many OEM helper software has been compromised and allowed user data to be collected by malicious actors? No...
• A clean install is not an option, it is a necessity, IMO. Interesting. I've never done that as I never knew it was something that should be done.
• And of course, you don't buy a throwaway 256/512/1TB SSD to do the clean install onto; you buy a 2TB drive to get the most sustained storage performance possible.

Why 4x M.2 PCIe x4 SSD's is a waste of resources on a current mobile system when highest overall performance is the goal:

See:
https://ark.intel.com/content/www/u...9850h-processor-12m-cache-up-to-4-60-ghz.html

Look under the 'Expansion Options' section in the link above for your processor. There are only 16 lanes maximum the processor can use. With an M.2 PCIe x4 drive, it can power 4 of them and that is all. No GPU, no LAN, no USB C, Thunderbolt or other fancy ports. Are you starting to see the limitations of putting 4x M.2 x4 drives on a current mobile platform?

Of course, the M/B can also have extra lanes enabled (via an additional chip), but that will still create a bottleneck on the platform eventually if the workflow pushes the components fully (and 4x M.2 PCIe drives would do that on its own).

I would guess that if a workflow included a very heavy storage subsystem usage (with 4x M.2 x4 drives), very heavy GPU usage, and one or more USB C/Thunderbolt connections being fully utilized, the whole system would be running at less than 1/2 to 1/3 of its maximum productivity capacity vs. using just one (or maybe two) M.2 drives and the same workload.

I can imagine it would feel laggy and stuttering and seem it was ready to crash with 4x M.2 x4 drives instead of feeling like the powerhouse it should.

Not sure if the drive that ships with the PC is an x4 or not. It's "M.2 1TB PCIe NVMe Class 40 Solid State Drive". The drive I've bought as the second M.2 is "Sabrent 2TB Rocket NVMe PCIe M.2 2280 Internal SSD High Performance Solid State Drive (SB-ROCKET-2TB)" which says in the description it's "M.2 PCIe Gen3 x 4 Interface." so I guess it is x4.

I have no idea about how this stuff works. Would the system need to be using all four drives intensively at the same time for it to be a problem?

17" vs. 15.6" Monitors:

Why exactly do you need that extra 1.4" for and how exactly does it benefit you. I'm not questioning if it benefits you or not; just curious. My usual working setup is the laptop sitting with an external monitor each side (so 3 screens in total). They're all the same resolution, and roughly the same distance away from my eyes, so the closer matched in size they are the better

For a given resolution (1920x1080 or even 4K res), the small increase in the viewing area is effectively nil at least to my eyes. Buying a system with a quality monitor will give you better viewing/comfort results than increasing the screen size by ~1.4".

I don't read threads or reviews about Lenovos (and/or IBMs, originally) ThinkPAD's, I just use them. There have been many ThinkPAD's that have been used daily in my operations for a decade at a time. The only reason to retire/donate them was that the budget to buy newer platforms was approved. Each to their own - I like to do my research before I spend a lot of money on a new computer! Threads (such as this one) and reviews (to a lesser extent) are the best way for me to do that.

The best notebook monitors are not the 17" variety; the 15.6" segment far and away dominate.


Future availability of (any) component:

I would recommend you buy the full/matched 128GB of RAM available to you today. Believing any reseller that they'll be able to supply you the exact model you buy today is like believing in the tooth fairy. No experience of this so will take your word for it.

As mentioned; even if your workflows ultimately do not need the 128GB of RAM, you'll be able to use it in other platforms (or simply sell it/return it).

Buy what's offered to you today to max out your platform. Just don't believe that it will be available indefinitely, or even next year. Especially RAM with its many variations and internal configurations that may make it incompatible with anything you can buy today.

At 128GB RAM, you're already saving ~£164 off what Dell would have liked to squeeze from you with only 2x 32GB. The savings of ~£955 plus the productivity improvements that 128GB RAM will offer is not something to be lightly passed up. Yeah, it is tempting I have to admit...

 

Happy with that level of DIY - I've taken my M6700 to bits a couple of times, as long as the screws aren't done up so tightly you can't unscrew them without stripping the heads. This can be a problem with Dells. Ended up having to drill some of them out on my M6700.

 

@jack574,

Yeah; they're needed by the manufacturer. To track what you do with your system, to not properly secure them, to get you to sign up and/or buy more $%# you don't need.

The only one I let live on my systems after a clean install is the manufacturers' drivers/BIOS updating program. That's what I need.

When the Dell tech comes on-site, are you there for the entire visit until he/she leaves? Do they plug in anything to your system? Do they leave and come back from their car/van? I wouldn't have my data available to them for even a millisecond during any of these scenarios. The best 'theft' are the ones you didn't know took place.

You've written contradictory statements about a clean install? No here and yes on the other thread.

Any M.2 SSD you're considering putting into a platform such as this will be PCIe 3 x4 or better. No, the system needn't be using all the drives to be a bottleneck (why? Only 16 lanes for everything; GPU, USB C/Thunderbolt, 2 external monitors... etc. ...). Whether it will be a problem or not would depend if a single drive would give better performance vs. 4x M.2 drives. And when the entire platform is working hard, 4x M.2 drives will be slower (and on this platform, and your workflows; I'm guessing by a lot).

If you're not using this system mobile (on the go), why don't you simply buy a third, identical monitor, instead? That will be worlds better than a 17" to any desktop-sized monitors you are trying to match it with.

On some of my platforms, I am using a 50" 4K TV's. 4x 1080p monitors, in one. Productivity increased at least 50% vs. a 3 monitor setup for the workflows used on them (Financial, PDF creation/editing/updating, Excel, Word, Access, Outlook, Edge/Edge Chromium, plus some I'm forgetting to write down right now). Not to mention that there is no room for 4 monitors on that same desk.

I would have recommended two systems for your workflows (if you really need a mobile setup). One a pure desktop and the other a slightly less over-the-top platform, but much more mobile than a 17" based platform offers. Your wants, need PCIe lanes; desktops have more.

Contrary to what you may hear others state about me when it comes to buying new platforms, I am open to all. But reviews and research are but 5% or less of my decision; I personally test what each may bring to the table for me, in my actual workflows/workloads, productivity-wise, and then buy (or not!) accordingly. In your situation; I would be testing alternate software to get your work done (and see if those can push your current hardware to 100% utilization while making you more productive too). Hardware is only half of the productivity cycle; the O/S and software is the other.

I'll leave you with one last bit of info. CPU + RAM = Work done. These are the basic building blocks of computers - buy as much as you can afford of each. The CPU will be kept as 'fed' as it can possibly be, and in turn, will also allow all other components to be equally efficient too (and possibly let you hit 100% utilization in Task Manager, for example).

 

New
@jack574,

Yeah; they're needed by the manufacturer. To track what you do with your system, to not properly secure them, to get you to sign up and/or buy more $%# you don't need.

The only one I let live on my systems after a clean install is the manufacturers' drivers/BIOS updating program. That's what I need.

When the Dell tech comes on-site, are you there for the entire visit until he/she leaves? Do they plug in anything to your system? Do they leave and come back from their car/van? I wouldn't have my data available to them for even a millisecond during any of these scenarios. The best 'theft' are the ones you didn't know took place. Haha ok... If they're trying to fix a problem with my system, I'd rather they fixed it with the drive I'm actually going to be using installed! My data will be on a separate drive to the OS/programs so I could always just remove my data drive if I was worried about it.

You've written contradictory statements about a clean install? No here and yes on the other thread. On this thread, I've said I've never done a clean install on a brand new system as a matter of routine. On the other thread, I said I did a clean install to upgrade from Win 7 to Win 10. The PC shipped with Win 7 in 2012, and in 2018 I upgraded it to Win 10. Different scenarios!

Any M.2 SSD you're considering putting into a platform such as this will be PCIe 3 x4 or better. No, the system needn't be using all the drives to be a bottleneck (why? Only 16 lanes for everything; GPU, USB C/Thunderbolt, 2 external monitors... etc. ...). Whether it will be a problem or not would depend if a single drive would give better performance vs. 4x M.2 drives. And when the entire platform is working hard, 4x M.2 drives will be slower (and on this platform, and your workflows; I'm guessing by a lot).
Which of these setups would you say was best?

1.
Drive 1 - OS/programs, file storage, temp/cache files for video editing etc

2.
Drive 1 - OS/programs, temp/cache files for video editing etc
Drive 2 - file storage

3.
Drive 1 - OS/programs,
Drive 2 - file storage
Drive 3 - temp/cache files for video editing etc

My plan is for option 2. initially, then if I run out of space on Drive 1, switch to option 3. Is that a bad plan?

If you're not using this system mobile (on the go), why don't you simply buy a third, identical monitor, instead? That will be worlds better than a 17" to any desktop-sized monitors you are trying to match it with. I could do, but I have no problem using a 17" in between two 19" monitors.

On some of my platforms, I am using a 50" 4K TV's. 4x 1080p monitors, in one. Productivity increased at least 50% vs. a 3 monitor setup for the workflows used on them (Financial, PDF creation/editing/updating, Excel, Word, Access, Outlook, Edge/Edge Chromium, plus some I'm forgetting to write down right now). Not to mention that there is no room for 4 monitors on that same desk.

I would have recommended two systems for your workflows (if you really need a mobile setup). One a pure desktop and the other a slightly less over-the-top platform, but much more mobile than a 17" based platform offers. Your wants, need PCIe lanes; desktops have more. Desktop wouldn't work for me - I work between two offices and each has the same setup (2 external monitors with a space for the laptop in between). I also sometimes work on the sofa in the living room using the laptop as a laptop, or at other locations. I like a 17" screen then too.

Contrary to what you may hear others state about me when it comes to buying new platforms, I am open to all. But reviews and research are but 5% or less of my decision; I personally test what each may bring to the table for me, in my actual workflows/workloads, productivity-wise, and then buy (or not!) accordingly. In your situation; I would be testing alternate software to get your work done (and see if those can push your current hardware to 100% utilization while making you more productive too). Hardware is only half of the productivity cycle; the O/S and software is the other.

I'll leave you with one last bit of info. CPU + RAM = Work done. These are the basic building blocks of computers - buy as much as you can afford of each. The CPU will be kept as 'fed' as it can possibly be, and in turn, will also allow all other components to be equally efficient too (and possibly let you hit 100% utilization in Task Manager, for example). Maybe I should have gone for the i9 instead of the i7 then....

 

Same exact chips, Duel Rank chips, Highest speed to latency ratio(true latency), past that is how much ram you need. Filling all four is ideal also, and once you have all of what I said, the only thing you need to focus on is how much you need or want. 32gb chips are not likely to have the highest ram performance, but are great for synthetic loads where alot of ram is required and there are minimal gains to having fast ram.

As usual, retailers rip you off. Get ram from newegg instead. 32gb samsung chips are only 125 usd a piece.

 

Thanks. Was planning on getting either two or four of the 32GB modules on this page.

https://www.mrmemory.co.uk/memory-ram-upgrades/dell/precision-mobile-workstation/7740

If I decided i only needed 64GB in total, would you suggest I got 4x16GB (rather than 2 x 32) then as the 16GB chips will perform better than the 32GB ones?

 

It would be good to determine how much you need first, so what exactly are you doing? Filling all 4 is ideal for memory performance, though I cannot recall the specific details on how that works, other then old test I remember seeing show it does have a some performance gain. These 16gb chips will perform better then 32gb chips because of true latency, depending on task as well though. Here are your three paths.

• If you know you wont use more then 64gb realistically, then these are the best, and specifically the 3000mhz ones: https://www.newegg.com/p/pl?N=100007609 601204089 600521526 600528730 601275424 601204087 50001459 50008476 50011776

• If you will use more then 64gb, the go for the samsungs.

• If you doubt you will use more then even 32gb of ram, then look at crucial ballistix. dual rank 8gb chips at 2666mhz https://www.amazon.com/Ballistix-Single-PC4-21300-SODIMM-260-Pin/dp/B06XC4W1LQ/

If you really have that this money to idly spend, you might look at giving away a laptop or two this Christmas

 

"Idly spend"? Bit of an odd comment, given that I'm clearly researching how best to invest in memory.