Dual Core Processor or 7200 RPM HD performance or 1 GB of RAM?

I am running the Dell D620 with a duo core 2 Ghz, 1 GB RAM, 100 GB HD at 7200 RPM. I just tried an experiment to use DVD shrink to encode an ISO image. When compared to the Pentium M 1.6 Ghz, 512 MB RAM and 60 GB HD at 4200 RPM, the time to encode was over 1/2 the time.

What is this performance improvement a function of? Faster processor, RAM or HD speed?

 

A combination of them all, but your CPU is probably the biggest winner hear. RAM would be second. HD third.

It would be interesting for you to pop out one stick of ram on the machine and see what effect 1/2ing the RAM will have.

 

i totally agree with RogueMonk. in addition not all ram are created equal, some are better than others. there is a good-better-best category as well. if one wants a more efficient and faster system in almost everything hardware-wise then logically one maxes out the the theoretical capacities of the system's MB from cpu power, ram amount and speed, hd speed and buffer. of course here lurks the enemy --heat. fast memory + fast hd + fast cpu + graphics card running at their maximum capacity will generate enough kinetic energy that will affect overall performance of system. as a way to protect itself the new generation of machines have a built-in powering down (undervolting) feature which kicks in when the machine reaches dangerous levels of heat generation. so we may have a very powerful fast machine that does not perform at its optimum because of the perinnial by-product turned villain called heat. this is where desktops outperform notebooks because desktops have more design ways to keep itself cool without sacrificing performance. of course we already know this.

 

It only has one stick. I may retest it with 2 GB if I can find a decent deal. Dell sells 1 GB 667 mhz RAM for ~150 USD.

 

Is the heat issue minimized by running at Maximum battery versus Maximum Performance settings?

 

Wait, so did the Pentium-M system take half the time to encode or did it take twice as long as the Core Duo? Your sentence doesn't make sense to me. Either way, encoding usually is entirely CPU dependent. RAM comes in second...

Newegg.com sells the generic stufffor $80 and the Corsair Value Select(great stuff) for $90.

 

I am trying to get 2 1 GB 667 RAM for my e1705

There are 2 options, the PC2 5300 and the PCS 5400... whats the difference? I am going to have the T2500 2 Ghz duo core... what RAM do I go with when upgrading?

 

I'm not sure why they rated the one set as being PC5400, its speed and letency are nothing special, but just get the PC5300. As long as it is DDR2-667, you're golden!

 

I believe the pc5400 was claimed to be cl4 @ 667Mhz, but people who bought it have reported that it is really cl5 @ 667 and cl4 @ 533, which is the same as all the pc5300 ram available so the pc5400 listing is misleading.

 

Correction:

Let me rephrase. The Core Duo was 2X faster.

 

Thanks for clarifying! So when they do come out with cl4 at 667 MHz, that would be the best way to go then?

My final question is if my T2500 processor FSB is running at 677 Mhz, shouldn't the RAM run at 677? Will the 533 effect performance in any way if paired with the 677 processor FSB speed?

 

If I remember correctly, the memory controller will automatically configure itself for the best use of either 533 or 667 and ultimately the 667 only sees a marginal gain over 533. It's peak theoretical bandwidth is about 25% higher, but in actual application... nothing extraordinary.

One thing I will say - and the reason I am getting 2GB of DDR2-667 - is that the Core Duo chipset is compatible with Merom, Intel's upcoming super-CPU. This new CPU will make much better use of DDR2-667 on top of it just being a better CPU in general.