Dual DDR2 SDRAM 1gb 667mHz or 2gb 553mhz?

Pavilion dv8324

CPU Type:Mobile DualCore Intel Core 2 Duo T7200, 2000 MHz (12 x 167)
But I can choose between 2a1gb Dual DDR2 SDRAM at 553mHZ or 2a512MB 667MHz DDR2-667 PC2-5300, 200p SODIMM, 1.8v.
Is the fsb-speed the most important, or the quantity?
Does a lower fsb-speed of the RAM influences the speed of the CPU, with a higher fsb
Thanks!

 

Quantity! No question!

The ram does not influence the CPU speed. The CPU will still run at 667mhz. The ram is just a little hardly noticbly slower.

 

Go with the 2GB @ 533. The difference between 533MHz and 667MHz at the same capacity is negligible at best. More RAM the better and the 2GB@533 will outperform the system with 1GB@667. It wont affect the FSB of yor processor the memory will run at 533(266MHzX2) and the FSB will run at 667(166X4).

 

You could always upgrade to another 1GB stick at 667MHz if you really want to.

 

There is little to no difference between the 533 and 667 ram due to latencies. You will lose a couple of points in a benchmark maybe, but definitely not noticeable in general computing, even gaming.

But the difference between 1gb and 2gb is huge, especially in Vista.

I gurantee you that if you took 100 people, not 1 will be able to tell whether or not your computer had 533 or 667 ram just by using it. But a huge percentage of those 100 will be able to tell the difference between 1gb and 2gb just by using the computer, especially in Vista.

 

Yeah, go 2GB.

 

I dont quite get it (maybe because Im a noob to notebooks). Why not get 2gb of DDR2 667? That way, you'll get both, or isnt it?

 

its prolly more expensive than the 533 mhz he's looking at

 

the 667 is a little more expensive for the same Gb capacity vs 533. and its been proven in benchmark test that the 2 perform almost the exactly the same, so save the money and get the cheeper that performs the same.

 

Ic, for a moment there, I thought there are some sort of compatibility problems running a dual 2GB 667 setup.

 

Not to jack this thread. *since I assume its better to post in an existing thread, than to start a new one*

But heres a question, which is better dual channel or not?
My laptop supposedly only supports 3.xx gb of ram. Would it be better to have 2gb + 1gb or 1gb x 2? How important is dual channel? Also, would the best solution be to get 2gb x 2 and just miss the 500mb+/- of ram?

 

More ram is more important than dual channel. 3gb non DC is better then 2gb dual channel. 4gb and dual channel and a 64bit OS to use it is ofcourse the best. Go for the 3GB if you want to keep 32bit. You wont see a differance or slow down because it is not dual channel. Dual channel only gets you a few % more bandwidth. But bandwidth is not the bottle neck for Ram.

 

Appreciate the advice. Currently I'm stuck using a 32bit OS until I upgrade my CPU *core duo, not core2*
I plan on maxing this laptop out here in another 6 months to a year. I will most likely get the 4gb ram, and just wait on the other upgrades *os/cpu* I was mainly wondering if there were any limitations to the additional ram not being recognized? It doesn't cause any problems having the unrecognized ram not being used right?

 

Well, i've seen the 667 stuff run a bit cheaper generally, so it would come down to just buying whatever is cheapest.