HELP: Ram question please. thanks

I am purchasing an HP Pavillion DV2000t which has a build in RAM = 512MB DDR2 with (as per the website) Memory Speed 400MHz DDR2 SDRAM.

Question:
1) Can i put another memory card in my notebook's extra slot whereby the added card has a 533Mhz DDR2 specification? Or i can only use a 400MHz one?

2) Having 512MB already installed, can i use a 1GB stick on the other slot thereby making it 1.5GB RAM? Or do i need to make both the rams equal in size? Would this hinder its ability to perform? Would it benefit me more to just get another 512MB to make it a total of 1GB? Its just that the cost of the 1GB is the same as the 512MB as the 1GB is a used one already.

In short would you go for

a) 512MB (400MHz) + 512MB (400MHz) = 1GB RAM
b) 512MB (400MHz) + 1GB (533MHz) = 1.5GB RAM

Thanks

 

1) Yes, you can add RAM of any speed. However, it will all run at the speed of the slowest module. (If you have 400 and 533 MHz, both will run at 400 MHz)

2) Yes, you *can* do that. But it may give you lower performance. Always try to have two identical modules. (2x512mb or 2x1gb). This allows your system to run the memory bus in dual-channel mode, effectively doubling memory bandwidth. This makes a noticeable difference. (This assumes your notebook is actually able to run dual-channel. I don't know whats inside the DV2000t, so this might be irrelevant)

However, the amount of ram is the #1 priority. If you have too little ram, it'll use the HD for swapping, which is *much* slower than the slight performance difference in single- vs dualchannel memory.

 

as previously stated

1. Yes, but it runs at a slower speed

2. Yes, but not recommended

 

Dual channel influence is insignificant. Atmost you will see 2-3% performance increase over a single channel system. Thats because most systems cannot utilize the full bandwidth and after a certain point the bandwidth is wasted.

I dont see any reason for it to be not recommended. Running 2 unequal sticks wont cause any stability issues. Yes, it wont be dual channel but the difference is insignificant and having more RAM is generally considered better than having less RAM & dual channel.

HP dont use DDR2 400 memory in the dv2000t. If you saw that on their website, then it is most likely a typo. They mostly use 533MHz and some people have also have gotten 667MHZ memory. Check their Parts site for the dv2000t, they only list 533/667 memory as replacements, so I highly doubt that they would use DDR2 400 memory.

 

Daetlus:
but given this situatuon:

In short would you go for

a) 512MB (400MHz) + 512MB (400MHz) = 1GB RAM
b) 512MB (400MHz) + 1GB (533MHz) = 1.5GB RAM

what would you go for? I was thinking of going for b) so that later on when i get the money, i could just change the 512mb for another 1gb.... making it 2gb

Miner:
- can you check this link. you think thats a typo? hmmm **** good thing i asked before buying more ram

http://www.shopping.hp.com/webapp/s...otebooks/hp_pavilion&storeName=computer_store

 

Option b). Better future upgradability and dual channel is pretty insignificant. But as I mentioned before HP most likely will be using 533 or 667MHZ memory with the dv2000t.

 

Nope, in my experience it can be very significant. Admittedly, most of my experience comes from DDR, rather than DDR2-based systems, but it had a really big impact (in the order of 20-40% difference in framerates in games)
It might have been true when dualchannel was first introduced, but today, it's a pretty important factor.

Got any evidence to the contrary?

Of course, you're right, the #1 priority is the amount of ram. Having too little ram will devastate performance far more than single vs dualchannel.

However, if you don't need more than, say, 1GB ram for your uses, then getting 1.5GB will offer zero extra performance. So it also dependson what you need the computer for.

 

I have to definately disagree with the 40% increase in framerates. This review might be a bit old but I think it is still valid considering we have only had one chipset change and I dont expect it to suddenly offer 20% increase in performance...
http://www.laptoplogic.com/resources/detail.php?id=20

The only place where dual channel might offer a definate advantage is when you are using a integrated graphics card. Although I agree dual channel gives you slight increase in performance, I dont think it is that critical for the performance of a system.

 

I was talking about my own experiences, not a review.
Keep in mind though, I was talking about gaming performance. Benchmarks such as superpi and, to an extent, 3dmark and photoshop are a lot less memory-intensive than modern games. Any task that has a large working set of frequently used data will benefit hugely from dualchannel.
SuperPI is basically a CPU benchmark, and memory isn't involved much at all. 3dMark obviously requires some memory access, but it's still a lot simpler than a "real" game. It's first and foremost a GPU benchmark.
And Photoshop is a good mix of everything, and a good indicator of *general* performance, but again, stuff that depends heavily on memory speed will show a much bigger performance difference with dual- vs singlechannel.
Now, the OP didn't say anything about what he used his computer for, so you might be right that dualchannel isn't a big deal for him. Or it might make a significant difference.

To give you an example, I've got a desktop system with Athlon 64 3200+ and a Geforce 6800 GT. My brother has an A64 3500+ with a Geforce 7800 GT. I've got dualchannel memory, he hasn't, but that's the only point where my system is superior. And I'm the one getting the best performance in games. By a noticeable amount.

 

Well, you cannot really pin that on the dual channel memory just because thats the only difference. Peformance will be different if the chipsets, memory(latency) are different. Also since AMD systems have direct access to the memory, bandwidth is even less of an issue with it. Since the GPU is taken care of by the chipset, it can influence in game performance. Also some games are bandwidth hungry than others, so you cannot put a blanket statement about the increases just by taking into account improvements in certain games.

If you look at the last page of the review that I linked you will see they did run HL2 and Doom3 and there was virtually no difference in framerates. Granted they were using the GMA900 and to a certain extent it might have been limited by the GPU. But still the extra bandwidth did little to improve the performance considering that the GMA900 relies entirely on the system RAM for its use. I dont see how a review testing the dual channels effectiveness should not be indicative of real life performance gains.

 

About the chipset, his is again much better performing than mine. I'm serious when I say that running dual-channel is the *only* advantage my system has. (Oh, I've got a better monitor too, but I doubt that has any effect on performance. )

So the fact that it still makes a difference just goes to show it really does matter...

And no, I'm not trying to make any blanket statements. I did say above that some tasks don't show a scrap of difference, and gaming is pretty much the most extreme example of bandwidth-hungry tasks.
But you're right, for many common tasks, it's not really important. Then again, for many common tasks, you don't need more than 1GB memory either.

As for the last bit, yes, I'd say any data based on GMA900 is automatically invalid.
That thing has so many other bottlenecks to cope with that access to memory is pretty much a non-issue.

 

ok guys, now i have a new problem, how would i know the speed ofthe ram i should get if the website indicates that my ram speed is 400mhz (but you guys said its a typo) so i looked in the parts catalog and it says the its 533/667MHZ but it didnt say which is for the AMD and which is for the Intel.

Anyway just to be double sure, ill just buy the 667MHZ ram as for sure, it would work if my system would be 533mhz or 667mhz. At least itll also be future proof than the 533 right? the only disadvantage to this is that the 667mhz is more expensive... i got this right, right?

If so, where do you suggest i buy this ram? newegg.com's OCZ? thanks again.

 

(If we knew the specs, it would be easier) Anyways it doesnt matter if the memory is for AMD or Intel, since both are now running DDR2 memory. If the FSB of your processor is 533, then if you buy 667Mhz memory, it will downclock it to 533.

Pricewise, yes 533 is cheaper now than before, but 667 is getting cheaper and more notebooks are switching to 667. OCZ is a good manufacturer, and Corsair and Kingston are good too. Newegg.com is the best place to buy them.

 

I guess we have to agree to disagree on this one.

You should not have any issues with using DDR2 667 memory. The core Duo supports it as does the chipset. Both AMD and Intel machines these days use the same memory - DDR2 and both are capable of supporting memory upto DDR2 667 and I dont really see why they would shortchange the Intel systems with DDR2 400 memory. I will be getting my dv2000t early next week and I will let you know the speed of the memory used by HP.

 

would this be a good choice? or can you recommend me another.. sorry but im not really good at this. Im getting a T2250 proc by the way....

OCZ Value 1GB 200-Pin DDR2 SO-DIMM DDR2 667 (PC2 5400) Notebook Buffered/Registered: Unbuffered
Cas Latency: 5
ECC: No
Heat Spreader: No
Manufacturer Warranty: Lifetime
Timing: 5-5-5-15
Voltage: 1.8V

Model #: OCZ26671024VSO
Item #: N82E16820227099
In Stock

Item#:
N82E16820227099

Price:
$80.49

 

The T2250 has a 533MHz bus, so your memory will only be capable of running at that speed, so if that is cheaper then get a 533MHz RAM, otherwise you should be fine with the OCZ. If you are getting a T2x00 series Core Duo, then you can use the full 667MHz bus and so can run memory upto that speeds.

 

As far as Dell 1705's check out; http://www.anandtech.com/mobile/showdoc.aspx?i=2766


"It's worth mentioning once again that the 945GM/PM chipset only has a 64-bit front side bus, so while it can support dual channel memory, there is little advantage in running dual channel over a single channel - at least if you use DDR2-667 memory."