X200 RAM Question

I purchased 8GB (4GB X2) PC3-8500 DDR3 1066MHZ RAM but I received PC3-10600S.

I guess seller made a mistake..
It's not compatible right? If it is compatible, will there be a problem later?

Thanks!

 

it will down clock to the 1066 mhz speed, the 1066 mhz RAM module has already been phased out for the higher speed CPU. If it works then you shouldn't have problem, you would know whether there is problem when you use it initially.

 

PC3-10600 RAM runs at 1333MHz instead of the 1066MHz you need, but it should downclock to 1066MHz with no problems. Only way to find out is to test it, really. If the seller allows open-box returns with no penalty, that's what I'd do. If not, then let the seller know that he made an error, and get the item exchanged.

 

Thank you for the replies!

I e-mailed the seller. I don't want to open it and end up having to pay for it, so I'll wait for his response.

PC3-10600S is compatible with PC3-8500 RAM slot?

So if it works, PC3-10600S is better than PC3-8500 in terms of build quality, clock-speed [although it will downclock], price, and such?

What's PC3-10600'S' though? I noticed some PC3-8500 had S after. The model I received is PC3-10600S

 

yes and yes.   you were sent better memory than what you paid.   keep them.   they will work in your X200 perfectly fine.

if it helps, i had those same modules in my X200T well over a year ago when 4GB SODIMMs were ridiculously expensive.   they're now sitting in my X220.

the 'S' designates it as a SODIMM.   samsung always adds a letter code at the end for SODIMM (ie: PC3-10600 S), FB-DIMM (ie: PC2-5300 F), ECC uDIMM (ie: PC3-8500 E), RDIMM (ie: PC3-10600 R), and so on.   it's nothing to worry about.

 

Don't think about it as a down clock of the RAM as the chipset is really what controls the RAM timing. RAM comes with a rated maximum frequency that it can run and still perform to its specifications. So the PC3-10600S will run frequencies up to 1333MHz but your system will only run memory at 1066MHz which is easily within the rated specifications of the RAM.

 

Does this look right?

I inserted the 8GB RAM but is it normal for Windows Experience Index to only increase from 5.9 (4GB RAM) to 6.0 (8GB RAM)?

And I don't know if this happened from RAM installation, but I lost 10 GB of space all of sudden. I'm using Samsung 64GB SSD. I've yet to go down below 20GB in almost 3 years of use and last time I checked (probably sometime yesterday), I had about 23GB of space (only because I installed Visual Studio few days ago - I had close to 30GB prior to installing VS). Now I have 15GB of storage left. I didn't install anything large enough to blow away 8 GB of space. Could something have gone wrong?

 

Are you using hibernate? If so, that could eat up plenty of space. I'd also look up how much space goes for System Restore (I have it disabled since I find it useless) and how much space are you using for a swap file. There's a small program called CCleaner that also checks how much space is wasted on other files that can be safely deleted so you can check with that too.

P.S. WEI is useless. And btw I have 4GB RAM @ 1066 MHz, scored at 5.9.

 

Yes. I disabled hibernate and system restore. I pretty much follow Viper's Guide whenever I clean install. Black Viper's Website

I use CCleaner as well.

I did a bit of experiment and removed \Recovery [not sure if this is needed, but I always clean install and keep all documents on SD card that's always plugged on my SD slot so I'm usually okay even if something goes wrong] and \Windows\Installer directory, which was eating up over 5 GB of storage. I made backups on external drive.

That brought back the storage to 20 GB. I tried MsiZap method but didn't work too well so I tried the alternative method by removing Office 2010 suite via Microsoft FixIt (I assumed either Office 2010 or VS 2010 is a culprit) - cleaned up everything including registry http://support.microsoft.com/kb/290301

That brought me back to 28 GB (full installation of Office suite is 2.8 GB so something had to be wrong there[?])

I installed Office with SP1 freshly and now I'm sitting at 26.7 GB - MSOCache is now taking up only half of the initial and \Windows\Installer directory now only taking up 1GB as opposed to 4GB. Maybe fresh installation of Office every once in awhile doesn't hurt(?). MSOCache folder seem to pile up to large sum after awhile.

 

Good points, I forgot about these folders.

Microsoft loves these useless folders with "backups" of installations and crap that never get wiped out. No idea whats in in \Recovery -- presumably some Lenovo backup solution. Dell Alienware come with a separate Recovery partition so I am guessing its a similar thing.

There are some more (sigh) temporary folders in \Users\<username>\AppData\Local\Temp and I also make sure \Users\<username\Downloads is also gone (I prefer \Downloads location).

 

The interesting page of CPU-Z is the SPD page, which shows the timings coded into the RAM for operation at different frequencies.

I would expect a bigger increase. Rerun WEI. However, as already pointed out, WEI bears little resemblance to real life performance.

John

 

I did a re-run and it yielded same 6.0. I've seen some with 8GB RAM-Installed ThinkPad go over 7.x, so I'm wondering if the RAM is legit.

I bought it off eBay from the seller who only sells RAM (high rating but has many negatives that mention slow shipping and sending wrong item like my case).

I think I'm going to return it since the seller said I could. I bought a retail packaging from MicroCenter instead.

It seems like there is new PC3-10600 RAM out from Samsung recently. Some places has them in stock and other places will have in stock soon. Probably smaller nanometer processing.

Does more RAM use up more hard drive storage? I put 4GB (2X 2GB) back into 2 DIMM slots and now my storage is back up to 30.2 GB from 26.7 GB. Weird... I don't get it. I had 29 GB prior to installing Visual Studio 2010 Ultimate (5.5 GB). Now I still have VS 2010 installed and it's back to 30 GB..

 

I will let you know after I install my 8GB RAM later tonight if the scores improve. Right now, I have 2GB in Windows 7 x64 and it's a 5.5 score.

Check your page file settings. It can vary depending on amount of ram installed. Mine changed to 8GB after installing the RAM. Was only 2GB with 2GB RAM so 6GB difference.

*Edit* Only went up to 6.0 on WEI with G.Skill DDR3-10600 installed vs default DDR3-8500 before.

 

why return them?   you have the same chips lenovo includes with systems.   samsung M471B5273CH0-CH9 and M471B5273DH0-CH9 are some of the latest 1333MHz modules available.

i have two M471B5273CH0-CH9 modules in my X220 and they net a 7.3~7.5 WEI score.   however, i could care less about WEI.   it has zero bearing on my actual experience in windows.   i run windows server anyway.

besides, your low WEI scores could be due to the fact that your system can only run at 1066MHz.   perhaps it's giving a low score as a result.   this is further evidence why WEI is not an ideal way to judge performance and leads to confusion.

M471B5273DH0-CH9 are likely the newest PC3-10600S module from samsung.   you can buy them all day long for around $30 each.   the only difference between the CH0 and DH0 is the board revision.   the chips are identical.

 

What about these?
Micro Center - Samsung 8GB DDR3-1333 (PC3-10600) CL9 SO-DIMM Laptop Memory Kit (Two 4GB Memory Modules) MV-3T4G4D/US

 

Yep, afaik it has mostly to do with the frequency -- 1066 MHz, not with the amount of RAM. I use the same RAM on both of my computers (4GB @ 1066 MHz) and can't say I had speed issues with anything.

For general work in Windows, I doubt you or anyone could figure out a difference (if you did a blind test) between 4GB and 8GB system, so don't expect miracles.

Also I believe the chipsets on our X200(t) support max 1066 MHz RAM frequency, so the 1333 MHz is probably overkill -- unless they cost the same as 1066 MHz chips. Your old RAM has a lower CAS latency (7-7-7-20) vs this one (9-9-9-20) so in theory it will be slightly faster.

 

these are half the price with identical specs and performance: https://www.superbiiz.com/detail.php?name=D3-13S4GS

all recent samsung chips are 40nm process regardless of how they're packaged on the module.

the "old" memory was also 1333MHz so it's an apples:apples comparison.   besides, CAS latency is a function of frequency.   1066MHz @ CAS 7 is identical to 1333MHz @ CAS 9.

to save from re-hashing old info...
- http://forum.notebookreview.com/lenovo-ibm/572634-4-8gb-ram-4.html#post7411007
- http://forum.notebookreview.com/len...l-memory-gskill-pc10666-ddr3.html#post4453757
- http://forum.notebookreview.com/lenovo-ibm/533513-1333-mhz-ram-into-y460.html#post6890962

 

MicroCenter package is 8GB (2x 4GB) package for $58.00.

Are those compatible with my X200 though? MV-3T4G4D/US
Micro Center - Samsung 8GB DDR3-1333 (PC3-10600) CL9 SO-DIMM Laptop Memory Kit (Two 4GB Memory Modules) MV-3T4G4D/US

I have yet to run into a Samsung RAM with MV-XXXXXX. It seems like a new model to me. B&H and some other places say it's new and they'll have in stock soon.

I'm thinking of buying new laptop late this year or early this year so I'm rather buying one for the future swapping. I'm very happy with ThinkPad (both my parents bought a ThinkPad after they have seen how long my laptop is lasting! ).. SSD makes my laptop very fast.

I initially bought the RAM from SuperBiiz (before buying from eBay), but they never had stock (although it says the item is in stock). I asked them about two weeks later and they still didn't have a stock.

 

MV-3T4G4D/US is simply their marketing part number for the pair of modules.   this allows them to swap in any number of module part numbers under this broader part number and still offer identical spec products.

in six months even 1333MHz modules will be considered outdated.   buy what's cheap and don't worry about performance.   in your case you're trading apples for apples and still ending up with apples.   don't waste any money chasing down something like this.

what you had originally (2 x M471B5273CH0-CH9 from ebay) were awesome to begin with.   keep 'em.

 

Thank you so much for the help. I'm always learning a lot here!

 

In this case I suspect the problem is with the settings in WEI for what is now a 2 generations out-of-date chipset. In my measurements, 8GB with Sandybridge gives 7.5, the same 8GB with Arrandale
gives only 6.8, so the chipset before that may stop at 6. It's not total nonsense since the memory bandwidth has increased with each iteration (although the big jump is with Sandybridge's integrated memory controller).

You can use the memory bandwidth benchmark in SiSoftware Sandra to get a good measure of memory bandwidth although WEI also considers that more RAM = better performance, at least with the newer chipsets (there's a big jump when going from 4GB to 5GB).

John