questions about ram/cpu

Hi
i finally purchased a laptop (NEC Versa P8210) , and all i can say is that im really really happy with it. It runs everything fast, plays counter strike source at 120 fps etc...

now i want to upgrade my ram because my x1600 is using up so much together with windows.

I currently have 2 X512, but i want to get 2X 1gb ddr2 667... my question is does the ram brand make any difference in performance? i know that for pc's you are able to get quality ram with better timings over the generic , but is it the same for notebooks or..

also, i have a core duo centrino in this running at 1.83 ghz. However when i check my pcwizard, it says the cpu is running at 900 mhz, and sometimes it shows 1.83ghz for a second. can someone please explain this in more detail :O

last question, will i be able to upgrade this cpu to a core 2 duo, or quad core in the future??

thanks

 

The brand doesn't matter too much so long as it reputable enough so you know it's not crap and it'll work.

The processor gets clocked down when it's not being fully used. Intel's Speedstep, or Sidestep or something like that.

Yes, you can upgrade to a core 2 duo, so long as you use the "old" merom cores. The new ones rolling out with the Santa Rosa platform are incompatible with today's motherboards. Same with quad core, won't be compatible with your current motherboard.

 

sweet. so better brands will not necessarily give better performance right.. and all ddr 667 has same timigs?

if i want to upgrade my cpu, do i get a standard desktob cpu and put it in or ... i dont know how it works..

 

Yay someon with same laptop as me did u get from portacom?
Also i upgraded to 1.5g which is good enough for me

 

Yes, the brand of the RAM makes no difference. The actual specifications are what matters, and almost all the 667 MHZ DDR2 RAM on the market today, has the same speicfication. A few good brands are Crucial, Kingston, G. Skill and Corsair. There are many other good brands aswell, and there RAM should work. However, before you upgrade, check if you need more RAM. Yiu can do this by clicking the "Performance" tab in Task Manager, and it should show you how much RAM you are currently using. If it is approaching the 1 GB you have at the moment, then an upgrade may be heplful. Other games can require alot of RAM, such as Battliefiled 2/2142, so an upgrade to 1.5 GB or 2 GB is a good idea.

Upgrading the processor is more complecated. Dektop processor and mobile processor are very different from each other. There are many processors that are supported n your notebook, and at the moment you probably have a Core Duo. May I ask, if you the model number for it? Depending on which it is, you may not need to upgrade, as for most people the upgrade doesn't yield any real performance increase. You tasks also need to be takem into consideration. If you complete processor dependant tasks, such a video editing or enciding, the a processor upgrade should help performance. If you main tasks are to listen to music, surf the Internet and word process, then I would advise against a processor upgrade, as it won't help performance. Gaming is limited by the graphics card is almost all circumstances, so there will be no performance increase there either.

 

--> not to hijack the thread... but about memory timings. Would RAM with different timings work together, or would they need to be the same?

--> does faster timing really substantiate to real world performance increases, or would the gains be negligible?

Thanks,

 

If you have more than one module, then the timings for both will be the same. Individual RAM modules will have certain timings at different frequencies, but the majority of modules have the same timings anyway, provided your comparing the same frequency across the board.

 

Most of the DDR-667 SODIMMs have a clock latency of CL=5 but I believe that CL=4 modules are now appearing. These will give some improvement in memory access speeds.

You can see the timings of your RAM modules on the SPD page of CPU-Z. These timings are expressing as clock cycles. CPU-Z shows the true speed of the RAM - DDR2 means two data accesses per clock cycle. 5 clocks at 33MHz is the same microseconds as 4 clocks at 266MHz so the move to higher frequency does not necessarily give boost to performance unless. Instead, the higher frequency uses more power.

John

 

hey thanks for the replies
I will just go off and buy 2 gb of ddr667 (not sure about brand but i guess its not important). I will need 2 gb since my x1600 is using 300 something + windows xp which leaves little for games.

here are specs of my cpu..
so u think a core2 duo wont give any better performance in games??

 

Almost all the Core Duo/Core 2 Duo range of processors will do well in games. I don't think theres any need to upgrade the processor, as it won't increase performance, because the limiting factor is the graphics card.

 

Whereas I am confident that more RAM will help the performance (note my previous comment about looking for CL=4 RAM), the benefit of a faster CPU will probably be marginal. What proportion of the time when you currently use your computer is the CPU running at maximum speed? (You could use an application such as RMclock to give you a graph of the CPU behaviour).

A CPU upgrade could become more attractive when the faster C2D CPUs become much cheaper as they slide down the price chain and the price differentials shrink. However, you will need to be sure that your notebook manufacturer has a newer BIOS which supports the C2D CPUs.

John

 

I suggest you use at least an ok brand ram, though even if any ram can run well, but running programs might cause error especially 2 of the rams dont go together. I always run into problems when trying to buy cheap rams. The more compatible it is to your laptop the better and if you're upgrading both dimm then try to get the same kind.

 

http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=113132

I guess this answers the Dual Channel question w/768 memory

 

Keep in mind that when you're talking about a dual core processor that performance in an application that isn't multithreaded is going to be about half that of what it would be if it was. In other words your CPU may only be running at 50% load but in actuality it's running at 100% load for that application because it can't make use of the other core. Only more recently have games and applications started to make more usage of dual core processors. Before the only applications that were multithreaded were the ones commonly run on workstations and servers where there would be a dual CPU environment. Your Core 2 Duo 1.66GHz might be plenty fast enough when it can make use of both cores but when it can't you're running that application on a single core at 1.66GHz.

 

burningrave101, you are correct. However, the rest of the system can benefit with that one core that remains free. So, on a single cored machine, if you want to play a game, and have quite a few background tasks running at the same time, a single cored processor will strugle. A dual core on the other hand, would be more responsive, because the second core can be allocated to those tasks in the back.

 

Just a quick question, is there a big difference in power between 1.6 GHz and 2.0 GHz C2D processors? Can't decide which one to take..

 

Yes there is, when your main tasks are processor based. For example, in video editing and encoding, a faster processor will help alot, because the applications rely on a fast processor, in order to get the work done. So, the faster the processor, the betetr the performance. On the other hand, if your tasks are to simply surf the Internet and word process time to time, then either will suffice. At the moment, the T7200 sits in the middle of the Core 2 Duo range, with the best price to performance ratio, and the T5600 is recommended as well.

 

Nah, i don't do heavy operations like that, mostly just surfing the web, playing music, some word processing, watching videos via external screen (which is mounted to my wall, just opposite of my bed ^^) and my main use with a computer, gaming. Am i right thinking that i should choose GPU first, then RAM (1GB or 2) and only after that the CPU?

 

For those tasks, I would take the graphics to choose first, the processor and then the RAM. If you choose a notebook with a good graphics card and a Core Duo or Core 2 Duo processor, then you will be more than fine for all of your tasks. RAM is easily upgradeable, so you can disregard that, if need be.

 

my 2 cents on the ram thing. I always stick with performance ram brands like Corsair, OCZ and Mushkin on desktops. For laptops I am inclined to do likewise. It seriously behooves you to checkout prospective ram suppliers websites. Do they have a ram config tool? A forum? Do they RMA stuff?
On a related note, I have been unable to determine the single or dual channel-ness of my Lenovo 3000 c200 notebook. I am inclined to think its single channel as the socket M has so few pins. But the 945 chipset supports single or dual channels, and the lenovo tech said "uh yeah, I thikn its dual channel"
Basically, i am debating whether to get a 512 for now, or wait longer and get a full 2gb at once.

 

What is the quality of Dell's Ram?... my friend was is upgrading his notebook to 2gb, and has offered to sell me his 512 stick for ~25USD a piece.

--> My peak memory usage is around 420mb, unless i load Flight Simulator or SimCity; in which case peak usage shoots up to 800+. Which is over the current physical memory on my IBM.

 

Dell's RAM will most likely be built by some other manufacturer, probably some smaller, less known RAM. If you get 1 GB, which is the amount of RAM that is becomming more and more common, then you will be spending $50 on it. Newegg offers some cheaper 1 GB modules for around $60, and they are brand new modules. There may not be anything wrong with the older modules, but newer ones are always more desirable.

 

ram usage as viewed in system properties isnt really a reliable metric. For example, when I went from 1gb to 2gb on my desktop the ram usage meter still shows well under 1 gb. But I have a lot less issues with multiple apps fighting each other. I can have Photoshop, 10 IE windows open, my audio editor and Dreamweaver open at the same time. Even on 1 gig this would be a problem sometimes.