I?ve done 4GB RAM upgrade for S1, and results are?

Hi everyone

I actually done the upgrade and here are the results:
The Notebook : LG S1 Express Dual 2.0Ghz
Operating system: Vista Ultimate (32 bit)

Before:
Physical Ram: 1GB (OEM “Hynix” 2x512MB)
Windows recognized Ram as : 1GB
Vista RAM score (Memory operations per seconds) : 4.5

After (configuration 1):
Physical Ram: 4GB (Kingston667 2x2GB)
Windows recognized Ram as : 3.070GB
Vista RAM score (Memory operations per seconds) : 3.5

After (configuration 2):
Physical Ram: 2GB (Kingston667 1x2GB)
Windows recognized Ram as : 2.046GB
Vista RAM score (Memory operations per seconds) : 3.3

After (configuration 3):
Physical Ram: 2.5GB (Kingston667 1x2GB + OEM “Hynix” 1x512MB)
Windows recognized Ram as : 2.558GB
Vista RAM score (Memory operations per seconds) : 3.3

The question:
Discarding configuration 2 and 3, do you think I should go for 1 or the go back for original setting?

 

Try the ram benchmark in SiSoft Sandra 2007 lite. It is better then the windows benchmark. Also download CPUz and check the ram. Maybe the 2x2Gb dont run in dual channel?

 

I don't have that much faith in Vista's benchmarks. It showed that the 8400M G is a worse performer for normal graphics than the ATI 1250M IGP.

In normal use, more RAM is better and if Vista starts to use spare RAM for pre-fetch then you will notice that everything happens more smoothly. Existing benchmarks don't effectively test the pre-fetch feature.

If you can get a refund on one of the 2GB modules then the 2.5GB configuration may be a good compromise.

John

 

regardless of the quesionable vistabench, 4Gb is going to give you better performance than 2.5, which in turn is better than 2, and that is better than one.

lets say you only have itunes open, and you want to encode one song.

maybe with 2 gigs it will take 4.076 seconds, and with 4 gigs there is a little overhead so maybe it takes 4.078 seconds...

thats not really a big deal. what IS a big deal is that with 4 gigs of ram, when you have a memory intensive program, it will run MUCH faster, you wont have to access the hdd, or when you have multiple programs open it will be a huge difference towards 4 Gb. also, by the end of the year, 4 Gb will improve your gaming performance by a lot.

 

Thank you all for your kind comments,
I’ve gone with masterchef341 advice and I reached my target of buying those RAMs which is ……… Flight Simulator X
Now a gained about 12 FPS after the upgrade especially for the 3rd party aircrafts which have more details “which consumes a hell of resources” than the FSX default ones.
I’m happy with the upgrade ‘coz it kicked off the idea from my mind of buying a new computer just for the FSX.

 

My Vista gave me a 4.8 rank with:
Physical Ram: 2.5GB (Kingston667 1x2GB + Samsung667 1x512MB)
Windows recognized Ram as : 2.558GB

I had 2x512 Samsung before, I can really see the difference in performance...
(mostly on heavy memory sucking programs)




I asked the folks at the LG Lab, they implied that LG Notebooks & Kingston memory do not work well, but they didn't really explain why/how...

 

Yeah I was going for 4 gb of ram. Im just hesitant. to shell out the extra $100 to upgrade from 3 to 4

 

the vista test is not a benchmark... it should be banned from being mentioned anywhere... It just pulls random numbers from the air based on a hardware configuration.

For example my 2.8ghz opteron 148 gets a 4.5 in vista wich is as powerfull as both cores on a 1.6 c2d moble at full blast but the c2d will get will into the high 5's area when in realiy the opteron is the better performer becasue I can have full power on any single threaded task while the dual core can only equal the power I have in a multi threaded application.


Now the next example would be yours. The reason the first one is reporting a better score is 99% probably because it was in dual channel and had low latences.

The bigger ram has higher latences and if your not in a equal setup you dont get dual channel, but in real life performance and not vistas made up world 2gb+ of ram in any configuration even without dual channel and slower timings is worlds better.

Take note that 4gb is a total waist tho if your not willing to use a 64bit OS, and you must have a chipset that supports it aswell.

So 3gb is the magic number for most people, however unless your a gamer. I say stick with just a 2x1gb setup and save yourself some money.