Fastest (available/affordable) laptop memory

E

EllisCEC

n00b
Joined
Mar 3, 2011
Messages
21
Hi,
I'm looking to upgrade the memory on my HP Pavilion G6 laptop (i5-2430M processor). It seems the best memory I can get for it is the Kingston 8GB (2x4GB) DDR3 1866MHz Plug N Play Hyperx Laptop Memory Kit CL11 1.5V. While I'm pretty confident with desktop building, I've never tried laptop upgrading before so I'm not sure what compatibility to check for. The g6 has no bios voltage controls.

While I'm here, a 2.5" OCZ 120GB Agility 3 SSD would work as a swap in hard drive, right?
Thanks
 
Haha ok thanks, I just needed a bit of encouragement I think! :) It should absolutely fly with those specs. It was no slouch to begin with
 
I would say it is doubtful that HP will allow you to overclock your memory controller so that even though you may purchase DDR3 1866MHz it will most likely only run at the DDR3 1333 speed since that is the maximum Intel CPU supported ram speed.
 
Last edited:
drescherjm said:
I would say it is doubtful that HP will allow you to overclock your memory controller so that even though you may purchase DDR3 1866MHz it will most likely only run at the DDR3 1333 speed since that is the maximum Intel CPU supported ram speed.
Click to expand...

Right, most laptop RAM unless the laptop has BIOS control for it, most will be set to a default 1333 speed. At best it might drop the timings down when the RAM is down clocked. I would do research on your computer and see how it handles upgrades, and if not look for low voltage low timing ram.

This RAM has done well for me, at default 1333 timings are 8-8-8-20 and its 1.35v RAM.
 
RAM is RAM is RAM. With modern Intel CPUs there's almost zero performance difference between DDR3-1333 and DDR3-2666 and similar craziness. If you're paying a premium, you're paying too much.
 
So I went ahead and made the purchase (didn't see these posts until afterward).

Ok WOW this computer is crazy fast. Boots my linux build in under 3 seconds. Loads every application instantly, and I have enough memory to run the entire operating system out of RAM (gotta love those 20GB/s read/writes!)

Even Windows 7 isn't exactly slow, however, the memory seems to be in two minds about how fast it is, depending on the operating system:

Linux
Code: 
 *-memory
          description: System Memory
          physical id: c
          slot: System board or motherboard
          size: 8GiB
        *-bank:0
             description: SODIMM DDR3 Synchronous 1776 MHz (0.6 ns)
             product: KHX1866C11S3/4G
             vendor: Kingston
             physical id: 0
             serial: [removed]
             slot: Bottom-Slot 1(top)
             size: 4GiB
             width: 64 bits
             clock: 1776MHz (0.6ns)
        *-bank:1
             description: SODIMM DDR3 Synchronous 1776 MHz (0.6 ns)
             product: KHX1866C11S3/4G
             vendor: Kingston
             physical id: 1
             serial: [removed]
             slot: Bottom-Slot 2(under)
             size: 4GiB
             width: 64 bits
             clock: 1776MHz (0.6ns)

On the other hand, CPU-Z has this to say:

Windows
Code: 
DRAM Frequency:        665.2 MHz
FSB:DRAM            1.5
CAS# Latency (CL)           8.0 clocks
RAS# to CAS# Delay (tRCD)         8 clocks
RAS# Precharge (tRP)        8 clocks
Cycle Time (tRAS)         23 clocks
Command Rate (CR)         1T

So, is my memory really running three times faster under Linux, or am I (admittedly more likely) misreading the numbers and getting the wrong impression?
 
Linux is just reading the SPD info off the ram chip. It does not mean the ram is running at that frequency. CPU-Z is reporting the expected frequency (remember all DDR is clocked) for DDR3 1333 which is the expected speed your ram will work at on a motherboard that does not let you overclock your ram controller.


Ok WOW this computer is crazy fast. Boots my linux build in under 3 seconds. Loads every application instantly,
Click to expand...
Neither of these have any thing to do with ram speed but have everything to do with SSD speed.
 
drescherjm said:
CPU-Z is reporting the expected frequency (remember all DDR is clocked) for DDR3 1333 which is the expected speed your ram will work at on a motherboard that does not let you overclock your ram controller.
Click to expand...

Ok thanks, why is the DRAM Frequency half of 1333? Is that because it's dual channel, or are the two numbers unrelated?

Neither of these have any thing to do with ram speed but have everything to do with SSD speed.
Click to expand...

Partially true. The boot time is because of the SSD, but the responsiveness is entirely credit to the RAM. The reason for this is because, upon boot, a 3GB partition is made within the 8GB of memory, and all of the application and system binaries are copied into there, it is then mounted in place so that all of the applications are being loaded and running out of memory. Imagine having your C:\Windows and C:\Program Files directories in main memory.

edit: Found 'configured clock speed' to be 666 MHz under linux, read by decoding the DMI table.
 
Last edited:
You'll notice almost zero difference between running off a RAM drive and a modern (SATA3, 500+MB/s) SSD. Don't believe me? Disable the creation of the RAM drive at boot and run it like that for a couple days (long enough you won't just go "yeah it's slower").

Also, even if there is, to you, a noticable difference between the RAM drive and a modern SSD, there certainly won't be any between DDR3-1333 and DDR3-2666
 
drescherjm said:
It's 1/2 because its DDR,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_data_rate
Click to expand...

Thanks for the reading material, I hadn't thought to check the acronym.

You'll notice almost zero difference between running off a RAM drive and a modern (SATA3, 500+MB/s) SSD. Don't believe me? Disable the creation of the RAM drive at boot and run it like that for a couple days (long enough you won't just go "yeah it's slower").
Click to expand...

No. There is a difference in program load speed (the difference is between 'very fast' and 'negligible'). For my uses, it isn't that important, but the implications for lower spec computers is massive, so I'm continuing development of it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top