|
Statistics
Visitors: 942202
Advertisement
Notebook Computers
For the best deals on laptop computers visit www.Geeks.com.
|
|
Crucial 512mb PC2100 SODIMM |
|
|
|
|
Written by Mikhail Ivanenkov
|
|
Wednesday, 20 June 2007 |
|
Page 2 of 2
However, it's easy to only partially install the module without knowing it; that's what I did the first time and was surprised to see my computer turn on and then shut off again. Overclocking laptop memory is stupid. It doesn't cope with aggressive timings (which you can't set in the BIOS anyway) and seeing as how the trade-off for lack of noise is extreme heat, running anything above spec is asking for trouble. Therefore tests will be limited to a few runs, simply to see if the sticks perform well enough on their own and in various combinations. The test system:
- Dell Inspiron 8200
- P4 1.6-M
- 15" UltraSharp (1600x1200 native)
- 128mb Generic (?)
- 512mb Kingston
- 512mb Crucial
- 40gb 5400rpm HDD
- 64mb Geforce4 MX-440 Go
- 24x CD-RW/DVD combo drive
- Floppy drive
Under WinXP SP1 (with all current updates), the only non-system programs running during the time of the benchmarks were McAfee antivirus and Task Manager. I benchmarked using the memory tests found in PC Mark 2002 Pro and the memory bandwidth in SiSoft Sandra 2002 SE. All possible combinations of memory were used and the results recorded. In the below graphs, K = Kingston, C = Crucial and G = Generic. Obviously two letters means a combination of a pair of sticks. First off, PC Mark:
PC Mark is a rather awkward program and doesn't yield the exact same results every time; it's simply not as polished as the multi-year 3D Mark. Nevertheless, there may be some truth to the results. Used alone, the Crucial SODIMM beats out the competition. Surprisingly, the mix of Kingston and generic comes in second, with Kingston at third. What's even more shocking is that when used with either generic or Kingston (and especially the latter), the Crucial memory tends to fall behind, even past the 128mb generic stick alone. But regardless, it's not a dramatic jump and you won't notice any difference. Just here to satisfy those who have to see some numbers.
SiSoft Sandra paints a somewhat different picture. Here Kingston and Crucial alone are neck to neck in scores, with Kingston and generic falling way back for some reason I can't explain. The other scores (with the exception of generic) are pretty much tied. This just goes to reinforce the well known fact that it's better to use the same brand/density of memory for optimal results, since the chips and circuitry vary by manufacturer.
As for price, over the past few months PC2100 (as opposed to PC100/PC133) has become all but standard on newer laptops, therefore becoming more and more affordable. So much that it's over $100 less than it was near the end of yesteryear. At a little over $200 (and about $30 more aggressively priced than Kingston's offering), this is the memory upgrade you want for a laptop, seeing as how upgrades from the laptop manufacturer are unspeakably expensive.
Pros
- Good packaging and prompt delivery
- High quality components, as usual
- Easy to install
- Some of the highest standalone scores
- Lifetime warranty!
- Very low price compared to a few months ago
Cons
- None really, I just want it to be cheaper still
In case you haven't noticed, this is no Corsair XMS shootout. We're not going for the highest yields or best scores, though Crucial has proven to be near, if not at the top of, both. What matters is the warranty (after all, this isn't exactly lunch money), the price and the customer support (Crucial's consistent rating in the top 10 at ResellerRatings says something). I'd like to thank Crucial for sending over the memory once again and if interested you can get yours here. Thanks for reading and enjoy the site!
<< Start < Prev 1 2 Next > End >>
|
|
Last Updated ( Wednesday, 20 June 2007 )
|
|
|
