Is Your Gaming Laptop's RAM Slowing It Down?

13

Comments

+ Add a Comment
avatar

zulfy26

"the notebook oddly was running 32-bit Windows 7 Professional so it couldn’t even address more than 3.5GB anyway"

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3_GB_barrier

Please read this.  I know it's arguing semantics, but this is a tech blog and we should be precise.

"It is commonly claimed that 32-bit processors and operating systems are limited to 4 GB of RAM,[1][2] and that this is a primary cause of the "3 GB barrier". This is not a true limit of these processors. Almost all modern x86 processors (from the 1995 Pentium Pro onward) can in fact already address up to 64 GB RAM via physical address extension (PAE)."

"Thus, the "3 GB barrier" under x86 Windows "client" operating systems can therefore arise in two slightly different scenarios. In both, RAM near the 4 GB point conflicts with memory-mapped I/O space. Either the BIOS simply disables the conflicting RAM; or, the BIOS remaps the conflicting RAM to physical addresses above the 4 GB point, but x86 Windows client editions refuse to use physical addresses higher than that, even though they are running with PAE enabled. The conflicting RAM is therefore unavailable to the operating system whether it is remapped or not."

avatar

davidtuerk

MACBOOK, Y U GET BETTER FPS THAN THOSE SCORES??

avatar

RaptorJohnson

No.

avatar

titan8813

Throw out the SiSoft Sandra benchmark and you're netting a benefit of no more than 12% with the higher-speed RAM over the lower-speed, assuming both kits are dual-channel.  If the cost differential would justify it, it would be an economical choice.  Based on these scores, if you absolutely need to be on the pointy end of the technological scale, then by all means get the more expensive stuff.  Otherwise as long as you're running dual-channel it doesn't seem to make economic sense to splurge.

avatar

kixofmyg0t

Hmm. Interesting numbers. Toms Hardware did a feature before that didnt show that much difference speed on desktop RAM speeds. But they had powerful enough graphics cards and CPU's to help isolate the feature. But IGP laptops are more sensitive to this. 

However it would be nice to see some tests done on Llano equipped laptops. 

avatar

SodaAnt

http://hothardware.com/News/InDepth-Analysis-Explains-Llanos-Bandwidth-Sensitivity/

avatar

loozer

Gaming laptops do not have integrated graphics. I'd also like to see llano numbers, because the igp is not totally terrible.

avatar

axiomatic

Considering that the memory in my laptop is Corsair. No... it's not slow at all. ;-)

avatar

Neufeldt2002

I have to ask, do AMD's APU's do better? I would think they would, but I wonder if the lower end are worse than the higher end APU's?

avatar

kixofmyg0t

Depends on workload. CPU vs CPU Sandy Bridge beats up Llano. But in the graphics department Llano absolutely slays Intels weak sauce "HD" graphics. 

If ur workload is CPU bound, like StarCraft 2 for example...Sandy Bridge still pulls ahead. If its more reliant on GPU then Llano takes the cake. 

avatar

pk44

I'm glad someone else is making a point of this. People are always asking me for advice when building a PC and it's hard to convince them to go for speed before quantity of memory, especially considering current prices.

avatar

tekknyne

Heh. To your point, I just recently bught 2x4gb g.skills for my amd fusion c-50 laptop. It was only $30 on newegg so I got a heck of a deal. But that laptop will never use 8gb of memory in it's life.

avatar

DrDrrae

Keep in mind that this is pertaining to laptops with an IGP.  Faster RAM makes almost no difference on a computer with a dedicated video card in gaming tasks.

Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.