01-28-2013 12:36 PM
Just running Windows alone creates a lot of overhead which reduces system performance.
What I did, was turn off al graphical features, turn off Bluetooth and WLAN, turn of your sound and microphone and make sure that there aren't any unnecessary programs running in the background.
In order to turn of the graphical nonsense in Windows:
go to your control panel--> system and security --> advanced system settings--> click on the advanced tab --> then turn of all visual effects by selecting best performance mode.
This will get rid of part of the overhead created by Windows.
Then the key is to run the test a couple of times, and see what you're results are, since it isn't the best benchmark for assessing Max memory bandwidth.
A more accurate test is that of Sisoftware: Sandra the bandwidth performance test is actually quite good.
01-28-2013 03:23 PM
[quote]In order to turn of the graphical nonsense in Windows:
go to your control panel--> system and security --> advanced system settings--> click on the advanced tab --> then turn of all visual effects by selecting best performance mode.[/quote]
In Windows 7 the path is CP > system and security > system > advanced system settings > advanced.
(I can't get the stats from "winsat mem" because it is malfunctioning (system is only a couple days old). When I run it from the command prompt, it opens another console window and quickly prints some stuff and exits (closing the window it opened). But that's moot since I haven't changed RAM or other hardware from the stock 4GB. Its just disturbing that my factory Windows install doesn't work right.)
My concern for this thread is that something is causing the T430s to run the 2133MHz RAM more slowly than on your T430. Or am I wrong and jdgw's memory speed correct for 2133MHz RAM...? So 1065 is correct and DDR multiplies that X2 ?
Then why does his hwinfo show that the RAM can support higher speeds? I thought 2133MHz was just about the highest speed supported by DDR3.
I'd love to add some high performance RAM to my T430s, but I'm confused and don't want to waste money on speeds that aren't supported. I have this suspicion that if I put 2133MHz RAM into my system, it won't run any faster than 1866MHz RAM that is considerably less expensive.
01-28-2013 03:29 PM
Installed the Kingston PnP SoDimm 2133 MHz memory (4Gb x2) in my i5-3320M, intel graphics, 128 SSD, T430s with no issues. The WEI was approx. 5.2 and went to 6..5 with Win 7 64 set for max performance.
The data transfer rate went from around 10 Gb/s to 17.6 Gb/s. Hardware Info reports that the memory speed is actually running at 1065.2 Mhz and the max speed capable is shown as 1300 Mhz.
Can you give us a screenshot of hwinfo?
01-28-2013 07:37 PM
01-28-2013 08:15 PM - edited 01-28-2013 08:17 PM
I look forward to that screenshot. Referencing this DDR3 table, I am trying to figure out why you and dodger_NL are getting the speeds you both are reporting. Your 17GB/sec rate seems to match PC3-17000, but that would not account for dual-channel mode which should push the throughput even higher.
01-29-2013 03:07 AM
The numbers from that DDR3 table seem to match with my numbers. It appears that the 1066 MHz gets multiplied by 2 for the dual channel to get the 2133 MHz naming. Also, if you use dodger_NL's speed calculations you get close to my actual number ( 1065.2 x 2 x 8 = 17,043 GB/s ) with max being the 21.3 GB/s at 1333 MHz. In any case, I noticed a speed improvement when doing some heavy number crunching but for everyday tasks (surfing, word, excel etc..) you probably wouldn't notice any speed change. It seems that the 1833 MHz memory is actually going to run at 916.5 MHz on dual channel. Let us know what you get if and when you do your upgrade.
Here are my screenshots (getting a little more oomph today!):
01-29-2013 12:00 PM
Interesting. Hwinfo says the RAM is PC3-16000 not 17000. This may be due to the timing section (CAS 12 etc). But your RAM is working close to the ideal speed.
BTW, double data rate and dual channel are two separate things. The former doubles the potential of any single RAM module, while the latter can potentially double two RAM modules of any supported type. Its best to have both these features at once, of course.
Now as for the missing 12GB/sec of throughput--
dodger_NL: Was that 29GB/sec result from a different computer? Perhaps of a desktop system with triple or quad channel RAM? Can you post a hwinfo screen shot, too?
Thanks for all your input so far...
01-31-2013 10:09 PM
FWIW, I've checked around the web and it seems that winsat isn't a good measure.
The only examples I've seen of people getting 29GB/sec or more are (using Sisoft Sandra benchmark) on desktop systems with triple and quad channel memory.