600E with more than 256mb+32mb

Older ThinkPads.. from the 600, the 7xx, the iSeries, 300, 500, the Transnote and, of course, the 701
Post Reply
Message
Author
drwho
Posts: 43
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 9:33 am
Location: Toronto

600E with more than 256mb+32mb

#1 Post by drwho » Tue Oct 31, 2006 1:30 pm

i was just wondering, currently i have an IBM600E and it has 256mb + 64mb + 32mb ( onboard ) memory. is there really a big difference if i add 2 x 256mb + 32mb ( onboard ) totally 544?

i am asking because i know some of you have it this way and wanted to get your opinions before i decide to buy.

thanks...anyone want to lend one to try, hehe...probably not.

pianowizard
Senior ThinkPadder
Senior ThinkPadder
Posts: 8368
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 5:07 am
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Contact:

#2 Post by pianowizard » Tue Oct 31, 2006 1:55 pm

If you work on one program/document at a time, then you should see a slight improvement for WinXP, a less obvious difference for Win2K, and probably no difference for Win98(SE). However, in all three cases, there should be a fairly big improvement for running multiple programs or viewing multiple documents simultaneously.
Microsoft Surface 3 (Atom x7-Z8700 / 4GB / 128GB / LTE)
Dell OptiPlex 9010 SFF (Core i3-3220 / 8GB / 8TB); HP 8300 Elite minitower (Core i7-3770 / 16GB / 9.25TB)
Acer T272HUL; Crossover 404K; Dell 3008WFP, U2715H, U2711, P2416D; Monoprice 10734; QNIX QHD2410R; Seiki Pro SM40UNP

rkawakami
Admin
Admin
Posts: 10055
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2006 1:26 am
Location: San Jose, CA 95120 USA
Contact:

#3 Post by rkawakami » Tue Oct 31, 2006 1:58 pm

I'd say, depending upon the operating system you are using and the types and numbers of processes that are running, then you can see either no substantial difference or a huge amount.

For example: if you are simply using the system to surf the web or write up the occasional Word document, then you probably would not see much improvement. Yes, your programs would load slightly faster and you could have more programs loaded at the same time without the slowdown of disk swapping. However, if you are attempting to run something as memory-intensive as a graphics program (say Photoshop or Paint Shop Pro) or a video editing program, then the additional memory could be the difference between being able to run the program or not.

(gotta type faster!)
Ray Kawakami
X22 X24 X31 X41 X41T X60 X60s X61 X61s X200 X200s X300 X301 Z60m Z61t Z61p 560 560Z 600 600E 600X T21 T22 T23 T41 T60p T410 T420 T520 W500 W520 R50 A21p A22p A31 A31p
NOTE: All links to PC-Doctor software hosted by me are dead. Files removed 8/28/12 by manufacturer's demand.

pianowizard
Senior ThinkPadder
Senior ThinkPadder
Posts: 8368
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 5:07 am
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Contact:

#4 Post by pianowizard » Tue Oct 31, 2006 2:00 pm

rkawakami wrote:(gotta type faster!)
Yep, I type fast, perhaps in part due to my superior pianistic skills.
Microsoft Surface 3 (Atom x7-Z8700 / 4GB / 128GB / LTE)
Dell OptiPlex 9010 SFF (Core i3-3220 / 8GB / 8TB); HP 8300 Elite minitower (Core i7-3770 / 16GB / 9.25TB)
Acer T272HUL; Crossover 404K; Dell 3008WFP, U2715H, U2711, P2416D; Monoprice 10734; QNIX QHD2410R; Seiki Pro SM40UNP

drwho
Posts: 43
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 9:33 am
Location: Toronto

#5 Post by drwho » Tue Oct 31, 2006 2:13 pm

nothing really, just surf the web, might download some files, running XP sp2. i guess i really don't need to get another 256, thanks for your input. i assume 128 would be enough for another machine running WIN2K.

rkawakami
Admin
Admin
Posts: 10055
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2006 1:26 am
Location: San Jose, CA 95120 USA
Contact:

#6 Post by rkawakami » Tue Oct 31, 2006 2:19 pm

I've booted a couple of my systems (T23s) with Win2K and 128MB of memory (I think I even did one with 64MB!). Yes, it loaded fine but I didn't actually try running a bunch of programs with it. Again, depending upon the types (and numbers) of programs you have loaded (count the stuff in the system tray too or open up the Task Manager), 128MB could be enough.
Ray Kawakami
X22 X24 X31 X41 X41T X60 X60s X61 X61s X200 X200s X300 X301 Z60m Z61t Z61p 560 560Z 600 600E 600X T21 T22 T23 T41 T60p T410 T420 T520 W500 W520 R50 A21p A22p A31 A31p
NOTE: All links to PC-Doctor software hosted by me are dead. Files removed 8/28/12 by manufacturer's demand.

smugiri
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 774
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2004 4:29 pm
Location: Mississauga, ON
Contact:

#7 Post by smugiri » Tue Oct 31, 2006 2:36 pm

Its also important to consider the speed and timing of the chips, the 32mb is likely to be a bottleneck from this perspective when compared to the specs of the 256MB chips especially if its older.
Steve

rkawakami
Admin
Admin
Posts: 10055
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2006 1:26 am
Location: San Jose, CA 95120 USA
Contact:

#8 Post by rkawakami » Tue Oct 31, 2006 2:42 pm

smugiri wrote:<snip>... the 32mb is likely to be a bottleneck from this perspective when compared to the specs of the 256MB chips especially if its older.
That shouldn't matter. The (stock) 600E is going to run at the 66Mhz front-side bus speed no matter what faster modules are inserted.
Ray Kawakami
X22 X24 X31 X41 X41T X60 X60s X61 X61s X200 X200s X300 X301 Z60m Z61t Z61p 560 560Z 600 600E 600X T21 T22 T23 T41 T60p T410 T420 T520 W500 W520 R50 A21p A22p A31 A31p
NOTE: All links to PC-Doctor software hosted by me are dead. Files removed 8/28/12 by manufacturer's demand.

smugiri
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 774
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2004 4:29 pm
Location: Mississauga, ON
Contact:

#9 Post by smugiri » Tue Oct 31, 2006 3:09 pm

rkawakami wrote:
smugiri wrote:<snip>... the 32mb is likely to be a bottleneck from this perspective when compared to the specs of the 256MB chips especially if its older.
That shouldn't matter. The (stock) 600E is going to run at the 66Mhz front-side bus speed no matter what faster modules are inserted.
Yep.

What I was saying is that the 32MB module might be 33Mhz meaning it would slow things down.
Steve

pianowizard
Senior ThinkPadder
Senior ThinkPadder
Posts: 8368
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 5:07 am
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Contact:

#10 Post by pianowizard » Tue Oct 31, 2006 4:03 pm

smugiri wrote:What I was saying is that the 32MB module might be 33Mhz meaning it would slow things down.
But why would Intel and/or IBM use an onboard RAM that would slow down the processor's 66MHz FSB?
Microsoft Surface 3 (Atom x7-Z8700 / 4GB / 128GB / LTE)
Dell OptiPlex 9010 SFF (Core i3-3220 / 8GB / 8TB); HP 8300 Elite minitower (Core i7-3770 / 16GB / 9.25TB)
Acer T272HUL; Crossover 404K; Dell 3008WFP, U2715H, U2711, P2416D; Monoprice 10734; QNIX QHD2410R; Seiki Pro SM40UNP

cmarti
ThinkPadder
ThinkPadder
Posts: 1935
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2006 1:26 am
Location: Orlando, Florida
Contact:

#11 Post by cmarti » Tue Oct 31, 2006 8:18 pm

smugiri wrote: What I was saying is that the 32MB module might be 33Mhz meaning it would slow things down.
If the processor runs at 66mhz the ram MUST run too at 66mhz.

Where did you get the 33mhz idea? :?:
X32/2.0GHZ/2GB/ENGENIUS EMP-8602+S 600mw mini pci/WD 250GB
X60/1.83GHZ/2GB/Atheros/7K100

smugiri
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 774
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2004 4:29 pm
Location: Mississauga, ON
Contact:

#12 Post by smugiri » Tue Oct 31, 2006 9:27 pm

cmarti wrote:
smugiri wrote: What I was saying is that the 32MB module might be 33Mhz meaning it would slow things down.
If the processor runs at 66mhz the ram MUST run too at 66mhz.

Where did you get the 33mhz idea? :?:
RAM does not run at processor speed. Both processor speed and memory speed run at a multiple of bus speed. I am not sure if this is the case with the 600E but most machines that use 66Mhz can run 33Mhz memory by waiting a cycle for data.

All this argument might be moot though as the specs seem to suggest that 600E's only access a max of 288MB of RAM (( 128 x 2 ) + 32 ) see Note #4.
Steve

pianowizard
Senior ThinkPadder
Senior ThinkPadder
Posts: 8368
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 5:07 am
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Contact:

#13 Post by pianowizard » Tue Oct 31, 2006 9:32 pm

smugiri wrote:All this argument might be moot though as the specs seem to suggest that 600E's only access a max of 288MB of RAM (( 128 x 2 ) + 32 ) see Note #4.
That page was written when 256MB sticks didn't exist. The 600E can use two 256MB sticks in addition to the 32MB onboard. And according to the twbook, the onboard memory is 66MHz.
Microsoft Surface 3 (Atom x7-Z8700 / 4GB / 128GB / LTE)
Dell OptiPlex 9010 SFF (Core i3-3220 / 8GB / 8TB); HP 8300 Elite minitower (Core i7-3770 / 16GB / 9.25TB)
Acer T272HUL; Crossover 404K; Dell 3008WFP, U2715H, U2711, P2416D; Monoprice 10734; QNIX QHD2410R; Seiki Pro SM40UNP

AlphaKilo470
Moderator Emeritus
Moderator Emeritus
Posts: 2737
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2004 1:42 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Contact:

#14 Post by AlphaKilo470 » Tue Oct 31, 2006 11:19 pm

Just make sure those 256mb sticks are low density. Most 256mb chips are high density and will only be detected as 128mb.
ThinkPad T60: 2GHZ CD T2500, 3gb RAM, 14.1" XGA, 60gb 7k100, Win 7 Ult
Latitude E7250: i5 5300U 2.3ghz, 12gb RAM, 12" 1080p touch, 256gb SSD, Win 10

warwound
Freshman Member
Posts: 56
Joined: Sun May 15, 2005 4:21 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

#15 Post by warwound » Wed Nov 01, 2006 1:48 am

AlphaKilo470 wrote:Just make sure those 256mb sticks are low density. Most 256mb chips are high density and will only be detected as 128mb.
Or not at all.....

I bought a 256MB module for my 600E and was sent a high-density module - my 600E would not even boot with it installed.
Lucky that i bought it from a good seller and it was swapped for a low-density 256MB module that works perfectly.

I agree with the other replies to the original question.
I doubt you will notice any real-world improvement in performance with a second 256MB module unless you have LOTS of programs running at the same time.

warwound.
No longer a Thinkpad owner.

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Return to “ThinkPad Legacy Hardware”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests