Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Intel Turbo Memory?

  • 02-11-2008 2:10pm
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,358 ✭✭✭


    hi guys!

    getting a new laptop soon but it comes with Vista business which i will defo upgrade its ram to 3Gb - heard terrible stories of this slow Vista .while i did some research on the web found this thing called Intel Turbo Memory which claimed to be speed up booting the OS etc.sound highly appealing to me since i really have had enough 'slow moments' with my 4 years old laptop stuck up with 256 ram due to broken ram slot...

    anyone tried it?would i bother to get one for the lappy?it would be so comfy if vista runs as fast as XP while multitasking lots of software at the same time


Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,559 ✭✭✭Umiq88


    Vista will run fine its those laptops out there with poor processors and only 1gb of ram and vista will be very sluggish on them.

    Im running dell vostra

    dual core 2.1ghz proc
    3gig ram

    and it runs very fast might run slightly faster with xp but i wouldnt be concerned.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,706 ✭✭✭Voodu Child


    Most people who say Vista runs slow are just regurgitating things they read on the internet, or tests conducted 2 years ago. On average its a touch slower than XP but that's to be expected. Vista runs great with a good system and 2Gb ram.

    Most tests ive seen on Turbo Memory suggests it does very little, and isn't really worth spending any extra money on. I wouldn't bother with it unless it came free with the laptop.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,358 ✭✭✭seraphimvc


    Most people who say Vista runs slow are just regurgitating things they read on the internet, or tests conducted 2 years ago. On average its a touch slower than XP but that's to be expected. Vista runs great with a good system and 2Gb ram.

    Most tests ive seen on Turbo Memory suggests it does very little, and isn't really worth spending any extra money on. I wouldn't bother with it unless it came free with the laptop.
    thanks dude :D cant wait for my T8100 2.1Ghz Thinkpad T61!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,012 ✭✭✭✭Cuddlesworth


    seraphimvc wrote: »
    hi guys!

    getting a new laptop soon but it comes with Vista business which i will defo upgrade its ram to 3Gb - heard terrible stories of this slow Vista .while i did some research on the web found this thing called Intel Turbo Memory which claimed to be speed up booting the OS etc.sound highly appealing to me since i really have had enough 'slow moments' with my 4 years old laptop stuck up with 256 ram due to broken ram slot...

    anyone tried it?would i bother to get one for the lappy?it would be so comfy if vista runs as fast as XP while multitasking lots of software at the same time

    Don't upgrade to 3 gigs of ram, 2 gigs or 4. Ram works better in matched pairs when the system utilises dual channel.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,221 ✭✭✭RichyX


    Don't upgrade to 3 gigs of ram, 2 gigs or 4. Ram works better in matched pairs when the system utilises dual channel.

    But unless you're running a 64 bit version of Windows the OS can only use 3GB of RAM anyway, no?


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 35,125 Mod ✭✭✭✭AlmightyCushion


    Most tests ive seen on Turbo Memory suggests it does very little, and isn't really worth spending any extra money on. I wouldn't bother with it unless it came free with the laptop.

    Same here, I haven't seen anything to suggest it's even slightly better than useless.


  • Moderators, Education Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators Posts: 8,259 Mod ✭✭✭✭Jonathan


    You are better off increasing the system ram than adding turbo memory.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,012 ✭✭✭✭Cuddlesworth


    RichyX wrote: »
    But unless you're running a 64 bit version of Windows the OS can only use 3GB of RAM anyway, no?

    3.25 but by installing two sticks(1 and 2 gig) you are gimping your system since it uses dual channel ram.

    Wiki article here, although I have a problem with the Toms hardware part at the end. Seems more like a plug tbh. And in real world performance with a 3 thousand machines I have seen a big difference between laptops with 3 and 4 gigs.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,358 ✭✭✭seraphimvc


    3.25 but by installing two sticks(1 and 2 gig) you are gimping your system since it uses dual channel ram.

    Wiki article here, although I have a problem with the Toms hardware part at the end. Seems more like a plug tbh. And in real world performance with a 3 thousand machines I have seen a big difference between laptops with 3 and 4 gigs.
    interesting...i think the spec stated that 3Gb ram is the max,so i shall go for adding 2Gb instead?

    p/s:where can i get a reasonable walk-in price of 2Gig DDR2-5300 in dublin/belfield?best if i can test it cause' i can compare it with my own 1Gig ram


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,727 ✭✭✭✭Sherifu


    I was looking for turbo memory a while back. It was hard to find even to price.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,221 ✭✭✭RichyX


    3.25 but by installing two sticks(1 and 2 gig) you are gimping your system since it uses dual channel ram.

    Wiki article here, although I have a problem with the Toms hardware part at the end. Seems more like a plug tbh. And in real world performance with a 3 thousand machines I have seen a big difference between laptops with 3 and 4 gigs.

    What about 3GB versus 2GB?
    It's easier to replace one stick afterwards than both of them.

    If I get a laptop running 32bit windows with 4GB of RAM will the RAM be running at optimal performance, loss of .75GB aside?


Advertisement