2 x 8 gig memory upgrade for DV7-4xxx series

I like that statement. We tried this in our office (dv7-6027ez) - no go.

cheers ...

Give us a feedback if it works out on your dv7-4xxx series.

cheers ...

Looking at BIOS and chipset driver update as usual. An eternity with HP

cheers ...

Hey guys,

That's a tough one to reason out.

To be honest: Not meaning to bash HP tech support or anything (they're only doing their jobs), but you're not likely to get a reply about anything going outside the initially posted technical bounds of their machines. It's a tech support thing. If they start telling people "Yeah, it's not officially posted, but it WILL do this" it will only lead to more headaches than they NORMALLY have. I don't blame them, even if it's somewhat inconvenient to the tech-savvy amongst us. I once e-mailed them asking about my DV9700 and whether it would support Intel VT-x if I replaced my C2D T5750 with a VT-x supporting chip. Their response was: "No, it will not. If the option does not show up in the BIOS, replacing the CPU will not help. You would need to buy a new computer with that feature already enabled."

By doing some quick research on their own site, you can find a few spots where it's pretty clear that VT-x is a BIOS feature that shows up ONLY when a VT-x supporting chip is present. I do not blame them for their reply, they're adhering to printed documentation and, of course,trying to make sales. I replaced my T5750 with a T7250 and lo, I had VT-x.

I also replaced my 4 GB (2x2) DDR2 RAM in the system with 8 GB (4x2) as an experiment, and that also worked. This despite HP, Intel, and Crucial's websites ALL insisting that the chipset on my board supported a max of only 4 GB.

The moral? With the price of 8 GB DDR3 RAM sticks dropping fast, I would honestly try it out as an experiment. Even if it DOESN'T work, you can always resell the sticks or potentially refund them.

On a side note: People can correct me if I am out and out wrong, but the memory controller in modern systems is a part of the CPU and NOT the NB chip. The NB should have NO bearing on how much RAM your system will support. This has been the case for several years now, longer for AMD than for Intel even. As an example: I have a Core i7-2630QM in my DV7-4296NR. The max RAM HP and Crucial list for the system is 8 GB. However, CURRENT systems are sold with an i7-2630QM and 16 GB, so I would assume mine will run it as well. I have not had the chance to try this yet, but planned to after next paycheck.

That being said, if you can find instances of running a Phenom II N620 or similar with 16 GB, then you have a good chance of it working for you, too.

I hope this information is useful for you in some way. Like QHN said: If you try it out, give us a shout and let us know how it went. Always good to know where rules can be broken!

Regards,
O Shadow Fox O

from Wiki..

"Computers using Intel microprocessors have traditionally had a memory controller implemented on their motherboard's northbridge, but many modern microprocessors, such as DEC/Compaq's Alpha 21364, AMD's Athlon 64 and Opteron processors, IBM's POWER5, Sun Microsystems's UltraSPARC T1, and more recently Intel's Core i7 have an integrated memory controller (IMC) on the microprocessor in order to reduce memory latency. While this has the potential to increase the system's performance, it locks the microprocessor to a specific type (or types) of memory, forcing a redesign in order to support newer memory technologies. When DDR2 SDRAM was introduced, AMD released new Athlon 64 CPUs. These new models, with a DDR2 controller, use a different physical socket (known as Socket AM2), so that they will only fit in motherboards designed for the new type of RAM. When the memory controller is not on-die, the same CPU may be installed on a new motherboard, with an updated northbridge."

and the interesting part about cost ...

The integration of the memory controller onto the die of the microprocessor is not a new concept. Some microprocessors in the 1990s such as the DEC Alpha 21066 and HP PA-7300LC had integrated memory controllers, but rather than for performance gains, this was implemented to reduce the cost of systems by eliminating the need for an external memory controller."

cheers ...

Hey QHN,

Exactly the point. Thanks for that bit of research extra research!

Now all we can do is wait for his results if he decides to try it out.

Thanks and regards,
O Shadow Fox O

Pushing the envelop on ram is always fun ...

http://www.notebookforums.com/t/121534/faq-memory-upgrade-on-emachines-m68-xx-gateway-74-xx-gx-mx75-xx

There were times when we had to be careful about ram module speeds as well in order to make them cranking

cheers ...

QHN,

Definitely. There's so many quirky things that RAM can do before working or not working. Speed, voltage, single-side vs. double-side, etc.

When I first tested the 4 GB RAM sticks in my DV9700, I only bought one. I tried it first in the "lowest" RAM slot (the one closest to the MB physically) and put a 2 GB in the outer one. It didn't work, black screen on boot.

I then tested it on its own, and it booted, 4 GB recognized. This was similar to my original MB in my C500, which booted with a single 2 GB stick but not with a 2 GB and 1 GB together (which itself later reversed, by I digress). I put the 2 GB stick in FIRST and then the 4 GB in the outer slot, and that worked: 6,144 MB recognized in the BIOS. Of course, I assumed 6 GB to be the limit (as I had read in a couple spots) and let it go at that.

A few months later,my father bought a Gateway Netbook (peppy little beast, 11.6" with an Athlon X2 dual-core) and it listed 2 GB as the max. I had read several reports of people putting 4 GB in it without issue, so dad bought one to try. I borrowed it from him to test in my DV9700 (what did I have to lose? I hadn't spent the money and it was just an experiment). As you know, obviously, it worked on the first go: 8,192 MB recognized. Man the system FLEW with that in it. As soon as I could, I bought a second for myself and the rest is history.

So yeah, as long as it's the right type of RAM, you don't have a lot to lose by at least trying!

Regards,
O Shadow Fox O

Absolutely, trial and a good attitude about it, working or not. Many users gave up or just simply getting upset because of incomplete information regarding what a system can or cannot support.

for what you and other members are doing with the C500 upgrades ... great information sharing

cheers ...

QHN,

That's why I went ahead and did so much digging and experimenting with the C500. I had the means and the time as well as the desire and there were so many questions.

To me that's a puzzle to be solved and the pieces were all right there. Same thing with the DV9700, though I have nowhere near as much information on them (there are far too many available boards for me to test them all and my poor DV9700 will eventually refuse to be reassembled).

The more information we can provide, the more specifics there are, the more clearly EVERYONE can see and benefit from the knowledge as well as get the most they possibly can from their hardware.

I absolutely HATE it when good hardware is tossed by the way-side simply because of one or two things that could be cheaply remedied.

And in the end, experimenting is FUN! That's how all this began in the first place, it's how we learn. Yeah, you run the risk of possibly damaging or destroying the machine for some things (disassembly, CPU swapping if you don't know what you're doing). But, nothing ventured, nothing gained as the saying goes.

I can't wait to find out the results of this possible RAM upgrade. It'll be one more piece in the puzzle making the picture clearer!

Regards,
O Shadow Fox O

So true ... Have you looked into this thread?

http://www.notebookforums.com/t/238645/guide-to-upgrade-old-hp-pavilion-zv5000z-with-ocz-vertex-2-and-windows-7

Pushing here on "old" machines with SSD upgrade. I got the connector, just waiting to get a hand on a cheap SSD to experiment with my old 12.1" MSI

cheers ...

QHN,

That's a fascinating little read, makes me want to try it out on my old Inspiron 5150 if I could find a way to mount it properly. I'm a sucker for beefing up old hardware in ludicrous ways.

Thanks for the link!

Regards,
O Shadow Fox O

I am soooooo not alone now

cheers ...

That is one heck of a machine, my M6805 is still humming away, on Windows 7 64-bit as well

cheers ...

They caught on fast don't they? Have a good one bldegle

cheers ...