IBM Think Pad upgrade

[WA9SVD]

I use an IBM THinkPad T22 for Amateur Radio applications' Windoze XP Pro with latest updates.
The original memopy was 128 MB, upgraded with an additional 128 MB when I bough the machine. The service manual says it will take a maximum of 512 MB, and the modules listed state SD-RAM, PC-133 as upgrades.

I purchased a 512 MB SD-RAM PC-133 module through Amazon, and it won't work! If I install the single module, I just sat a series of three beeps, with no boot up. If I add the module with one of the original modules, I don't even get the beeps. I noticed that the original memory (ine original from IBM, and one from INfineon, were both PC-100 modules.l
Do the SD-ROM modules need to be installed in pairs? Or is the 512 MB module I received defective? I realize even 512 MB is barely enough to support XP, but it's far better than only 256 MB.

[KK4DHD]

I'll bet they do need to be installed in pairs. Most RAM nowadays does.

[WA9SVD]

I'll bet they do need to be installed in pairs. Most RAM nowadays does.

Apparently not. Remember, this is SD-RAM. The machine works with ONE <128MB> module installed; although it came with two <128 MB> modules installed. (One of the modules is an aftermarket product.) Originally, the OEM product from IBM shipped with a single 128 MB module. I presumed the machine would show a modicum of improved performance with 512 MB of memory. oer its current 256 MB. (Barely suitable for Win XP.) . The strange thing is that IBM specified PC-133 memory up to a single 512 MB module, but the original memory modules were all PC-100. I suspect the new module may be defective.

[AC0H]

Apparently not. Remember, this is SD-RAM. The machine works with ONE <128MB> module installed; although it came with two <128 MB> modules installed. (One of the modules is an aftermarket product.) Originally, the OEM product from IBM shipped with a single 128 MB module. I presumed the machine would show a modicum of improved performance with 512 MB of memory. oer its current 256 MB. (Barely suitable for Win XP.) . The strange thing is that IBM specified PC-133 memory up to a single 512 MB module, but the original memory modules were all PC-100. I suspect the new module may be defective.

Double check the BIOS on the machine and ascertain if it will support PC133...just in case.
If you try and mix PC100 and PC133 the memory will only run at the PC100 rate.
I'm betting on a bad SIMM.

[WA9SVD]

Double check the BIOS on the machine and ascertain if it will support PC133...just in case.
If you try and mix PC100 and PC133 the memory will only run at the PC100 rate.
I'm betting on a bad SIMM.

'm now thinking about a bad SIMM. The IBM Service manual specifies PC-133 modules, with a 512 MB maximum,) and the 128 MB modules worl individuals as well together. They ARE PC-100 mudules, even if that's what's spec'd by IBM in their service manual. The 512 MB /PC133 module won't work in any configuration. I'm now leaning to a memory module failure.

[WA9SVD]

Double check the BIOS on the machine and ascertain if it will support PC133...just in case.
If you try and mix PC100 and PC133 the memory will only run at the PC100 rate.
I'm betting on a bad SIMM.

There's nowhere in the BIOS that specifies the type of memory for the laptop. If the SIMM is defective, then it will be returned. I'd even rather run aPC-100 run at it's proper speed if I can get the memory upgraded. But if IBM spec's PC-133 memory, I'd think the replacement would have been acceptable,and operate as well.

Obviously, the PC-133 SHOULD function properly, as spec'd in the IBM service manual. Id didn't not.

[KD5SPX]

To get 512mb you must install 2 x 256 mb modules.

[WA9SVD]

To get 512mb you must install 2 x 256 mb modules.

Then why does IBM designate a single, 512 MB PC-133 module as a suitable "FRU" (Field replaceable Unit) for this particular laptop? IBM states that 512 MB is the maximum it can handle. and lists a 512 MB / PC-133 module as an upgrade option. Or at least so says the service manual; there's NO mention of the need to install memory modules in pairs.

Single memory modules (such as the 128 MB module that was part of the OEM machine) work fine without being paired with another module.

Please state your reasoning or experience to the contrary. My QUESTION is whether current "PC-133" memory may not work in this situation, or if the memory module is defective.

[AC0H]

Then why does IBM designate a single, 512 MB PC-133 module as a suitable "FRU" (Field replaceable Unit) for this particular laptop? IBM states that 512 MB is the maximum it can handle. and lists a 512 MB / PC-133 module as an upgrade option. Or at least so says the service manual; there's NO mention of the need to install memory modules in pairs.

Single memory modules (such as the 128 MB module that was part of the OEM machine) work fine without being paired with another module.

Please state your reasoning or experience to the contrary. My QUESTION is whether current "PC-133" memory may not work in this situation, or if the memory module is defective.

Turns out SPX is right.
The T-22 will take PC-133 and a max of 512MB but it has to be a pair of 256MB SIMMs.
http://www.crucial.com/store/listparts.aspx?model=ThinkPad%20T22%20Series%20%28 Type%202647%29

At least according to Crucial.

[WA9SVD]

Turns out SPX is right.
The T-22 will take PC-133 and a max of 512MB but it has to be a pair of 256MB SIMMs.
http://www.crucial.com/store/listparts.aspx?model=ThinkPad%20T22%20Series%20%28 Type%202647%29

At least according to Crucial.

I would tend to think IBM would know more of what the machine needs than an aftermarket memory company. It's just strange that IBM specifies PC-133 memory in the Service module, but they installed a single (128 MB) PC-100 memory module from the factory.