Is there any benefit to "slight" elevation?

The obsession with elevation here is pretty hilarious.

1000m or above will work. you will notice your breathing is a bit harder when you get that high, so it must have some effect on generating more red blood cells.

Technically yes, altitude benefits are a gradient like anything else. At your specific elevation would I expect tangible results? Probably not. So in practicality I wouldn't bank on any performance improvement. But all other variables being equal, such as in lab scenarios, you'd see a slight difference between sea level and a moderate increase in elevation.

Well yea dude, it's a part of our sport. There's a reason why most of the elites in our sport train at altitude. What's the problem with asking a question?

These altitudes sound too low to me. The "sweet spot" for triggering adaptations (EPO and RBC) for distance runners seems to be 2000m-3000m, but I've seen figures as low as 1700m-1800m. This altitude negatively impacts speedwork, so a "hi-lo" strategy would have you coming down from altitude (e.g. 1000m) to do faster training.

I live at sea level in VA and will run a half-marathon in Asheville, NC (elev. 2134 ft / 650 m) next month. I've never raced above 1000ft before. Will the effort required to hit my goal time be noticeably larger?