question about massive amounts of ram . . .

[drowd]

so, i had heard that as ram increases, the noticable amount of performance increases get smaller. so say, you have 256 megs in a machine and jump to 512, you will notice a difference, but then from 512 to 1 gig, you will notice a difference, but not near as much. so, i was wondering, any of the folks with bukus (3 to 4 gigs in a workstation) of ram (in a windows environment), what kind of performance increases are you seeing from a machine running 512 or 1 gig of ram. i am gonna be building a new computer either over christmas or next summer, and i am trying to do some long term "general" planning for the rig i will build. anyway, whatever info you folks care to offer is good for me. and remember this is not for a server, but more of a workstation, and it is in a windows environment. thanks . . .

[Geeky1]

If it's of any help, I noticed zero difference between 1GB and 1.5GB...

[kanezfan]

i wont use XP with any less than 768. i find 256 unusable, 512 barely ok, and 768 just right. I'm running 1 gig of ram right now, it's perfect. i love that when i exit games, i can open up another app and my computer doesn't blink. i get no swapping, ever.

[stoopid]

Yeah, 1gig owner here and I couldn't see much from 512 to 1gb either... it's good to know it's there but many of my music producing software apps are programmed to use the swap and I couldn't find settings to change that... :(

[kanezfan]

you didn't see a huge difference between 512 and 1 gig? really? i mean between 768 and 1 gig, no difference really, but from 512 to 1 gig i was like :D

[drowd]

yeah, i upped from 256 to 768, and i was very satisfied. i just remembered when i was building a p3 rig back in high school, and people said 64 was more than enough, and 128 was more than you would EVER need, and i went ahead and got the 256, not only was i happy, but i had the hottest rig on the block. sigh, those were the days. anyway, i guess in about a year or so, 2 gigs should still be plenty, eh? or excessive?

[timinator]

man 1gb? im still running 256mb happily on winxp over here, i never have any slowdown. i must be in the stone age....

[trippin]

I ran xp on 256mb for a while, it wasnt that bad (i do pretty heavy multitasking, photoshop multi ssh sessions 20x ie windows ftp etc...) when i went to 512mb i noticed a pretty big difference, but when i went to 1gb it wasnt that big of a difference. If you NEED 1gb you would know it, and if you need ever more than that you would be running some wierd stuff, that size of ram would be reserved for servers.

[Komete]

I have to say 512 is the lowest you should ever go with xp. I notice a big difference. Was useing 512 in xp untill one of my 256mb sticks went bad. That was a big drop. I put in a stick of 128 and that helped but still isnt nearly as good as the 512 was.

In your situation where you will be upgrading over winter or the summer I say Shoot for the 1 gig to 2 gig range. I am guessing you will building an athlon 64 system. If not 512 to 1 gig willl be just fine.

[kanezfan]

i must not have any patience then. i can't stand any swapping, even for like 3 seconds, drives me nuts.

[citrixmeta]

i noticed a huge diff when loading/exiting games (as kanezfan mentioned).

gaMEs like BF1942 require lots of ram for the bots or else your swapping through out the game. (usage will go up to 430megs while gaming)

as far as the OS and apps go, i haven't noticed much diff. i always have photoshop 7 open, bsplayer playing a movie always on top, msn, irc, a few IE's, all this on 256 megs of ram (im upgrading next week to 1gig geils pc3500's)


swapping = EviL!

[Aranyic]

I noticed a HUGE difference going from 512 to 1gig of ram in planetside alone (the game will use 500-600mb if you have it there for it).

I also noticed a difference in just day to day usage though for me, I'll generally have photoshop, zendphp, bunch of IE, music, kazaa, grabit and about 25-30 background tasks running :p.

To answer your question though I would think 1 - 1.5 gig will be plenty for a while yet.

[Geeky1]

256MB for XP is just fine.... just not for games or anything like that. The office machines that my grandparents' business donated to habitat for humanity a few months ago are K7S5As w/1800s, GF2MX400s and 256MB of ram, and they run XP Pro. For office apps and e-mail, they work just fine.

That being said, the least I run in MY systems is 512MB, and that's only in the print server and the laptop. Everything else has been upgraded to 1GB. Going from 512MB to 1GB is definitely noticeable, although fairly subtle. I don't notice any difference between 1 and 1.5GB tho. Maybe I'll throw a full 2GB in the print server when I get home and see what that does (my print server is the only computer I have that can take 4 unregistered/non-ecc DDR sticks)

[versello]

Originally posted by citrixmeta
i noticed a huge diff when loading/exiting games (as kanezfan mentioned).

gaMEs like BF1942 require lots of ram for the bots or else your swapping through out the game. (usage will go up to 430megs while gaming)

as far as the OS and apps go, i haven't noticed much diff. i always have photoshop 7 open, bsplayer playing a movie always on top, msn, irc, a few IE's, all this on 256 megs of ram (im upgrading next week to 1gig geils pc3500's)


swapping = EviL!

Who buys BF1942 to play against bots? :D

[citrixmeta]

meh

[drowd]

ouch, that was a low blow. you better defend yourself citrix :D . . .

[citrixmeta]

no need, im not the one with the dell

:D

[drowd]

oh man, things are getting NASTY up in here . . .

[citrixmeta]

ya lets quit it before the agents (admins) show up and pwn us all

[stoopid]

Originally posted by citrixmeta
ya lets quit it before the agents (admins) show up and pwn us all

Mr. Citrix... we meet again...

:cool:

[citrixmeta]

OH NOES!!!!11111

[izzugotom]

Agree with 768 minimum........Just do it.......and be happy.