My dual Opty has 4 gigs, my 3700+ has 2 gigs, the Fiancee's computer has 1 gig, and both lappy's have a gig a piece. Hell, I even upgraded the laser to 160MB!!
I didn't notice much of a difference when I went from 512 to 1gb, I only did it because I was upgrading to faster chips while I was at it. That was a year ago though, so BF2 and DS2 will probably make me glad I have the extra RAM.
I noticed a pretty large performance improvement when I upgraded to 1GB last year. Game map loading times were killing me with 512MB, 1GB literally cut those times in half.
1156? 1024MB is one gagabyte of RAM. The difference is 132MB. How on earth can one come up with a total of 1156?
That is the magic number for XP a 1 gig chip and a 256 chip run perfect, I did some tests and found after windows uses its share of ram. If the above number is left the games and system run like a champ.
I am, too. It may be that the popularity of dual-channel memory is causing people to buy two matched smaller sticks rather than one larger one, making it somewhat more difficult to upgrade down the road.
I built a new system last January with a 2X512MB dual-channel configuration. Springing for a 2X1GB setup would have meant getting by with an el-cheapo video card. Upgrading now would involve trying to match the old ram exactly, plus lowering the speed to 2T timings. Since I'm able to run every program I care to with 1GB total, it just doesn't seem to be a high priority.
That was my main point, too. Meeting the requirements of dual-channel makes an incremental upgrade somewhat problematic (though not impossible). I kind of miss the good old days where you just waited a couple months, then slapped another stick or two in your computer and kept on rolling.
That is the magic number for XP a 1 gig chip and a 256 chip run perfect, I did some tests and found after windows uses its share of ram. If the above number is left the games and system run like a champ.
wth are you talking about??!! 1156mb??
0
LeonardoWake up and smell the glaciersEagle River, AlaskaIcrontian
edited October 2005
OK, so 1156 "remaining" after Windows uses what it needs. So what is the starting total of physical system memory? Look, I'm not razzing you - I just want to understand your observations. But you also said a "1 gig chip and a 256 chip", which equals 1280Mb. Sorry, I just don't understand.
That was my main point, too. Meeting the requirements of dual-channel makes an incremental upgrade somewhat problematic (though not impossible). I kind of miss the good old days where you just waited a couple months, then slapped another stick or two in your computer and kept on rolling.
When I first bought the parts for this PC, I thought 1GB would be enough too, especially with the low timings and all.
But man was I surprised after I saw some benchmarks and whatnot, then again I did spend a few hundred on this new memory.
Why isn't 96MB a choice? One of my computers has 96MB (only 95 are recognized though =/).
In this system I have 1GB and the office computer 512MB.
0
LeonardoWake up and smell the glaciersEagle River, AlaskaIcrontian
edited October 2005
Why isn't 96MB a choice? One of my computers has 96MB (only 95 are recognized though =/).
Because Short-Media readers only recognize 95, and not 98! Sheesh!
Or rather, because it didn't dawn on the thread starter that anyone here would have a computer with only 96MB of system memory. Doubt I would have considered that either! Truth be told, my first computer had 8MB system memory. My first great act of technical daring was upgrading that computer to 16MB of system memory (or was 12 total?).
Okay I will break it down one of my system carries 128 Onboard ram I add 1 Gig chip with a 256 chip = 1408MB of Ram. After windows uses what it needs to run, I have a good 1156MB free that is what I am saying.... so my magic number on my computer that windows runs great on is 1156MB
0
Straight_ManGeeky, in my own wayNaples, FLIcrontian
edited October 2005
A friend and customer came over TODAY with a baby NEC laptop-- 32 MB RAM, Windows 98. I was flabbergasted.
But, here I have 1 GB per computer, same mobo model on each, and same matched sticks on each-- so to go to 2 GB I simply stick the other pair in the computer of choice also, and get two 1 GB matched sticks (and given what the Windows XP computer does, might well do that in the next few months) for the other computer.
is it true that alot of programs cant really utilize more than 2gb of ram?
A program with low requirements in the memory department won't see any advantage in having a large amount available. Straight_Man's friend with the 32MB Win98 machine may get along just fine, depending on what they actually do with the computer. I used to keep an old Win98 box around that had a P166 with 64MB of RAM. All I used it for was as an mp3 terminal in my bedroom. I never noticed it's lack of resources.
Where you'll see an improvement is with those programs which do benefit from scads of memory, plus with multitasking in general. On a normal afternoon I might have Outlook 2000, Firefox (several tabs or separate windows), Photoshop 7, Foobar (an mp3 player), Word 2000, and who knows what else, all open at the same time. Throw in my always-running AntiVirus software, a weather watcher program, MBM5, GetRight, GrabClipSave, EMIII and F@H and it really adds up.
The limitations you're referring to may be OS-dependent. With Win98 you were pretty much wasting your time with greater than 512MB of RAM - the OS didn't cache it efficiently beyond that point.
also if i give you lot the make and model of my mobo would you be able to tell me from that how much ram i could upgrade to?
Comments
2GB is optimal for games like BF2 though, prior to that I'd say 1GB did the trick though.
I have 4 rigs running in the house right now. And parts for 2 more amd 64's actually sitting here.
Both the dual opteron and the dual xeon have 2gb and need more badly. They both need 4gb minimum for what they are used for.
My s939 3400+ rig has 1gb and Robs s754 3200+ has 1gb.
Tex
Flint
That is the magic number for XP a 1 gig chip and a 256 chip run perfect, I did some tests and found after windows uses its share of ram. If the above number is left the games and system run like a champ.
and I have 48 Gigs of ram
I built a new system last January with a 2X512MB dual-channel configuration. Springing for a 2X1GB setup would have meant getting by with an el-cheapo video card. Upgrading now would involve trying to match the old ram exactly, plus lowering the speed to 2T timings. Since I'm able to run every program I care to with 1GB total, it just doesn't seem to be a high priority.
Now when WinVista comes out...
When I first bought the parts for this PC, I thought 1GB would be enough too, especially with the low timings and all.
But man was I surprised after I saw some benchmarks and whatnot, then again I did spend a few hundred on this new memory.
In this system I have 1GB and the office computer 512MB.
Or rather, because it didn't dawn on the thread starter that anyone here would have a computer with only 96MB of system memory. Doubt I would have considered that either! Truth be told, my first computer had 8MB system memory. My first great act of technical daring was upgrading that computer to 16MB of system memory (or was 12 total?).
What OS are you going to run for the ones with 4gb+
Tex
But, here I have 1 GB per computer, same mobo model on each, and same matched sticks on each-- so to go to 2 GB I simply stick the other pair in the computer of choice also, and get two 1 GB matched sticks (and given what the Windows XP computer does, might well do that in the next few months) for the other computer.
also if i give you lot the make and model of my mobo would you be able to tell me from that how much ram i could upgrade to?
Where you'll see an improvement is with those programs which do benefit from scads of memory, plus with multitasking in general. On a normal afternoon I might have Outlook 2000, Firefox (several tabs or separate windows), Photoshop 7, Foobar (an mp3 player), Word 2000, and who knows what else, all open at the same time. Throw in my always-running AntiVirus software, a weather watcher program, MBM5, GetRight, GrabClipSave, EMIII and F@H and it really adds up.
The limitations you're referring to may be OS-dependent. With Win98 you were pretty much wasting your time with greater than 512MB of RAM - the OS didn't cache it efficiently beyond that point.
Certainly.
Linux & OSX