• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

192MB vs. 256MB for Windows ME...is it worth the upgrade?

S

Staz

Senior member
I currently have 192MB of memory and was wondering if it was really worth the money to upgrade it to 256MB? It does make a difference in Windows 2000, but is it just overkill for Windows ME?
 



<< It does make a difference in Windows 2000, but is it just overkill for Windows ME? >>



you said it 😉
 
Why are you running winME? have you even seen the benchmarks for it? I doesnt help anything except save you in case of a crash.... but if you're running on the win9x kernel you should be resetting before crashes anyways, it's not like the winNt kernel or good like *nix kernels
 
I would think that a difference of 64Mb would make a little difference, there would be a much bigger difference going between CAS 3 to CAS 2 or from PC100 to PC133
 
If found that 192 is the sweet spot (for a gamer) of Win98, I can't imagine ME being different. When I went from 128 to 192 load times for levels went down, rebuilding the geometry of my own custom created levels went down, but I didn't get a framerate increase or anything. The only time I saw a FPS increase was when I went from CAS3 to CAS2 Ram and that was only in Unreal engine games. I would say that 192 is good, unless you can get 64 megs for dirt cheap.

Sd- I have heard that as an OS windows will only use 128megs, but other programs (games, word proc, graphics editing) will use it all depending on how they manage memory usage. Probably an Urban legend. A few years ago when a 128 megs was a lot for a consumer, the legend was that windows would only use 64 megs and other programs would use any other ram in there. Go figure. Take those &quot;it will only use x megs or ram&quot; with a grain of salt. Until someone takes apart the windows kernal and shows me, I won't totally believe it.
 
I went from 192 to 256, for both WMe + W2K. can't say I noticed any tangible day-to-day perf improvements.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top