• 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.

Do you really need over 512mb?

Budmantom

Budmantom

Lifer
I know a lot of you guys have it, but from everything I have read you really don't see a benefit from anything over 512mb. So for you guys that do have over 512mb why? Will winME take over 512mb without acting-up I know I tried it on one of my systems a while ago and it would recognize it.

Thanks for your thoughts,

Tom
 
Depends on your OS and what you do w/ your rig Budmantom. 🙂

BTW, Win ME is the worst OS I have ever used! :|
 
Developers and graphic designers (especially 3D stuff) need it. For example, Websphere Studio Application Developer highly recommends 512MB minimum (384MB is killing me).

Besides, it's so cheap nowadays...
 
IMO, not on 98 or ME unless you are doing some really intense stuff, in which case you should then be using 2k or the such. I know on XP, 768 seems to be the seem sweet spot, I know when I had that much it was a noticeable improvement from 512. Anyway, with the current RAM prices I think I may go ahead and help myself to another 512 stick.
 
My laptop is a Windows 2000 Adv. Server running Active Directory, IIS, SQL Server and I run VB.NET and Outlook along with the SETI@Home program. Toss in Word once in a whlie or Excel and my 384MB crawls on a PIII-1.0M
 
Each session of vmware I run requires 256mb of ram. Two sessions and my work computer is almost to a crawl.
 
if you run linux/W2K/XP then 512 is good unless you run database/graphic/photochop etc, then max it out!
i just ordered another 512MB stick for $62 last night
 
I have 256 on WinXP and it's WAY too little. My bro has 512 and it's definitely a nice difference compared to my 256 but I DEFINITELY still wouldn't be happy with 512. I'd probably go for a GB (ddr).

And I'm just a home user. I don't do any heavy stuff. I don't do 3d graphic design, I don't do halflife/UT/q3/deus-ex mapping, I don't even program.... all I do is basic things 99% of the time, and I would still be unhappy with 512. Pheonix, Miranda, Seti, a few applications.. things eat up the memory awefully fast when you keep them all open at the same time. I like to do EVERYTHING without having to make my HD crunch like a little bitch. Which it does often right now.
 
In addition to everything already mentioned, having over a certain amount of RAM, and I believe this varies depending on the setup, you can eliminate the windows swap file.
 
Originally posted by: FoBoT
if you run linux/W2K/XP then 512 is good unless you run database/graphic/photochop etc, then max it out!
i just ordered another 512MB stick for $62 last night
Click to expand...

*grumble*

I need RDRAM for my machine, pricing here is over $300 for 512MB RDRAM... 🙁
 
My next machine will have AT LEAST 1gig of RAM 😛! Having less than that is pointless IMO. There are already games that practically require 512megs of RAM (IL-2 Sturmovik: Forgotten Battles and Sim City 4 comes to mind), and I would much rather have some breathing-room when it comes to RAM.

<=== Currently has 384megs with all DIMM-slots full
 
When playing BF1942, there is a huge difference when loading maps when going from 512MB to 768MB. With 768MB, I'm usually the first person on the new map. When I pulled out 256MB, I was middle of the pack.
 
I have 1280MB of RAM and it isn't enough. After Effects (and many, many other apps) chew it up within minutes.
 
Originally posted by: Doggiedog
When playing BF1942, there is a huge difference when loading maps when going from 512MB to 768MB. With 768MB, I'm usually the first person on the new map. When I pulled out 256MB, I was middle of the pack.
Click to expand...

Java developer certainly needs more than 512mb, I am running J2E at work, my computer is a P4 1.8GHz with 512mb, whenever something is loading, it uses up all the memory, so I am getting another 512mb to reach a gig.
 
for what i do, no. i have 384 MB running xp on a celeron 500 and performance is ok. my box does get a bit slow when doing intense gaming(e.g. stuff like ut2003). day-to-day stuff--it's fine.

 
I have 1GB of RAM on my PowerBook and it makes a difference when I am running Virtual PC as well as other RAM-intensive apps.
 
At my old job, our machines ran a database server, a web server, a and a full J2EE application, plus our development environment and whatever documentation we had up at the time. On Windows 2000.

512 megs just didn't cut it. We each had 1 GB, and I maxed that out on numerous occasions.

Oh, and 1 GB wasn't enough for our testing product to run unencumbered. Major caching allowed for 2 GB, an improvement, but still not enough, plus system performance slowed way down.

Now I have 512 megs on my current systems and am considering upgrading for gaming purposes. Everquest is a hog when you've got all the textures enabled.
 
Windows 3.11 - up to 16mb.
Windows 95 - up to 64mb.
Windows 98 - up to 128mb.
Windows ME - up to 256mb.
Windows 2000 - up to 512mb.
Windows XP - up to 1gb.

With my experience with each of these operating systems, I have observed a trend in how well they handle memory. Anything above what I listed for that particular OS makes very little difference in the system. And that's just in the case of running multiple programs simultanesouly. However, for a game like Sim City 3000, the Video card and CPU is more important than the memory. For a game like Everquest (the newest edition) it's hard to play the game if you don't have at least 768mb of RAM.

So for ME, 512 is the most you will need until you go to the next OS. ME still runs on the 9x architecture. Also, each OS will recognize however much memory you have installed because that is motherboard dependent, not OS dependent. That doesn't mean the OS will do much with it though.
 
Originally posted by: rh71
Developers and graphic designers (especially 3D stuff) need it. For example, Websphere Studio Application Developer highly recommends 512MB minimum (384MB is killing me).

Besides, it's so cheap nowadays...
Click to expand...

And also it's not anymore how LARGE your memory is but how FAST your memory is. Try and use DDR if you can, or at least the double or quad RAMBUS.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top