gobs and gobs of RAM

[Lord Evermore]

I just wanted to say that I and my roommate just ordered a total of 1.75 gigabytes of RAM. We each grabbed 2 modules of 256MB and 3 modules of 128MB.

Grand total cost: $1042

It's Micron chips, probably generic PCB, but I don't care too much. It was a choice between that or SyncMax which had a huge list of compatibility problems with some boards, and mine is on the list in some places but not others, so I didn't want to risk it.

So I'll end up with 640MB in mine, he'll have 768MB in his (3 slots and 4 slots for memory, respectively), and we'll have gobs of leftover modules, which we can pawn off for a slight profit when memory prices go up again (saving our friends money in case they need memory after the prices have jumped back up).

I'm just getting a stiffy thinking about it. I already wish I'd gone ahead and gotten another 256MB module so I could have a full 768MB.

 

[Sunner]

You know, A friend of mine has a boss who once told me something along the lines of "If it doesnt have at least 4 CPU's and 4 GB of RAM, it aint no computer"

Of course he works at Ericsson and is repsonsible for an awful lot of their Sun servers

 

[lupin]

Where do you buy these rams?

 

[Lord Evermore]

We got ours at pccost.com. We picked them because they were the only ones on Pricewatch listing 256MB modules at $91 and didn't say LIMIT ONE. Of course then we saw the Micron chip memory and decided the price difference would be worth it.

 

[Mday]

ya freakin' nut

 

[zippy]

Sounds like someone has been hitting the crack pipe!


jk

congrats....i think...

 

[Rigoletto]

What are you using this memory for BTW? And don't you have better things to spend your money on?...You sound like students.

 

[Pretender]

Maybe I'm missing something, but 256x2+128x3 = 896 MB.


BTW, is it 100 or 133mhz?

[edit] oops, you each ordered that. 896x2 = 1792 MB. My mistake [/edit]

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

Holy geez! :Q

Why?

 

[Lord Evermore]

What are we using it for?......I dunno, whatever comes up! With memory being so cheap, we wanted to grab as much as we could when it was at a low point. If it goes up again, then we'll have saved a lot of money by buying it now, so when we next build any systems we won't have to buy it at a higher price. If it continues to go lower, we may just buy some more!

We'll both be putting the 256MB modules into our computers, plus as many 128MB modules as we can. He has 4 slots, I only have 3. I thought after placing the order that I should have just gone ahead and gotten a 3rd 256MB module so I'd be able to get a full 768MB in my system instead of only 640MB...but you know, that might have been overkill...

The 128's will just sit around mostly, until we find the space for more computers. We've got enough parts to build more computers, but no room to put them and really nothing to do with them (other than me cracking RC5). We'll probably make use of some of the 128's to upgrade his girlfriend's computer and my second computer, plus his Linux box. Even with crappy Win98 memory management, you can't have too much memory.

 

[urbantechie]

Very cool. I want at least half a gig by the end of this year.


UTPK RV1?

 

[Pretender]

So, was it PC100 or PC133?

 

[Pariah]

"Even with crappy Win98 memory management, you can't have too much memory."

That isn't true. There are known bugs in win98, confirmed by MS, if you use more than 512MB of RAM. There's no reason anyone should need more than 256MB in win98. If you need more you shouldn't be running win98.

 

[zippy]

I've heard first hand reports than any ram beyond 256MB in Win98 will actually result in a slight drop off in performance.

I hope you are using an NT kernel.

 

[johnlog]

How much RAM you should be using depends on your mother board.

Some mobo's only cache 64 megs RAM. Others maybe 128 or 256 megs. So if you are using more RAM than your mobo can cache it will slow down your computer until you use enough RAM to get down to the cache top level.

JohnL

 

[Lord Evermore]

I'd forgotten about the cacheing problem. However with current processors and motherboards, I would think it's the CPU that determines the cacheable amount (since no motherboards for desktop computers come with onboard memory these days, except SS7). So the amount of CPU cache would make the difference.

We'll see next week. It probably won't get shipped till Monday or Tuesday, since we ordered late Friday, and I had it sent 3Day UPS.

I don't NEED more than 256MB of memory. I WANT more than that. I want to be absolutely certain that I've got tons more RAM than I will ever need, even if I'll never use more than a paltry amount of it really. It's cheap and I have the money, that's the main reason I got it. There've been too many times that I've needed memory for a new system or to upgrade, and either it was triple what it is now, or it was reasonable and I didn't have enough to get any (or both).

Even if I did need more than 256MB, that's no reason to think I shouldn't be using Win98. Win2k is overkill for me, offers me nothing that I need but adds incompatibilities and more work to set up. Win98 does everything I need it to do, and if I was running a program that needed more memory and Win98 could run it well with that extra memory, why should I use anything else?

 

[bluemax]

Big performance increase:

RAMDRIVE = E:\
TEMP = E:\

(or something like that....)
swap files going to a Ramdrive instead of HD? Nice...
And no matter how much RAM you have, It seems Windows will ALWAYS to temp stuff to disk. Blecch.

 

[Lord Evermore]

The RAMDRIVE driver included with Win9x is apparently limited to 32MB, so the swap file being put there won't work. Nobody seems to have created an alternative ramdrive for 32bit Windows which isn't limited.

 

[apoppin]

I hate to be the wet blanket here. However, won't SDRAM prices continue to drop since DDRAM is the next standard?

 

[Moonbender]

Actually, they might even rise. DDR RAM is already being produced in large quantities, and obviously it will be the next standard for both AMD and Intel CPUs, as well as graphic cards. With the number of of DDR RAM mobos and graphic cards rising, the number of SDR RAM mobos will fall. Less SDR RAM will be produced, and the prices will probably rise. At least that's how I see it.

But it doesn't seem awfully wise to me to buy heaps of SDR RAM now. I'd have waited and hopped on the DDR train if I was spending money on it. Oh well ... if you have the money, it doesn't really matter I guess.

 

[Soccerman]

Apoppin, that depends.. normally if RAM becomes rare, it's price goes up.. I bought 4 4 meg 32 pin pieces of RAM a few years back to max out my 486 with 16 megs. it cost quite a bit (over $100 I think).

that was when 72 Pin was in it's stride, and 168 pin was about to come out in about a year (I don't remember exactly).

 

[apoppin]

<< Apoppin that depends. >>



That's what I meant. It's a gamble prices will go up. If a lot of SDRAM is stockpiled the manufacturers will want to get rid of it to make room for the new product and the prices will continue to drop.

Since DDRAM may have mass acceptance the demand for SDRAM may also drop dramatically.

I hope not for Lord Evermore's sake. As for me, my next memory purchase will be DDRAM.

 

[bonkers325]

hmm maybe i should buy mroe ram too

 

[Lord Evermore]

Since I have 3 SDR motherboards right now, it's not like any of this will simply go to waste, even if I can't use it for anything I buy later.

DDR motherboards aren't going to become the be all and end all immediately. They're still not even available. For at least some time, SDR will still be sold and isn't going to just get dumped.

 

[mechBgon]

You could try adding &quot;ConservativeSwapfileUsage=1&quot; in SYSTEM.INI under the [386Enh] header. Never tried it myself, but it sounds like the thing to do if you have 512Mb of RAM.