How much memory does Win2K need to run

[wj]

I just did a format on my drive last night and install win 2000.
Is 256Mb memory enought to run win2000. So far I like win2000, if it will run all my program.


wj

 

[lilstevo]

256 is definitely enough for you to run everyday stuff. You aren't like a graphics artist that does crazy advanced drawings and stuff like that right?

 

[macssuck]

Would Win2k run ok on a celeron 500 with 64mb?

 

[MulLa]

Ms's minimum is 32mb recommended is 64mb.

But I would suggest a minimum of 128mb for win2000.

 

[FOBSIDE]

256 mb seems to be the amount before the diminishing marginal returns kicks in...for those of you who dont study econ, that simply means the youll get less "bang" per mb of ram after 256 or so...

 

[Rifter]

Mulla M$'s recomended min is 64MB not 32, i dont even want to think how win2k would run on 32, requirements can be found Here
And thats for professional, server needs more.

 

[macssuck]

Thanks MuLa thats what i was thinking but wanted another opinion.

 

[MulLa]

Ha Oppse.... sorry for the mistake ^^ Just thought I read it was 32mb somewhere.... Nevermind!

 

[damocles]

From my experience- I wouldnt run Win2k with less than 128 meg of ram. Otherwise you will have to set up large swap files etc. 256 Meg is quite a bit better than 128.

 

[BCYL]

Agreed... Don't run win2k with less than 128 RAM... I think you need at least 128 to get acceptable performance....

 

[xtreme2k]

I have had 128MB, 256MB and now 384MB running Windows2000

between 128MB and 256MB,
difference was HUGE, I can feel my comp starts swapping even without much multitasking, essential programs are obviously not 'cached'.

between 256MB and 384MB,
difference is small, but noticable. Obviously there is no swapping at all, and that a LOT of stuff are cached therefore system is VERy responsive

 

[Cnuke]

Microsoft standards 64 req 128 rec Keep in mind this is for normal desktop usage.

 

[slicksilver]

my celery 466 w/192 mb ram runs very fast and i mean hell fast.....win2k has been the operating system of this millenium for most of us i guess?

Raj

 

[Monolith]

This is what I did to get really good Win2k performance.
2 - 256MB PC133 chips or RAM,
1 - PIII 833 on Abit BE6 R2
2 - IBM 40GB HDD's RAID V
Windows 2000 is resource hungry and having 512MB RAM made a lot of performance difference.
Ram is cheap now so load up!!!

 

[mariner]

I agree, from experience 64 isn't enough. I'm at 64 with a BP6, 2xC366@550 doing just typical stuff, no powerful graphics, and it's running my HDD crazy! I need to order another 128 now while prices are reasonable. If I didn't have kids I would already have 256

 

[Noriaki]

If you press CTRL+ALT+DEL and go to task manager there is a thing there that shows you memory usage.

ICQ, RC5, and one IE5 open gives me about 64MB memory usage.
Opening programs you get a bit of a spike and if you have a copy of Word or Excel open, or if you do any multitasking you will want at least 128MB, even with 128MB I get a fair bit of disk swapping...

if you plan to play games you pretty well need at least 256MB.
I want to get 256 or 384 for my machine because of win2k...128MB doesn't feel like enough to me, 64 would hurt...sending messages in ICQ would probably cause disk thrashing...and I don't even want to think about 32....

 

[xtreme2k]

wtf?
i am using 95MB now with 2 IE windows, ICQ2000B and RC5 client only

my system takes 58MB when start up with optimised (disabled useless) services and even printer spooler, but with international fonts enabled

384MB RAM + 512MB swap

My TaskMan

 

[easternerd]

Hi there,
I am using PII 350 with 64Mb Ram ,Not much of a difficulty!
Though it gets a bit of lousy after some 3 hours of usage with
lots of Applications ,So go for a minimum of 128 Mb,I think it
should Suffice,But if Money is no matter go ahead with 128Mb Ram