Mushkin 1.5GB PC-133 $389 - free shipping

[muttley]

http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q253/9/12.ASP
http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q156/7/67.asp
http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q108/0/79.ASP

couldn't get the 3 linkified properly for some reason.

 

[littlebig]

whatever

 

[Mookow]

VBboy... I guess you have never had to deal with cheap RAM... It's a b!tch. Thus, even if this is Mushkin version of ValueRAM, its still a pretty good deal.

 

[dude]

Hey VBboy, your formula has problems!

If I have 512mb of ram on my computer, and according to your formula: SwapFileSize = (512 MB - YourMemorySize) -- for Win9x, that would make my swapfile 0mb in size?

and for Win2k, it's 1 gig - MyMemSize, so that would be 512mb. What if I had 1 gig memory? Windows will always use up as much memory as it can, even if it doesn't need it.

 

[kc]

On PriceWatch.com you can find 512 MB of PC133 RAM for under $70, so 1.5 GB would cost $210
VBboy,
I am concerned about compatibility when you put those cheap RAM (from pricewatch) into the system, especially with 3 sticks of 512MB total of 1.5GB. Have you done that??

Thanks

kc

 

[VBboy]

dud (no pun intended),

My formula is correct. If you have 512 MB and run Windows 9x, you should disable the Swap file. Similarly, if you have 1 GB of RAM and run Windows 2k, you should disable the Swap file.

Win9x OS with loaded drivers, the shell and your startup programs (I know you kids run antiviruses and 50 other programs in Systray) will want up to a 100 MB. Throw in a 100 MB cache that it will grab as you copy files around, and you got ~ 300 MB left for applications, which is great.

Regarding Win2K, I assume you actually have use for it, such as rendering apps, content-creation apps, etc. Give the OS and its components 200 MB or so; 100 MB for caching again, a few megs for CD-ROM caching, and you are leaving 700 MB for apps. Photoshop, 3d Studio Max and other apps will gladly eat that up. I also assume you like to leave apps open so you don't have to close and run them again when needed - so the memory comes in handy.

Don't ever question my training at an underground facility!

 

[OK]

How much RAM does someone running Windows 98 SE need?

I have 256 Meg now, which seems low compared to others in this forum. From everything I've read, if you go above 256 you'll get only a marginal benefit.

I'd like to here a few recommendations.

Thanks,

OK

 

[dude]

I got 4 systems. All got 2 sticks of 256mb for a total of 512mb each.

I got 4 items in my tray bar: ZoneAlarm Pro, Motherboard Monitor, AdsOff, and Seti. The first two most all of you should have for very good reasons. The AdsOff is to block all those flashy ads, and Seti is so I can eventually talk to my brother in Ixmok39.

One machine has a MS Sidewinder so it loads the joypad software. And the other is a Linux server.

They all got Geforce 2 64mb cards, except the Linux box. Two are 1.4Gz Athlon (oc'ed), PIII 550, and PIII 500.

I've got a 500mb swapfile on the windows machines for the hell of it. I don't notice a difference. I don't benchmark. I virus scan my files after I finish downloading them manually.

Sorry, no kiddies here!

 

[Mihir]

Setting swap space to memory may or may not be such a good idea - but it definitely is a good idea to set internet explorer temp files directory to the RAM Drive. There is a considerable increase in the speed at which IE loads pages. I have read about this tip somewhere online , but am yet to confirm it since I have just 192 megs of RAM.
Mihir

 

[Mihir]

Check out this link on instructions on getting the temporary internet files directory to be set to your RAMDrive
http://www.liquid2k.com/cyberwizardpit/article3.html
Here is what http://www.windrivers.com/tech/tips/May99/index3.htm has to say about getting browser cache in memory
ADVANTAGES:
Can be used for storing ALL browser cache AND cookie files.
Cuts down on hard disk activity noticeably.
Provides much greater file storage efficiency, because a RAM drive uses 512 Byte size clusters, smaller even than the FAT32 file system (limited to a minimum of 1 KB default cluster size, on drives/partitions of 512 MB or larger).
Avoids cluttering your hard disks with zillions of small temporary files.
Cached web sites are accessed a lot faster.
The Windows 9x GUI provides full 32-bit driver support for RAM drives.

DISADVANTAGES:
Your CD-ROM drive letter will be shifted upwards by 1 letter. Example: if you have 1 hard drive (single partition) and 1 CD-ROM drive, the RAM drive will take letter D, and will shift the CD-ROM drive to letter E, in all DOS modes and in Windows. Therefore you will nedd to update ALL your CD-ROM based applications/links to point to the new letter! To do this the easy way, use COA32 (Change of Address 32-bit), a free Win9x tool from PC Magazine. COA32 [296 KB], changes ALL system references to match the new location of ANY program you move to ANY other drive/directory.
The ENTIRE contents of a RAM drive is GONE upon rebooting!
You need at least 32 MB of memory (RAM) installed in your computer (64 MB recommended) to use this trick!
If using Microsoft Internet Explorer 3/4/5 you will NOT be able to download files larger than the RAM drive size, because MS IE downloads ALL files from the Internet into its cache folders!


I think the Advantages ar outweigh the disadvantages - so I'd recommend you go for it if you are not utilizing all the RAM you have.

Mihir

 

[Zxcvbnm]

XXXXXkevXXXXX: Yeah, I noticed a big difference in moving from 256mb -> 512mb. Especially when running a lot of applications and memory intensive applications.

 

[Willith]

^bump

Deal is still on and pretty good for those buying that Gateway server for $500.

 

[Zap]

Some thoughts about amount of physical RAM, virtual memory and RAM drives...

At the current prices, my belief is that everyone who does serious work or play should have at least 256MB, and 512MB wouldn't be too bad for the extra $60 or so (taking into account tax, ripoff shipping and handling). Over 512 MB really is overkill for those using Win95/98/Me because of incomplete support with a default install, and it gets tough to notice a real performance increase over 512MB for most people. I personally notice a performance gain going from 128-256MB, but not over it. A buddy of mine says he definately notices a performance gain going from 256-512MB. He uses his computer for different tasks than I use mine, obviously.

My belief is that virtual memory (swap file) is still needed in Win95/98/Me. I've tried disabling it, and in general everything either runs the same, or FASTER. But... _BUT_... some things don't run right. For instance, Q3A loads and runs faster/better, but a simple task such as playing an MPEG1 file (P3-933, 256MB RAM, absolutely nothing running in background) didn't work right, playback was choppy. Just enabling a few megabytes of virtual made it play right. I've read (but can't verify or find reference to) that Windows was designed to use virtual. In any case, fixing the virtual at a small set amount (such as 2x the physical) kinda straddles the fence on this issue.

As for RAM drives, I think the Microsoft RAM drive only supports 32MB partitions. It is loaded in the CONFIG.SYS and takes the next available drive letter, bumping your CD-ROM to a higher letter. There is another RAM drive program available (freeware, www.thetechzone.com has it) that supports up to 2GB sizes. It loads in the AUTOEXEC.BAT and lets you specify drive letter, so it doesn't bump other drives. One problem, I've tried using it and setting virtual memory to the RAM drive, but Windows wouldn't let me select that drive letter!!! However, Q3A loads like a bat outta hell from a RAM drive