• 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.

POLL: "256 ram is enough" True or false?

StageLeft

StageLeft

No Lifer
A certain member on this forum seems to think that he can buy a new P4 1.6 with DDR ram and get 256 megs ram. Take in mind the primary use of this computer is as a gaming rig. I've assured him with my personal stamp that 256 ram is NOT enough. Sure you can load a game, but are you really enjoying yourself? No. Maybe 256 is ok on a 1000 mhz computer or your grandmother's 386, but I am of the belief that upgrading to a p4 1.6 for a gaming machine and settling on 256 megs vs 512 to "save a few bucks" is doing yourself a gross disservice.

EDIT: AND basic multitasking apps at the same time like ICQ/msn, winamp, etc. that most people keep on at all times.
 
With or without WinXP eating up all the memory? If you turn off that XP feature you can do just fine with 256MB.
 
256 is enough.... 512 is more than enough. 😉

I've only had 512 for 6 months. I haven't really noticed a difference in my gaming.

amish
 


<< With or without WinXP eating up all the memory? If you turn off that XP feature you can do just fine with 256MB. >>

Not using winXP.
 
I'd say it depends on the OS and what app's you going to be using and how much multitasking . 512 mb is very comfy, don't have to worry much about straining system resources
 
256 is runnable but when i got my 512 pc800 upgrade winxp rann soooo much better.


its a definte imporvement so i would agree with you, if your gonna get a new system bite the bullet and get 512.
 


<<

<< With or without WinXP eating up all the memory? If you turn off that XP feature you can do just fine with 256MB. >>

Not using winXP. >>



what about w2k?
 
its enough for the vast maority of people, i have 398 myself, and considering the current prices its certaintly enough.
 
$80ish is not a few bucks. Yes, you can game on 256MB very well. Only if you multitask a lot or running some really really intensive programs + multitask then you need more ram.
I'm speaking from personal experience. My XP 1600 with 256 MB DDR is just fine at gaming and nothing stutters or anything.
 
I can't say anything about XP, but on my system running 2000 I didn't notice going from 256 to 512 at all, only did it because it was so cheap.
With RAM prices more expensive now I would say to stick with 256.
 
Exactly - if you're running XP and trying to game the 256 is a major bottleneck. If you are getting a new computer and don't get the ram you're basically admitting to the fact you won't be installing XP. The way I see it is if you're splurging to buy a p4 1.6 with the mobo and what not why would you tolerate 256? OS and a game can suck up a couple hundred megs alone leaving you with nearly nothing else to run on.

Realize that some games - like the EQ expansion need 512 to run properly. Now that game is badly designed but 256 is just so last year.
 
I say it's enough. I've had games stutter with 128mb, but 256mb is fine for everything I've tried... unless you plan on playing a couple games at the same time. 🙂

dc
 


<<

<<

<< With or without WinXP eating up all the memory? If you turn off that XP feature you can do just fine with 256MB. >>

Not using winXP. >>



what about w2k? >>

Yeah, win2k.
 
Do none of you multitask?

OS + game + winamp + windows explorer + perhaps IE open. 256 is really gonna cut it all the way into this year? Not a chance!
 
512 is enough. 256 is too little. windows + browser windows + seti = 200 anyway. turn on a game and i'm over.
 
256 MB is alright for me. I"m running XP and a AMD 1Ghz processor. Haven't noticed any slowdowns when I"m playing a game, but I'm haven't tried 512 MB so I can't say if they'll be any differences...
 


<<

<<

<<

<< With or without WinXP eating up all the memory? If you turn off that XP feature you can do just fine with 256MB. >>

Not using winXP. >>



what about w2k? >>

Yeah, win2k. >>



take the 512 it will make a difference.
 
i wonder how a P4 would run with 128MB ddr ram... dell sells p4 systems with 128MB standard.. and im guessing the majority of people buying arent as computer savy as some of us ATers .. must be slow as a snail since all their systems are preinstalled with winxp.
 


<< Do none of you multitask?

OS + game + winamp + windows explorer + perhaps IE open. 256 is really gonna cut it all the way into this year? Not a chance! >>



When I'm gaming??

NOPE!

OS+Game. Period.

amish
 
It's hard for me to point out what I've gained(in terms of performance) when I went from 256 to 512, but what you said basically goes through my mind.


<< 256 is just so last year >>


 


<< Exactly - if you're running XP and trying to game the 256 is a major bottleneck. If you are getting a new computer and don't get the ram you're basically admitting to the fact you won't be installing XP. The way I see it is if you're splurging to buy a p4 1.6 with the mobo and what not why would you tolerate 256? OS and a game can suck up a couple hundred megs alone leaving you with nearly nothing else to run on.

Realize that some games - like the EQ expansion need 512 to run properly. Now that game is badly designed but 256 is just so last year. >>


XP is only bad if you tell it to "reserve" the memory for faster logins. Suppose you have 256MB and WinXP is set for fast logins. Then suppose you and Mrs. Skoorb each have a different login. Now you are left with 128MB free. When little Skoorb comes around and makes a 3rd login, you only have 64MB free for games - pitifully slow. Of course if you turn off that feature, you have 194MB free which is plenty for 99.99% of the programs out there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top