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

[dullard]

One real nice thing about a P4 is the 3 or four memory slots. 256MB in two slots will be just fine for now. If the odd program comes out that needs more, then just pop in a little more in the free slots. So today, 256MB is plenty for the vast majority of users.

Plus the prices will drop again. So why spend it now?

 

[CStroman]

Oh, it's 50/50. 256 MB is enough for me.

 

[paulee]

"development tools??" didn't you say he was a gamer?? we're responding to your post, not some theoretical superpower user

 

[StageLeft]

<< Aren't you looking at this issue too seriously, Skoorb? I mean, you can buy the 256MB and if it isn't enough, just buy another stick. If it's enough, then you saved yourself some bucks. There's very little risk starting off with 256MB. It's not like you buying into a CPU/chipset platform and can't upgrade without tossing all this expensive componetry. >>

Oh i realize that if you buy 256 you can upgrade to 512 easily. That is beside the point though I'm trying to indicate that 512 is better enough that its worth buying if you've already blown the cash on a p4 1.6 What I REALLY should have done was this:

"If you've bought a P4 1.6 come in and tell me if you got 256 megs ram or 512+" and you'd see, I'm sure, that most people who bought a p4 1.6 thought it worth upgrading to 512 ram. Take in mind that most people in this thread have CPUs slower than that so naturally their inclination to hit 512 ram is less.

 

[StageLeft]

<< "development tools??" didn't you say he was a gamer?? we're responding to your post, not some theoretical superpower user >>

Well in your words

<< see 55% of the heaviest computer >>

I wouldn't call gamers a super heavy user. I think we both got off track...

 

[FrogDog]

<<

<< I see 55% of the heaviest computer users do just fine with 256MB with today's operating systems. That shows that 256MB is just plenty for the typical home user. Did you remember to turn off that XP "hog my memory" switch? And please stop insulting us with that Win3.1 garbage (it wouldn't run any memory hogging program and you know it). >>

Well it seems clear to me that those who say 256 is adequate are not that heavy users. I have it at work right now and I'm constantly running with 5-15 megs free, caching constantly. Get a few development tools open and its all over.

Frogdog what is NICE about ram if not for the speed? If it's no faster do you like it that it makes you feel sexy when it's in your computer or something? >>

I don't know exactly how it works but I don't believe adding more ram is going to directly speed up my computer. It will give me the ability to have more stuff open at one time. Is having IE and WE open while I play a game worth $80 to me? No. Is it worth it to me to have that ability plus assurance for future applications and games when ram is much cheaper than it is now? Yes.

 

[paulee]

<<

<< "development tools??" didn't you say he was a gamer?? we're responding to your post, not some theoretical superpower user >>

Well in your words

<< see 55% of the heaviest computer >>

I wouldn't call gamers a super heavy user. I think we both got off track... >>



not MY words

so let's clarify

poll: gamers need 512Mb Ram?

 

[dullard]

<< "If you've bought a P4 1.6 come in and tell me if you got 256 megs ram or 512+" and you'd see, I'm sure, that most people who bought a p4 1.6 thought it worth upgrading to 512 ram. Take in mind that most people in this thread have CPUs slower than that so naturally their inclination to hit 512 ram is less. >>



The speed of your CPU has nothing to do with the amount of memory you need for optimal performance. Instead it is the programs you use. 99.99% of programs do just fine with 256MB.

 

[StageLeft]

<<

<<

<< "development tools??" didn't you say he was a gamer?? we're responding to your post, not some theoretical superpower user >>

Well in your words

<< see 55% of the heaviest computer >>

I wouldn't call gamers a super heavy user. I think we both got off track... >>



not MY words

so let's clarify

poll: gamers need 512Mb Ram? >>

oops. frigging icons OK PURE gamers now MAYBE don't need it, though I still maintain that new games in the coming MONTHS will make great use of more than 256 megs ram. However few of us are pure gamers. Many multi-taskat the same time. For us 256 is not enough.

 

[Amused]

I think 256 is the bear minimum with XP if you turn off some of the fancy features. I turn them off with a gig of RAM because I can't stand waiting for animated menus and windows.

Gaming and RAM is the least of one's worries. If all he's doing is surfing and playing games, 256 is enough. RAM comes into play more with photoshop, ripping, video work and multitasking.

All my games run on my rig the same with less RAM. It only in the above applications that I notice the difference.

With RAM being so expensive, let him go with 256 now. If you can, let him try 256 more in his machine by adding some of your RAM and see if it makes a difference in his day to day kind of work.

Ok that's my opinion. If you don't like it you can mail me $99.95 and I'll gladly change it for you

 

[paulee]

good post amusedone. couldn't agree more.

 

[sharkeeper]

You can never have enough ram!

The day when I have enough ram is the day I don't have to pay taxes!

Isn't funny no matter what you build whether it's a shelf or you upgrade your computer it's overloaded as soon as you use it!

Cheers!

 

[PG]

When I run DVD2SVCD I've noticed that my machine uses over 256 for just one particular progam. This is just from looking at the task manager. Total memory used is up over 300 MB, so I would say 256 is not enough for everything and if you can afford it get the 512.

 

[GooberPHX420]

LOL its 68 to 68 right now..dead even

 

[StageLeft]

<< LOL its 68 to 68 right now..dead even >>

now 69-68. This poll has gone up and back with either side winning/ losing. CLosest poll I've ever seen.

 

[bunker]

I say 256 is enough. More than enough for Warcraft 3 as a matter of fact.

Taken from Blizzard's site:

What will the system requirements be?
It is important to us to make our games playable on as broad a range of machines as possible, and we do not see WarCraft III as an exception. We are planning on having a requirement of a PIII 400 system with a 3D accelerator card and 64megs of RAM. Currently, we are working on game performance and should be able to give more concrete information soon.

 

[Freejack2]

I'm using 355mb right now without any games running.

I don't think even 512 is enough for me (Which is why I have 768MB)...

 

[ILikeSprite]

You should have at least 384MB ram now adays.......

 

[pac1085]

Wow...very close results. IMO 256mb is enough for most games, unless you like running super high resolutions and like having the game load 2-3 seconds faster heh. I've ran 256 and 512 in my system and the only game in helped in was EverQuest(!). RTCW, Q3, etc I didnt notice a damn thing. If I were building a p4 system id throw 512 in just incase...doesnt hurt to have more.

 

[Luden]

anyone have a link to this windows xp memory fix?

Luden.

 

[CocaCola5]

Most interesting ATOT poll yet saw three times of 37/37 tie 43/43 50/50.

 

[Kaervak]

Personally I think 256MB is enough for the everyday user. The systems I build for people I put 256MB in as a base. I doubt they'll ever get anywhere near using all of it. My personal system has 512MB in it with a 256MB swap file (Win2K). I rarely use over 100MB at a time. Why do I have 512MB? Mechanical Desktop 5 & AutoCAD 2000. I don't use them all the time, but when I do, having the memory helps. Not everyone has a need for 512MB, most of the time, I don't even need it all. It's up to you really, your system & cash.

 

[Turin39789]

<< Wow...very close results. IMO 256mb is enough for most games, unless you like running super high resolutions and like having the game load 2-3 seconds faster heh >>



Everyone is saying that if he is just a gamer then he doesnt need the ram, or that it isnt worth 80+ dollars for the added performance for the task. But he doesnt need a p4 1.6(?Northwood?) for that either. Its like he is driving to work every day, and he buys a bugadi, and we are debating about wether he should use premium fuel. (incorrectly assuming that teh car would run ok on regular unleaded). If you are already shelling out for a p4 then you should at least get 512 i think. It is not like we are being really extreme and saying buy a gig! Many performance users run 512 its the up and coming standard. Wait for doom3

 

[FrogDog]

<<

<< Wow...very close results. IMO 256mb is enough for most games, unless you like running super high resolutions and like having the game load 2-3 seconds faster heh >>



Everyone is saying that if he is just a gamer then he doesnt need the ram, or that it isnt worth 80+ dollars for the added performance for the task. But he doesnt need a p4 1.6(?Northwood?) for that either. Its like he is driving to work every day, and he buys a bugadi, and we are debating about wether he should use premium fuel. (incorrectly assuming that teh car would run ok on regular unleaded). If you are already shelling out for a p4 then you should at least get 512 i think. It is not like we are being really extreme and saying buy a gig! Many performance users run 512 its the up and coming standard. Wait for doom3 >>

Actually for the game I'm playing right now I do need a lot more CPU speed, however do not need any more ram. War3 runs like shyte on my Celeron 1120, trust me. But it only takes about 100MB of ram...

 

[RSI]

Meh, it all depends. I have 256 and I'm unsatisfied, although if I'm just browsing the net and messaging/email, it's plenty. I'd like to have 768MB or 1GB so that I could have most everything cached at the same time and not have it re-cached every time I switch a number of programs.

For example, let's say I have IE (say 5-6 instances), ICQ, MSN, KaZaA, Norton 2k2, AnalogX POW!, and winamp open. All that is fine and they don't need to HD-crunch at all if I close/open any of those. But say I go to a game like Wolf, and then go back. Well everything needs to crunch again (ie, re-cache). It'd be real nice if I could have everything I used all the time, able to open/close/re-open and not have to hear HD-crunching and see awful lag all the time. I usually leave my comp on without restarting (my CMOS keeps getting cleared when I power off for some reason, so I'm leaving it on even more). If I had a gig of ram I have the feeling I'd be far more satisfied.

For all you people saying there's no point cause your games don't go faster - WTF, do you expect higher quantity of RAM to make your games faster? That'll only happen if you are already too low on ram and it has to cache during gameplay. Otherwise, maybe FASTER ram would make a difference, probably a slight one again only if you were underpowered to begin with. Ram generally isn't a thing looked at to improve frames per second, but rather to multitask.

To each their own, but gimme a gig any day over this 256...

Another note... HD is critical also. If you have a shiety hd, who cares about RAM. HD first.