Win 2k - 64MB vs. 104MB

[Workin']

I have a Pentium 166MMX-based laptop computer that I often use at work. Our office is switching over to Win 2k soon, and since I had a copy laying around at home I installed it on the laptop (in place of Win 98SE). Everything (hardware and software) works OK, and it's interesting that my Advanced Power Management finally works correctly - never did under Win 95, 95 OSR2, 98, or 98SE.

But anyway, the machine has a 6.4GB HD and 64MB of RAM right now. My question is would bumping the RAM up to 104MB (the max for this model) make a noticeable difference in general "snappiness".

Please don't tell me to get a different laptop - it's my personal machine and there's no way on planet Earth that I can afford (or even want) a new(er) one. This one does everything I need it to do, and if adding more RAM won't make an appreciable difference, I'll just keep using it the way it is, it works well enough.

Thanks!

 

[SmiZ]

Adding more RAM would deffinately help. Your system right now is hovering very close to the low end on required resources (for win2k). I would put that little extra in if it's possible.

 

[Legacy6]

You should definitely go for more RAM. I just started configuring new laptops with Win2k Pro, and the ones that come equipped standard with 64MB RAM are badly hurting for more whereas the ones with 128MB RAM are just fine (and I'm talking about IBM ThinkPads equipped standard with PIII/700 or higher.) I think 128MB RAM seems to be the sweet spot for day-to-day business, but as usual, the more RAM the better.

 

[Workin']

Thanks for your replies. I guess 104MB sounds like a weird amount, but that's all she'll take.

Anyone else?

 

[Ringer]

I never knew that a 40 meg stick of ram exsisted?????????....am I that out of touch?.......WIN2k should use 128 megs...IMHO

 

[Workin']

No, you're not out of touch.

The laptop has 16MB soldered in, and if you install its max memory configuration you have to disable 8MB of it. So you end up with one 64MB SODIMM, one 32MB SODIMM, and 8MB on-board, for a total of 104MB. Right now it has the built-in 16MB + 16MB SODIMM + 32MB SODIMM for 64MB.

So 128MB is never gonna happen in this machine. But will 104MB be noticeably better than 64MB?

 

[Doh!]

Yes. You'll be much happier with 104mb than with 64mb.

 

[xodarap]

Im not going to suggest you get a new labtop.

I believe you reilized before you started this post your lo on RAM if your performance is slow add more. If you dont notice hay its your POS it doesjnt concern anyone but you

 

[edblor]

Well xodorap,

That's a nice response!!!

If you have nothing positive to add to his post....don't reply!!:disgust:

I would think that the added 40MB would definitely help! However, would the cost of it be justifiable if the performance is NOT that much better? I would assume the performance would rise, but the cost man...think of the cost....

Good luck with your decision,

Edblor

 

[Workin']

Thanks, edblor.



<< it doesjnt concern anyone but you >>

Not necessarily true. Literally hundereds of thousands of other people (or at least, dozens) have the same or similar situation, and unlike you, perhaps they would rather learn from the experience of others rather than learning the &quot;hard way&quot;.

I hope that by &quot;POS&quot; you meant &quot;Professional Operating System&quot;, otherwise you are adding nothing to either the discussion or your reputation, and should crawl back under whatever rock it is that you came from.

The upgrade would cost about $135, then I would have about $175 invested in this adventure. Think it's worth it? A few more constructive posts and I'll make my decision.

 

[SmiZ]

$135 for 40 MB or ram? Ouch, that's one of the reasons I hate laptops, but if you gotta travel with your puter, what can you do. I saw a big difference on my desktop at work when I went from 64MB or ram to 128MB for win2k pro, but then again, it wasn't my money.


If I were you and the speed was really bothering me, I would do it. If you can live with it currently, then spend the $135 on your ol' pal SmiZ.

 

[Biggs]

But going over 64MB on a Pentium Classic would actually decrease performance.

 

[Workin']

<< $135 for 40 MB or ram? >>

Actually that's for 64MB of ram, which is still bad, but it would only net me 40MB more than I already have because I would lose some in the new configuration.


<< But going over 64MB on a Pentium Classic would actually decrease performance. >>

I'll have to check up on that. But it's not a CPU-related problem, it's a problem with certain Intel chipsets. Besides, my CPU is MMX, not Classic . I know it's a minor problem with the TX and HX chipsets, but on this machine the chipset shows up in device manager as ????MX or something similar, must be a mobile chipset.

<< then spend the $135 on your ol' pal SmiZ >>

OK, just wait outside by your mailbox until it arrives

 

[edblor]

Workin',

I think I'd do the upgrade!

But I'm always upgrading...hehe

I have a lappy on the way and it has 96MB of RAM, 4 of which is shared to the vid card...I would do it (the upgrade) personally if I were you. However that may not be compelling enuff for you to dive in...lol

Oh, I really don't think that TX memory limitation applied to any Intel mobile chipset I've heard of....but I've been known to be wrong!!

Bye 4 now!

 

[Davegod75]

get the ram

 

[StanTheMan]

go for the 104mb ram

 

[rbV5]

Biggs: going up to 128mb ram in my pentium classic most definately DID NOT slow it down.

 

[erikistired]

i put 80mb in my thinkpad 765d and even that made a big difference over the 64mb. i'm running red hat 6.2 linux tho, not win2k. i never got brave enough to try that (how's it run btw?) if you can find a 64mb sodimm for it i'd pick it up, and that price sounds good (i priced the ram at 160-200 bucks).

erik

 

[JesseKnows]

Workin', where did you get that price? Crucial will sell you 64 MB SODIMM for $34, 2nd day shipping included! See here

If the price does not show up as $33.99, then the link doesn't give you the %15 discount. Enter Crucial via this link, click on the blue GO! button, and search for CT8M64S4W8E.

JesseKnows

 

[Workin']

JesseKnows, the price is ~$137 @ Crucial with the web discount, it's EDO, not SDRAM, that's why it's so expensive. It's for an IBM ThinkPad 760XL.

fisher I believe your ThinkPad is very similar to mine - Win2k runs fairly well on it, a little sluggish by PIII standards, but it's OK for me. The best thing is that all the power management features finally work correctly. So if the extra 40MB of RAM will perk it up a little, I'll be happy for another year or 2.

 

[Doh!]

How big of an amount is $135? Is it 5% or less or more of your monthly income? I guess the decision to upgrade the ram is all in relation to your financial status as well as the significance of the necessity to go ahead with the upgrade. In other words, if you are actively using your laptop for whatever the reason, and whatever you're doing with the laptop is significantly important to you then definitely the upgrade is the way to go. Look at it this way, if you're using the laptop for any work purposes, then the cost of the ram maybe tax dedutible and be depreciated over the estimated remaining life of the computer (sorry, I'm a CPA). Personally, if I were to keep your laptop and intend on utilizing it for whatever the reason frequently, then I would again definitely go with the upgrade. But then again, if I'm living on food stamps, it would be a different story. I'm sure you know what I'm trying to say here.

All the other factors aside, if you're purely concerned with the performance gain, yes, you'll notice a faster win2k with better multitasking capabilities. Realistically speaking, I wouldn't expect a &quot;significant&quot; performance boost (but then again, it all depends on the definition of &quot;significant increase&quot but you'll experience &quot;noticeable&quot; performance boost (that &quot;noticeable boost&quot; may be &quot;significant&quot; to others).

 

[Workin']

Doh! - You have hit what I was thinking right on the nose. Since the laptop is used exclusively for my job (and I own the company), the cost is deductible. Then there's the question of whether it's needed or not. Well, the machine works OK now, and the original intent of this thread was to see if adding the additional RAM would make a noticeable difference. So far the consensus seems to be that it would make a difference.

And since I spend more than $135/month on lunches (which is ~1.5% of my monthly income), the expense is negligible. I'll wait and see if anyone posts some additional opinions, then I'll make a go-no go decision next week, I think.

 

[5mudge]

I can attest to &quot;snapiness&quot; with repsect to RAM upgrades. In one of our offices we have a Dell Optiplex GXPro with a Pentium Pro 180 processor and 112Mb of RAM. We upgraded it from 64Mb of RAM last year, and I was pleasantly surprised at how much quicker apps launched, windows opened and closed, etc.

I say go for the upgrade!

 

[bigshooter]

Your laptop is the bare minimum specs that microsoft recommends which means you should probably upgrade since their minimums wont run win2k worth a sh!t.

 

[lundog22]

Win2k really need 128MB of RAM to operate smoothly. The sweet spot is 256MB. Anything higher..... diminishing return kicks in, you don't gain too much from it.