• 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.

Would 512mb of ram be overkill?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.
How would you go about changing the file and v cache? I'm curious. I'd like to do this. I have 512 MB on my WinME pc.

I just built a:

kt7 abit motherboard
1.1 GHZ AMD Thunderbird
Voodoo 5 AGP
Soundblaster Live 5.1 SC
2 40 GB hard drives
 


<< Someone would have to be insane to tell me that because I'm running 9X I shouldn't have 512mb... >>


Yepper and no VM is a HUGE plus.
 
512MB certainly won't *hurt* Win9x...but Win9x just doesn't need that much...if you are doing enough that you need 512MB you should be on 2000 😉

And 2000 will love it. NT has a well written memory manager for one thing, so it can make good use of that RAM, and 2000 uses a fair bit of RAM as a base. I have 384MB and Win2k loves every byte 🙂
 
They say in win 9x 192mb or 256 is plenty and you wont really get any performance gains with more.

My little ram manager tells me i have like 100mb used when running i few programs, so i dont think i will be upgrading my 256mb anytime soon
 
(Uptime: 1day 22hrs 20mins 36secs)(Memory Usage: 145/768MB (18.88%) [||||||||||])(CPU: 1-AMD Athlon K7, 902MHz)(Screen res: 1024x768)(OS: Windows 98 (4.10 - 2222)

Too much? Nah...I'm tempted to swap out one of the 256MB dimm's for a 512 since it's so cheap. 🙂
 
You keep missing the point that it's not about &quot;performance gains&quot; or benchmarking or &quot;win2k love memory, 9X am be so stupid it no use!&quot;. It's about no swapping, loading maps faster in games, tameing vcache, and then 512MB is well worth it.
 
Heh-heh, this is too cool. I've restrained myself from posting to this discussion all day just to see how much stuff people &quot;teach me&quot;. Must admit, I'm feeling a little smarter!

But, as usual, now I have another question. As far as Win98/Win98SE is concerned, is there a pre-determined limit (how much memory you have) that you can turn off virtual memory? I've heard widely conflicting opinions on this in the past, when memory was expensive. Just three years ago, the idea of having 512 megs of memory was almost ludicrous, unless you were doing CAD/CAM stuff for Ford or FEA for NASA! Now any old wanna-be-a-pc-expert, such as myself 😀 can afford it! Is there a tangible benefit to disabling virtual memory?

By tangible, I mean something I'll notice. Not something like &quot;my Winstone Content Creation Scores jumped from 5560 to 5561&quot; or something like that. I've no idea what I just said, but I hope you folks understand what I'm trying to say! I'm just so happy now that my first self-built machine has been up and running for three weeks now, without a glitch, that I don't know what to do! I'm sure most of you can identify. Have a nice evening.
 
Some programs HAVE to have virtual memory enabled no matter what (many games are this way). Even if you've got 512MB, they'll not run if they don't have a swap file available (and a lot of times they'll actually use that swap though they don't need to).

There is no performance lost by having virtual memory enabled. I've got a 192MB static swap partition set. It never actually gets used (as in, 0MB in use at all times), it's just there for those programs that think they need it.
 
For windows 98 512 MB is hardcore overkill
When i went to 256 MB from 128 i did not notice jack for difference
from 64 - 128 is the most noticeable diff.
for Win2k even 128 is okay, I have a rig with 128 MB and win2k and it runs just fine. 256 MB is prob. ideal for w2k and 128 is ideal for win98
I dunno what the hell u'd have to be doing to justify spending money on 512 MB of RAM.
 


<< When i went to 256 MB from 128 i did not notice jack for difference >>

Try loading UT the second time around and see how long it takes. 😉 I'll give you a hint...just about as long as teh first time you ran it. 😉 With 256MB of ram and a 133MHz FSB I can load UT in ~3 seconds the second time around. Anything more than 256MB I can't tell a difference. Maybe if I was doing some Photoshop or video editing work I'd need more, but with 256MB of ram in 2000, it runs super smooth with no complaints. 🙂
 
one problem i see is that all the &quot;Hot Deals&quot; are CAS3 deals... yuck... ok, i have great CAS2 Micron pc133 RAM and wont mix it with cheapo stuff... Does anyone anywhere know of any &quot;Hot&quot; CAS2 prices??

please let me know and I'll go from 256 to 512 tomorrow!...

Also, another question, nobody has mentioned this and im curious: Do I gain any benefits going to 512mb when it comes to burning CDR's? will I be able to play UT, download Napster AND burn at 12x without BSOD or coasters??

late.
 
compuwiz on the forsale/trade forum, sold a bunch of infineon 256mb sticks that users have reported to run at 150+mhz. it was $111 shipped. i'm waiting for my stick to arrive 🙂
 
Well said Oliver, I'm looking for the same thing, a good price on 256mb modules at Cas2.

Kingston tiny is up there in price.

My board only has 3 dimm slots if I go with 128 thats only 384 total I can have. And for all of you that say 512 is overkill, like Yield said
128 was good for win98, 256 for 2K and what about whistler? You don't know and neither do I, but I'll be covered either way, if I have 512mb.

 
cmaMath13 said:
You need 200+ posts.

I am curious, too. Is 512 overkill?
Click to expand...
No, 4gb minimum for work
8gb minimum for casual gaming
16gb gaming
32gb future proofing

You necro'd a 20 year old thread to list modern ram requirements? Locking this up - Moderator DAPUNISHER
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top