96mb or 558?

[KillerBug]

Ok, here are my choices, a computer with a 450mhz CPU and 96mb of ram, or a computer with a 558mhz CPU and 64mb of ram, it overclocks realy well, but my old 32mb stick of PC66 just will not do it. What yeilds higher performance on average?

[RobRich]

If you can get a system with a certified overclocked 558mhz cpu, then go for it. The step from 64 to 96 meg of RAM is hardly noticable. Get the 558, save some cash, then take it to 128 meg of mem.

[AuraEdge]

Sounds like he already has a P3 450 that wont OC to 558 unless he takes out the 32MB PC66 DIMM. I, too, would go for 558/64 RAM, but u really should have AT LEAST 128 these days if not more.

[KillerBug]

I will be getting a second PC100 64mb soon, then I will have 128mb, I guess I will pull out the PC66 though, perhapse I can sell it to a celeron owner or something.

[AuraEdge]

Id get another 128 instead. 192 is alot smoother for me than 128 under win98. U can get a 128 and try it out, and if u think 128 and if u think 192 is fine, keep both sticks. If u think 128 is enuf, u can sell your 64, and save on a DIMM slot in the end. Unless u absolutly dont have the money to get a 128 Stick (I know how an empty wallet feels like...)

[KillerBug]

i just got a second monitor, my hard drives are plenty fast for now, so i decided to go a bit more expensive and get a second 17 inch, now I have to get a PCI banchee card, and then I can think about upgrading to 128, I might have to sell some of my 486 systems, they are just taking up space anyway.