Too Much RAM for AMD & Win98

[IRED]

No such thing as to much RAM,more than you'll ever use maybe but not to much.

Most everyone I know have at least 128mb.


RAM GOOD

[Sammy]

I believe that whoever told you this might be referring to a limit in the amount of memory that the 2nd level cache can actually work with. This is dependent upon your motherboard, and should be in the manual somewhere, or on the manufacturers website.

For example I have a similar setup, and my Mobo is a Gigabyte. The manual says it can cache up to 256Mb ( or 512Mb cant quite remember ).

I've never tried exceeding this, so I couldnt tell you what the performance penalty would be. Maybe someone else can shed some light.

I do agree with Ired though, more is better !

Hope this clears the matter up for you.

[LazMan]

Ma paw always sez:

RAM, he GOOD, hmmmm. Mo da bet'r.

Ditto IRED.

Seriously, all motherboards have a maximum, some more than others. But, in general, the more memory you have to work with, the better performance you'll get out you're computer. There are limitations on L-caching, based on chipset capacities as Sammy spoke of (consult your motherboard manual). For an in-depth detailed tutorial on memory, consult Tom Pabst (the writer of Tom's Hardware Guide) at his site: http://www.tomshardware.com/guides/ram.html

Enjoy! /forum/smile.gif

Laz

[Bronco]

LazMan,
--------------------------------------------
Ma paw always sez:
RAM, he GOOD, hmmmm. Mo da bet'r
-------------------------------------------
I tink y'all mite hav cornfuzed yere Ma & Pa on this un. /forum/wink.gif

[Tracker]

I have been told that since I have Win98 and an AMDk6-2 400mhz processor that I would see better performance if I took my RAM down from 160mb to 128 or even 64. Is this true, or is it more RAM the better. I am wondering I always thought that more RAM the better.