How much RAM is too much?

[rtyp3]

I was wondering, how much RAM do games and heavy apps take these days? How much RAM would you need so that they would never have to use slow V-memory?

[chipbgt]

This is such a hard question to answer because it varies so greatly with so many variables....

I would think that the absolute minimum you would want to go with if your just doing basic WP and surfing, would be 32mb. Its gonna be slow but if your in no rush, and you dont run a bunch of power tools, then you should be ok...

According to Leo on ZDTV he says you need at least 64 now for win98 and above.

What do I have? http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/smile.gif 196. Why? Cause I could afford it, and because I like to run win nt and 2000. But, I think right now, once you hit around 128 and above you wont notice a big bit of difference.

I hope some of that helped http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/smile.gif

[rtyp3]

I have 96megs now. I was thinking about going up 128 or 64. It sounds like 64 may be enough to satisfy. If I won't notice an improvement above 160, I may as well not waste the money. Thanks

[chipbgt]

Well Ram can be relatively cheap nowadays. Get enough to where you feel like your system isnt slowing down for the amount of work you do. I do some video and audio editing and it helps to have a good bit. It has been mentioned on this board before, but by making a permanent swap file you will also help speed up your memory This is done in virtual memory under system properties which is under properties of my computer). Usually they say to make the file twice the amount of your memory......and lets see..supposedly under file system in the same area if you change your computer type to a network server windows handles the file system better...but I didnt seem much of a difference.
http://www.annoyances.org/win98/

[This message has been edited by chipbgt (edited 06-07-2000).]

[krusty the klown]

Cheers for the link, chipbgt!

Looks like a useful site http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/smile.gif

[Snuffy!]

I have 128mb, which is sweet, but I say minimum u need is 64mb, and the max u need 256mb, anything lower than 64mb, and u get disk swapping.

[Ultima]

Well,

I guess I'm at the edge with 256Mb pc100 ram!!!

It was very cheap, cause it wasn't exactly new, but they work fine, so I thought, why not??!!!

Never regreated it.

But how much you need??? It indeed depends on what you use it for!!!
If you go using autocad and 3D graphical designing stuff intensively, I think you would indeed need a lot more ram, then when you only have wp and other stuff like that.

Pim

[AuraEdge]

I got 320MB of SDRAM
Why?
Well I had 192, and SDRAM was cheap at the time, So I got a 128 Stick in case I ever had to build a system, or if Prices rose again, I could sell it for a bit of a profit http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/smile.gif. Kinda of a Comp stock job if U wanna call it that.
Niether happened yet..So its still cruising on 320MB. If I took away 64MB, I really dont know If I could tell the difference, But I havent tryed it yet.
I still enable Vmem cuz some apps get stuck up about having the Vmem on even if you dont need it..I have it set for 192MB, just for Insurance, so I get a solid half gig usable memory.
I think the optimal would be 192MB. 256 may be better, but not by a notable margin. 128MB is plenty sufficient, but in running some apps, I still noticed small chops here and there.

My 2c.

[This message has been edited by AuraEdge (edited 06-08-2000).]

[Banti]

A good rule of thumb...

If you must sell your car/boat/house/pet/SO/etc... to get MORE ram, then you already have too much RAM.

Or..

if you have considered how hard it would be to add another DIMM slot to your mobo, then you have too much RAM.

Those kinda sound like that Red Neck thing.

Banti

[BluesMan]

There no such thing as to much RAM. I'm currently running 512MB of Micron PC133, with one slot left and getting it filled as soon as possible with another 256MB. Granted if your using WP's or Office type programs, then 128MB is more than enough. However, if you like working on 500MB+ images in Photoshop or PSP, or super intense video games....MORE RAM!! Buy every MB that you can afford and before many other upgrades that are much less performance notable.

[Warthog]

LOL Banti! http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/smile.gif

Guess I have the optimal amount then (192). It is great with gaming and photo editing.

Warthog

[skywalker[TSG]]

me to running 512mb PC-100 EEC ram

doing some heavy duty video ediding and stuff like that

huge diff between 256 and 512 when using corel draw and 3dstudiomax

[rtyp3]

What about gaming. What would be best? (or a little too much)

[jman01pa]

I am running 256mb micron pc133. 128 was enough until I got my DVD player. I noticed an improvement in gameplay too. Installing Win 2000 also improved memory performance. Although now my dvd player wont work until drivers are avail.

J http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/smile.gif

[rtyp3]

Wow jman, almost same time! heh
After I pushed submit, by the time it took me back to this page, your post was there! What are the chances...

[chipbgt]

Jman what drivers are you looking for? ATI? I found a software dvd player that works fine in the time being.

[RobRich]

I commonly install 128meg for most people, as this proves to be fine for gaming and regular desktop work. I personally recommend 256-512 for anyone interested in file serving, CAD, or video/image editing. I'm currently running 128meg in my personal system at home, but will soon be going to 256 (as I plan to move to Win2K in the near future).

Robert Richmond

[Dputiger]

Right now, I'd say 64 Meg of RAM is minimal for playing modern games. Games like Quake, or even Quake II, will run acceptably with 32. 128 is better.

[jl123]

Well i'm running 128 right now in my main system. Very happy. But i don't do much photo editing.

Anyone using a Gb of memory??? http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/smile.gif

I might get another 128 when i get a job http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/smile.gif

~Joel

[hackercarlos]

I have 256MB of ram and my computer runs smooth. http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/biggrin.gif

I am in the process of building another computer so I will unload 128MB of it onto the next computer so both of them will have 128MB of ram. http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/smile.gif

[This message has been edited by hackercarlos (edited 06-09-2000).]

[NeilTrain]

I just went to 256 after a year at 128, i noticed a nice difference, but im the kinda guy who runs 20 apps at once, all of them doing something. And i have better than 20/20 vision, i keep my screen resolution at 1920 x 1200, most poeple can't read my screen, that puts some drag on the memory. If i ever get some extra dough ill jump up to 512, but i doubt it. Once you get above 256, the performance for a single app wont impove, but running more than one will. But im sure within a year the "Standards" will get bumped up and we will be seeing computers with 128 or 256 standard, and people pushing 1.5 gigs on home pc's

[Warthog]

64 is definately the very least you want to have for FPS. I first played Rogue Spear on 64 RAM. It was playable but when the action heated up with, say, me and 1 or 2 bad dudes shooting full auto, there was some SERIOUS slow down.

When I bought 128 stick (total 192mb), it ran super smooth in Rogue Spear.

That is, until I bought the mission pack Urban Operations and put the number of guys on 50(!) - BAD LAG!!

Warthog

[SysOpt]

Also depends on the OS. I have found that Win2k benefits from more RAM, while Win98 doesn't as much. Due to the way that Win98 allocates "resources", I still end up running out of resources just as fast whether I'm using 128MB of RAM or 384MB+ in Win98.