Re: " Sweet Spot" for XP SP3?
- From: JKlingler <jk@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:55:18 -0500
John John wrote:
I think that is an old wives tale! Adding more RAM may or may not make the computer perform better or go faster, but it won't slow it down.Actually, it depends a lot on the motherboard.I have an ASUS A7V8X-X. The memory requirements are quite confining as to type and amount of certain type banks etc. There are several places online where you can have your computer checked. Crucial Memory and All Memory are a couple I can think of. I went from 1gig to 2gig and really don't notice any difference under normal things I do. I did notice some improvement when editing video. I had to wait longer for things to be applied before. Of course, this is an older board, newer ones may not have these limitations, but I would check before buying any. I bought some that was supposed to be backward compatible but it wouldn't work.
John
Martin C wrote:
The OP stated that "2 GB of RAM was ideal for XP and more would actually slow it down"
This is news to me and may actually change my mind in adding more RAM. I have 1GB and was going to add an extra 2GB. Why does having more than 2GB actually slow the system down? Would I really be better off with just an extra 1GB?
Martin
"philo" <philo@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:u6Wam53bIHA.5768@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Colin Barnhorst" <c.barnhorst@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:OjHc6V3bIHA.4712@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Not true. The available memory for user programs that is reported on the
system properties page is driven by the amount of ram reserved by the BIOS
for memory-mapped IO for devices like video cards. It varies from as
little
as 2.5GB to 3.5GB depending on the computer. It is not that Windows
cannot
use all 4GB but that the BIOS is denying some memory to user programs.
Vista x86 SP1 now reports 4GB on the system properties page but only
because
MS has changed what is reported there from user space to installed ram.
Note: I said APPROX!
3.2 gigs is what most users report when 4 gigs is installed
that does not change the fact that the 64 bit version of the OS is needed to
utalize more than 4 gigs of RAM
"philo" <philo@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:e8lmSR3bIHA.1132@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Sue" <Sue@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:F0F6596F-285B-4E40-A7E2-C1D8B41D5980@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hi,
I am getting to the point where I will need to buy a new laptop and
want
to
have it configured to make optimal use of the XP SP3 OS. When XP came
out,
those in the know reported that 2 GB of RAM was ideal for XP and more
would
actually slow it down. I am wondering if the new SP makes optimal use
of
additional RAM or it remains best to stick to 2 GB.
Thanks!
Sue
XP 32 bit can make use of approx 3.2 gigs of RAM.
If you need to use more RAM then you will need the 64bit version of XP
and the appropriate hardware of course
.
- References:
- Re: " Sweet Spot" for XP SP3?
- From: philo
- Re: " Sweet Spot" for XP SP3?
- From: Colin Barnhorst
- Re: " Sweet Spot" for XP SP3?
- From: philo
- Re: " Sweet Spot" for XP SP3?
- From: Martin C
- Re: " Sweet Spot" for XP SP3?
- From: John John
- Re: " Sweet Spot" for XP SP3?
- Prev by Date: Re: Spell Checking
- Next by Date: MSVCRT.DLL error message....HELP! :-)
- Previous by thread: Re: " Sweet Spot" for XP SP3?
- Next by thread: Re: " Sweet Spot" for XP SP3?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|