Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Computer Learning -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: c.horn who wrote (25396)	2/7/2002 6:56:03 PM
From: Esteban	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 110653

I have 512 in this one and am going to up it another 512 when I go to the show next weekend How much ram is too much? This was a question that I wondered about when I built my system in June of last year. I was concerned 512, which I was contemplating, was overkill. I had a great link that covered this well with supporting tests, but it no longer works, at least today. Here it is anyway, in case the server is just down right now: hardcoreware.net As I recall both win98 and win2000 were tested. The gist was that anything beyond 256mb faced a stiff hit from the diminishing return concept, but 512 could be justified with Win2000 and heavy use of graphics applications. With the low price of ram I decided to go for 512, and it's been great. I also went directly to the pre-release version of Windows XP, which I believe has really optimized the use of the memory I bought. So how much has XP upped the ante as far extending the maximum practical limit? I'd like to see some research on this, and hear what thread members think. IMHO, unless you really have a specific need for huge amounts of memory, I think doubling memory from 512 to 1024 is a a waste of money. But upgrading from 256 to 512 and switching to XP on your old machine should get you a very nice performance improvement. Let us know how it turns out. Esteban