Windows Vista: 3 GB or 4GB RAM
3 GB or 4GB RAM
by mooseman923 - 4/16/08 2:17 PMIm going to get a laptop with vista on it and i am wondering, would it be better to have 3 gb ram or 4 gb ram in it, or would the 1gb make little to no difference
3GB for today.
by R. Proffitt
- 4/16/08 5:12 PM
In reply to: 3 GB or 4GB RAM by mooseman923
And if they don't set the /3GB switch for you, chastise them.
Would get 4 gig
by Basket628 - 4/17/08 1:48 AM In reply to: 3GB for today. by R. Proffitt
after download service pack one you will see all 4 gig. if not service pack 1 windows only see 3 gig.
If you research this you discover...
by R. Proffitt - 4/17/08 6:25 AM
In reply to: Would get 4 gig by Basket628
The MS article that shows that the more common versions of Windows limit programs to 2 or 3GB and then the application needs to be compiled specially to use past 2GB.
For now, for today you are not seeing benefits past 2GB for 99 out of 100 people.
Bob
RAM
by c.b.mullen - 4/18/08 6:32 PM In reply to: If you research this you discover... by R. Proffitt
I have a Dell Dimension E-521 that came with 2GB of dual channel RAM. I upgraded to 3GB and noticed a substantial increase in performance. I then upgraded to 4GB and not only saw an additional increase in performance over the 3GB but also noticed that the constant IE hangups and freezes completely stopped. I haven't had a problem with IE since.
RAM & IE Hangips
by dminott - 4/18/08 7:59 PM In reply to: RAM by c.b.mullenIf you eliminated IE hangups by adding more RAM, it could be that your original RAM has a memory error. After more RAM is added, IE will now load into a different area of memory (most likely.)
You may have temporarily masked a problem!
Vista has an extensive memory test program, and it might be prudent to run it and see if you have a memory "time bomb!"
Dave
Ram
by c.b.mullen - 4/18/08 9:47 PM In reply to: RAM & IE Hangips by dminottThanks for the suggestion but memory was and is just fine. I've checked the memory on several occasions using the Windows Memory Diagnostic Tool and also memtest. No problems.
Good.
by R. Proffitt - 4/18/08 8:36 PM
In reply to: RAM by c.b.mullen
But that's not happening for most of us. I've seen dozens of machines past 3GB and zip difference. At least they think it's faster. We used things like stopwatches and it was zero diff on boot times, etc.
RAM increase
by c.b.mullen - 4/18/08 10:13 PM In reply to: Good. by R. Proffitt
I'm sorry it's not happening for many people but the fact of the matter is that it happened for me. Prior to the installation of the fourth GB of RAM boot time was 84-86 seconds on average and shutdown was 14-16 seconds on average. Once the additional RAM was added the boot times were 67-70 seconds on average and shutdown was 10-11 seconds on average. The times were logged by TweakVista. I deliberately logged the times so as to ascertain whether or not I achieved any performance gains.
I think TweakVista will give me a more accurate reading than a stopwatch. In any event,the increase in performance is relative to the hardware and software installed on each individual machine and the configurations involved. I don't determine performance gains via illusions of the mind.
I don't expect the results I achieved to be duplicated on anyone else's system. As an example, most users of x86 Windows have the use of, on average, 3.0 to 3.2 GB of RAM out of a total of 4.0GB. On my system, again due to the particular hardware I have installed, I have use of 3.36GB out of a total of 4GB. The fact that most users will not have access to this amount does not mean that I do not.
I understand what you are saying and I agree with you for the most part. However, you should not disbelieve a person just because you think otherwise. The only way for a person to know for sure is to try it.
Research?
by Mike7p - 4/19/08 1:08 AM In reply to: If you research this you discover... by R. Proffitt
Hi Bob,
"The MS article" Which article do you mean Bob? Did you miss out the link?
Kind regards
Mike7p.
Here it it (links)
by R. Proffitt - 4/19/08 4:41 AM
In reply to: Research? by Mike7p
http://blogs.technet.com/askperf/archive/2007/03/23/memory-management-demystifying-3gb.aspx
There are many more about this and let's just say that we all hope that Vista 64 gains traction.
Bob
(NT) Thanks Bob. (NT)
by Mike7p - 4/19/08 5:47 AM In reply to: Here it it (links) by R. Proffitt
Don't Be A Nub
by khuss66 - 4/20/08 10:34 AM In reply to: Here it it (links) by R. Proffitt
L2WIN64
Why would ANYONE buy Vista except for it being 64 bit?
Because they live in Redmond.
by R. Proffitt - 4/20/08 11:56 AM
In reply to: Don't Be A Nub by khuss66
It's more than a state of mind...
Service Pack????
by George Weisdack - 4/21/08 3:32 PM In reply to: Would get 4 gig by Basket628I purchased a new Dell XPS 420 with 4G of memory.
According to Vista Ultimate, I have only 3.26G.
Contacted Dell service and they told me Vista will
only reconize 3.2+G because of software problems.
After checking for Microsoft updates, where is the "new
service package" or patch that some individuals
report exists.
Second issue is Dell tech stated my machine could
support 8G but not with current version of Vista.
It this correct and does anyone know if Microsoft
will provide a free upgrade or charge for it?
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
 |
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
