PC hardware: 2GB vs. 4GB Ram for Vista Home Premium?
2GB vs. 4GB Ram for Vista Home Premium?
by retexan599 - 5/6/07 2:22 PMThis is no doubt an oversimplified question: I plan to get a new Vista Home Premium based computer and will certainly get at least 2GB RAM. An option on one of my possible choices is to increase the memory to 4GB. I am inclined to get the extra 2GB as I want this computer to last me for five years. I do plan to do some conversions of old VHS videotapes to DVD with this machine and have the feeling that the extra RAM will come in handy. Or....am I just absolutely wasting the extra 270 dollars for the extra RAM. Opinions welcome! Thanks.
Beware that 4GB. There are complaints about...
by R. Proffitt
- 5/6/07 2:43 PM
In reply to: 2GB vs. 4GB Ram for Vista Home Premium? by retexan599
Vista as supplied will show from 3 to 3.5 GB of RAM. It has to do with the address space is also used for other things. Some owners seem upset with that.
It's also well known that past 2GB there is little gain.
Bob
2GB vs. 4GB Ram for Vista Home Premium?
by billzhills - 5/7/07 6:00 AM In reply to: 2GB vs. 4GB Ram for Vista Home Premium? by retexan599I would suggest spending the money on hard disk drives.
More information at Videoguys.
Bill
Depends
by xFulcrumx - 5/7/07 7:02 AM In reply to: 2GB vs. 4GB Ram for Vista Home Premium? by retexan599do you have the 32 or 64bit version?.
32 I assume and do you plan on doing vid editing?. or just transfers.
either way the extra mem will help despite what the others say.
profit says that theres little gain is false. when doing vid editing and such more mem is always good.
3gb is good, but 4th gb is usually wasted on 32bit vista
by ramarc - 5/7/07 8:12 AM In reply to: Depends by xFulcrumxthere's little gain in adding the 4th gigabyte of ram, not in adding more ram.
depending on your components and the memory address ranges they use, you might be able to use a bit more than 3gb. for example, i have 2gb of ram and my video card's memory range is 0x80000000 - 0x8fffffff (the first 256mb above 2gb). some components are greedy and require a large window while other components are fickle and use non-contiguous ranges (wasting even more ram). my pc's components take an address window of about 512mb. the 'better' your pc (from a features standpoint), the more address ranges it needs and all of those ranges start at the end of your physical memory. since 32bit OS's can only address 4gb of ram, if you install 4gb the memory address ranges for your various components will begin to hide some of your physical ram.
.........1.........2gb
|||||||||||||||||||||[mem]
.........1.........2.........3gb
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||[mem]
.........1.........2.........3.........4gb
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||[mem]
3GB
by kpo6969 - 5/7/07 1:02 PM In reply to: 3gb is good, but 4th gb is usually wasted on 32bit vista by ramarcI got my system recently with 2gb. Bought 1GB from Crucial for 61.99
Works great with 3gb.
So, maybe just buy 3GB RAM instead of 4GB?
by retexan599 - 5/8/07 1:11 PM In reply to: 3gb is good, but 4th gb is usually wasted on 32bit vista by ramarc1. It is sounding like (from the discussion here) there might be some value in going up to about 3GB, but probably a waste of money to go on to 4GB (all in a 32 bit system), does that make sense?
2. It also sounds like the bigger the video card memory, the more of a bite of the 3GB to 4GB increment is taken up by the other devices? I was considering getting a 768MB video card (vs. a 256MB card) but it sounds like the extra 512MB would cut down on the RAM (assuming I had the total of 4GB -- again is this making sense?
Thanks for all the input!
The problem is payback.
by R. Proffitt - 5/8/07 1:19 PM
In reply to: So, maybe just buy 3GB RAM instead of 4GB? by retexan599
In XP we saw very little payback past 1GB. In Vista there is some payback from 1 to 2GB but the payback that I've seen from 2 to 3 only shows in benchmarks and then in the single digits. Your choice here.
ram in XP
by photobug56 - 5/11/07 8:24 PM In reply to: The problem is payback. by R. Proffitt
I run XP Pro on an older PC. It had 1 gb ram, and was constantly starving for ram (lots of things running). Doubling to 2gb has led the pc to run a lot better.
Here's my 2 bits...
by TrackStar1682 - 5/11/07 10:47 PM In reply to: ram in XP by photobug56On my system, I run both WinXP and Vista, and I've been able to see how well they both take advantage of the extra memory (1 GB of DDR2 533 MHz v. 2 GB of DDR2 667 MHz)
In XP, the difference was really negligible and I really couldn't tell a huge difference other than things that would use way more memory than they did before. Example: iTunes running cover flow for a library of over 4000 tracks gobbled up a whopping 800 MB or so of memory!!! I can have a ton of stuff open either way and don't really have any problems in XP.
With Vista, things were a bit different. First off though, let me say that Vista does run well on 1 GB of RAM and that I had no problems running it with that much. That said, I was able to tell a pretty significant difference in how well everything ran when I upped it from 1 GB to 2GB. I can only guess that adding that extra gigabyte of memory would probably provide a little extra kick comparable to the extra kick XP experienced when moving from 1 GB to 2 GB.
If you need more than 2 GB, simply add another 2 GB rather than buying just 1 GB. If it works well enough in spite of the fact that only 3 GB will show, just leave it. When you feel the need to unlock that extra potential stored away in that last gigabyte, just order your 64-bit copy of Vista. If you have a copy of the retail software, you can obtain a 64-bit copy at no extra charge other than shipping. Going 64-bit has its own challenges, but if you have the need, go for it!
Same here
by b8375629 - 5/14/07 7:09 AM In reply to: ram in XP by photobug56Yeah, I was running into the same thing, especially using Nero 7. 1GB just didn't cut it, so as soon as I put another stick of RAM in, my machine ran Nero better, too.
XP Pro works just fine with 2GB. In fact, I'd recommend an upgrade to that if you have enough slots to do it with.
With Vista, if you can put 3GB in, great. Beyond 3GB on a 32bit system, it's probably a waste of money.
instead of more OS ram why not a RAM drive?
by Sugien2 - 5/14/07 7:58 AM In reply to: Same here by b8375629For just a little bit more then the price of 4Gb of ram you could buy a 32Gb ram drive. This may be the least reported but biggest news in the computing world. This is poised to go into production systems in 2008; but why wait? A ram drive is a Hard drive in name only; because in actuality it is pure ram that is used in place of the HD. Today you CAN buy a 32Gb ram drive to replace your HD for around $320. Talk about a speed increase. Starting and loading office for instance would load up and run using a (physical) ram drive as quick as if you already had it loaded in from a normal HD and sitting down in the task bar and it loads and runs as fast as if you had simply clicked on it down in the tray and had it pop up on the desktop.
These new ram drives include a battery back up system to retain information when the system is shut down. Laptops in Japan already have the option of replacing a 120Gb normal HD with a 32Gb ram drive. These new Ram Drive are NOT what most techs are use to thinking of a ram drive where you load information into a segment of ram and use it as a ram drive; but rather a *physical* ram drive that is used as the *primary* hard drive for the system.
That would be a good option...
by b8375629 - 5/14/07 9:16 AM In reply to: instead of more OS ram why not a RAM drive? by Sugien2...although 32GB wouldn't be enough for most people. They would still have to use an external mechanical drive for storage. However I agree flash drives are the future, no question about it.
Unless they can get mechanical drives to spin far over 10,000rpm. ;^)
It's up to you
by kpo6969 - 5/9/07 12:06 PM In reply to: So, maybe just buy 3GB RAM instead of 4GB? by retexan599For 60.00 it was worth it to me.
Not necessary ....
by Watzman - 5/11/07 8:42 PM In reply to: 2GB vs. 4GB Ram for Vista Home Premium? by retexan599Absolutely not necessary; 2GB is fine and going from 2GB to 4GB will be unlikely to make any difference at all in anything that most people do (including, I think, video editing). And if you only get 2GB, you can always add 2 more later, at any time (and probably for less money that it will cost with the new system, or even from any source at this time).
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
 |
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
