vista uses extra ram as a cache keeping programs that it uses frequently in
that cache for the next time you run it..
therefore the more ram you have the better
that said, for computer for everyday use will see a small increase in
performance but for a computer doing graphics you absolutely need more ram
than 2 gb...
vista is a very fat and boated OS... and it depends on much ram to get its
fat arse moving...
for the vista loving trolls who deny this, please let them remove the extra
ram they have and let them use only 512 mb ram
XP would runs "ok" with 512mb meaning that you can use it for some tasks,
but vista strains under its own weight.
Just telling the truth. People ask a lot of questions they can't or
won't like the answers to.
If you don't like it, kill file me.
It was cross posted to a design newsgroup where we don't cater to
Personally, I would locate the motherboard specs and stuff it to the
limit with the fastest memory it can use.
OK, how many gig is best on my Commodore 128 with the OS in ROM? My
S-100 systems? Do I really need more than 1 k of RAM? How about the
Intel Multibus computers in the shop? Or the Motorola Exorcisor
computers or VME boxen?
I AM crazy. Anyone who denies being crazy is admitting to being
I spent two years stuck in bed. I only have a couple productive hours
per day, yet I haven't given up. I am a 100% disabled US Army Veteran,
and I use humor to take the edges off the all too often bad days. Have
you ever had to deal with a conceited VA nurse who thinks she is a
doctor? Has bad medical advice come close to costing you both legs?
My mother died of Colon cancer decades ago. Her motto was "Crazy is
not being afraid to laugh at the world when it kicks you in the teeth."
Take that any way you want to. She suffered a year of pain and side
effects of her treatment, but did her best to keep her sense of humor.
You cannot really say that. IT depends on what applications you want to
run and how many you want open at any one time. Besides we all know that
Windows is a very inefficient OS and does a poor job of multitasking
In some cases 2gb is better. Setting aside half the address space for
memory mapped I/O can make for a better system. If you put 2bg on a
24MHz version of the 8051, and make it address 2gb of external RAM is
will out perform a 4gb, 4GHz quad core machine with graphics
accelerator running Vista. Part of the problem is that Vista uses the
bogosort routine to sort the PIDs to find the next task to give a time
slice to but the 8051 just uses the JMP @A+DPTR
If you are doing graphics on your PC, you should stop right now. PCs
are for doing spreadsheets.
Try doing multiple tasks with it. You can install XP with 128 MB,
but try using it if you install the updates.
I used to run a Commodore 64 with 38911 bytes of RAM.
The embedded 68340 processor controlling the equipment used for
audio, video, & data uplink to the ISS has 64K * 16 EPROM, and 2k * 16
SRAM and a 16 MHz CPU clock