UNSOLVED
RD
Red Dragon
221 Posts
0
108615
March 4th, 2004 14:00
How much RAM is enough for Windows XP?
After reading this board for a while, and then seeing the moderators new FAQ, it occurs to me that some users, especially new ones may not understand just how much RAM is needed for Windows XP.
The last article linked in the FAQ includes this section:
Why Add RAM?
I also found this Microsoft Knowledge Base article:
Computer Speed and Performance May Decrease
The Microsoft article mentions the minimum RAM as 64MB, but that is the minimum to install. Windows XP will not run well on 64MB of RAM.
So, back to my original question. How much RAM is enough for Windows XP?
64MB? 64MB is the minimum to install it, but you do not want to run XP on 64MB.
128MB? I have run Windows XP on an old portable (400 Celeron) with 128, and it ran okay, as long as I did not do much with it. This is really the minimum RAM for someone who wants to use Word, and the Internet, and occasionally something a little more ambitious.
256MB? This is the right amount for most users, who are not doing multimedia, or playing new games. XP runs quite nicely with 256, and you will only see slow downs when you try to do a lot with your system.
512MB? If you play the most recent games, do video or graphics editing, or like to keep about six applications open at the same time, then this is the minimum that you should really consider.
Unlike 95, 98, and ME, XP can use a lot of RAM. There is no downside to increasing the RAM in XP. You should not expect huge improvements in performance just because you increase your RAM, but if you have less than 512MB and you see slow downs or momentary freezes when you have several applications open, or when doing multimedia, or when playing games, then you may want to consider spending a little money on some more RAM.
RAM does not cost that much these days, and it is one of the better investments you can make in your system performance.
Edit: Some proof.
Check out this PC Magazine Performance Test. There are tests for General-Purpose Upgrades, Photo-Editing Upgrades, and Gaming Upgrades. Be sure to check out the Test Results.
Message Edited by Red Dragon on 03-04-2004 03:49 PM
4428
0
Posted March 29th, 2004 17:00
I am not sure. I'd say that 128mb is the minimum, My laptop has 192mb ram and it runs fine. The computer i'm getting has a gig of ram. The more ram, the faster and more reliable the system.4428
0
Posted March 29th, 2004 17:00
I have 384MB on my D8100 w/XP, but I noticed sluggishness on it even on sending a print job or plain browsing. So I checked the performance tab and showed running at 40%-45% of its memory. Can someone give me a clue on how to increase the performance? I've already closed antivirus, firewall, ad blocker etc to see if it improves and it only goes up a couple of % but still below 50%. Please help4428
0
Posted March 29th, 2004 17:00
I am not sure. I'd say that 128mb is the minimum, My laptop has 192mb ram and it runs fine. The computer i'm getting has a gig of ram. The more ram, the faster and more reliable the system.
3.0ghz w/HT
1024mb ram
120gig hard drive
128mb video card
Dolby digital 5.1 sound card
Quiet Keyboard
Optical Mouse
17"CRT4428
0
Posted March 29th, 2004 18:00
With 128mb, I have 60mb free (available) memory with several IE6 sessions running. IE6 comes up in approx 3 secs and new instances come up in <1 sec. There is more HD activity (paging) with 128 but the delay is only when switching applications that have been paged out. I can easily run Excel, Word, 8 IE6 sessions and outlook with 30-40mb available memory.
With 256mb boot time was 12 secs slower (including post) and hibernate was of course twice as slow.
System tested was a PII 400mhz with 6.4GB HD 5400rpm 9msec access 512k cache
Try observing your process activity with this excellent 'process explorer' tool which is like an expanded version of task manager.
http://www.sysinternals.com/ntw2k/freeware/procexp.shtml
As a last resort, reformat and install XP so you can establish a baseline for how your system should perform.
4427
0
Posted April 4th, 2004 03:00
As far as im concerned, the minimum amount of RAM for XP is more than any motherboard now-days can support. haha.(but 256MB is what i would concider the minimum, with 512MB being a much better starting point)
4427
0
Posted April 24th, 2004 04:00
One should never consider what is 'enough' but what is'at the very minimum', as we know, windows system always keep taking much of our system source and has endless will to expand. As for myself, I use 256 ram, whether it will be enough mostly depend on what you use the computer to do. To myself, it's enough.
4428
0
Posted April 27th, 2004 18:00
If you are looking for a true return on investment with low total cost of ownership over a 5 year period
and don't want to have to pay for a mid-life RAM upgrade (where the labor is a significant cost)
and as RAM pre-installed is significanly cheaper
For wordprocess/spreadsheet - 512Mb
For graphic manipulation - 1Gb (preferably 2)
For CAD - 2Gb
1045
0
Posted May 2nd, 2004 02:00
i have 1GB of ram and that is what i think xp need.
my i8500 laptop is so fast, faster than my desktop also with 2.6ghz, p4.
desktop 1.5ghz with p4 and 256mb of ram.
1045
0
Posted May 16th, 2004 12:00
I have 1gb Ram also, it was fine with 512, but got a little greedy, and a nasty habit of running about 10 programs at the same time. So the extra 512 works great. I would concider 512 is min. But 1gig is better, I might upgrade to 2gig sometime in the future, if needed.
@americajungle wrote:
i have 1GB of ram and that is what i think xp need.
martik
1 Rookie
•
22 Posts
4427
0
Posted March 18th, 2004 21:00