ccheung Posted March 17, 2006 Posted March 17, 2006 Hi, I plan to buy ram to upgrade my system. I'm thinking of buying 2gb or 4gb of RAM. I know that the best memory size of my system right now is 2gb. However, in reading the litercy of Windows Vista, i'm guess that 2gb is not enough at that time. Needless to say buying 4gb at the same time will save me the trouble of incompability later. Besides, now is the transitional period from DDR to DDR2. We can get good quality DDR ram cheap, although we don't need it right now. When the day of Vista comes, DDR will be an outdated product, it is hard to find, and expensive. I'm tossing between buying 2gb or 4gb. What do you think? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
supraboytt Posted March 17, 2006 Posted March 17, 2006 we'll need 2gb minimum for windows vista? dang... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
red930 Posted March 17, 2006 Posted March 17, 2006 I seriously, seriously doubt Vista will need anywhere near that amount of ram. Keep in mind they want to sell it on budget computers, running around 1GB or so I'm going to guess. Who knows, they might try to cram it on 512, XP is still sold on some computers with 256 sadly. That said, if you can afford the 4GB I'd get it, might very well be my next ipgrade while my ram is still available since I won't be getting a new board/processor for at least another year or two. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccheung Posted March 17, 2006 Posted March 17, 2006 Yes, you therotically can run XP with 256MB. But try to edit a photo if you like, you will know it basically is non usable with 256MB. I don't know the exact minumn requirment of Vista. But its new architech is that each program will have its own copy of device drivers. Say you run 10 programs (including background and foreground), each programs need a copy of audio drivers, that is you need memory to keep up 10 audio drivers, compared with XP, you only have one copy of device driver for the whole machine. About the minumn menory requirment, mircosoft can still say it is about the same as XP, because minumn assume that you only run a very small program. But it surely needs much more memory to be usable. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
red930 Posted March 17, 2006 Posted March 17, 2006 rite now i think xp addresses only 3.2gb of ram anyways.. but to be futureproof i dont see why not. the ridiciulously old comps at my school (the ones we didnt replace) have been upgraded to xp--all on a p3 and 128mb mem (lol, i got into the bios, idiots..) it takes about 7 minutes to get into the programs page.. XD by comparison, one of the school's dell latitudes can bootup and get to programs in about 3 minutes-- with a (im guessing) pentium m 740-750, 512mb ram.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccheung Posted March 17, 2006 Posted March 17, 2006 Yes, out of memory makes a computer unbearable. On the contrary, a computer with slow CPU but enough memory can still survive. Because most of our activities, e.g. word processing and web surfing, don't need much cpu. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
deeselcyde Posted March 17, 2006 Posted March 17, 2006 I seriously, seriously doubt Vista will need anywhere near that amount of ram. Keep in mind they want to sell it on budget computers, running around 1GB or so I'm going to guess. Who knows, they might try to cram it on 512, XP is still sold on some computers with 256 sadly. That said, if you can afford the 4GB I'd get it, might very well be my next ipgrade while my ram is still available since I won't be getting a new board/processor for at least another year or two. LOL my dad bought a dell about 2 years ago. 256 mb of ram, slowest piece of crap there is. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
supraboytt Posted March 17, 2006 Posted March 17, 2006 Yes, you therotically can run XP with 256MB. But try to edit a photo if you like, you will know it basically is non usable with 256MB. I don't know the exact minumn requirment of Vista. But its new architech is that each program will have its own copy of device drivers. Say you run 10 programs (including background and foreground), each programs need a copy of audio drivers, that is you need memory to keep up 10 audio drivers, compared with XP, you only have one copy of device driver for the whole machine. About the minumn menory requirment, mircosoft can still say it is about the same as XP, because minumn assume that you only run a very small program. But it surely needs much more memory to be usable. My old computer actually used windows xp. I was a p3 500mhz 128mb ram and ati rage 32mb. God awful though, even web surfing was slow as hell. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UncleDavid218 Posted March 17, 2006 Posted March 17, 2006 My friends dad is a beta tester for Vista. They have 1GB of RAM and a dual-core Athlon X2 CPU which seems to run it just fine. I would have to say that 2GB is the new standard, which means 4GB isn't too far behind. But remember, Windows XP can only adress something like 3GB of RAM, so you will most definately will not notice initially. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts