Skip to comments.
How to: How much RAM do you really need?
PC Authority ^
| Friday 21 March 2014
| Darien Graham-Smith
Posted on 04/11/2015 11:25:09 AM PDT by Utilizer
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-127 next last
To: Utilizer
4 is what I have on most machines. It seems to be the bang for buck for business machines. If are running programs for photo editing, videos, large spread sheets and the like you can’t get to much. I settle for 16GB.
21
posted on
04/11/2015 11:45:07 AM PDT
by
ThomasThomas
(EGO venit lego tantum titulus Posteri)
To: WilliamofCarmichael
I first learned how to program on one of these babies:
I then saved up to buy the 16K memory expansion module. Yeaaaah!
22
posted on
04/11/2015 11:46:24 AM PDT
by
COBOL2Java
("God save America" - we are at the dawn of a new dark age)
To: Utilizer
23
posted on
04/11/2015 11:46:40 AM PDT
by
bigbob
(The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly. Abraham Lincoln)
To: Utilizer; bicyclerepair
I run Debian in addition to W7, and agree it’s a lot more economical with memory. However, the browsers can be hogs even on Linux.
To: Utilizer
You want as much RAM that it takes to allow you to set the swap file to zero which will speed up your machine if you have enough RAM, check the monitors to see how the swap file is utilized. With the swap file at zero, MS will say you won’t be able to get the diagnostic dump MS supposedly uses to determine what caused the abend.
The funny thing is that in over 20 years of using NT, not once was I asked to upload that file and when I suggested it once, the engineer laughed.
25
posted on
04/11/2015 11:48:41 AM PDT
by
Lx
(Do you like it? Do you like it, Scott? I call it, "Mr. & Mrs. Tenorman Chili.")
To: Conan the Librarian
My first personal computer has 21k of memory and a tape drive for storage.
My first computer was a Timex Sinclair that I hooked up to a tape recorder. One of biggest peeves in recent years is how many open tabs my computer will support. With my first two or three Windows machines, I could open 30 or 40 tabs without the computer batting an eye. With my last two or three, anything more than about 8 or 9 tabs will cause it to have a conniption and freeze up.
I also miss my early word processor that fit on a 128K disc. It was set up to do some things that even modern ones don't. And if I didn't still have a Norton Commander clone, then I might be tempted to use my computer as a desk ornament.
26
posted on
04/11/2015 11:50:42 AM PDT
by
Engraved-on-His-hands
(Conservative 2016!! The Dole, H.W. Bush, McCain, Romney experiment has failed.)
To: Utilizer
Does anyone really need this much RAM?
Back in 1972 or 73 I had a computer programming class at a local community college. I remember one day the instructor pointing to a hand held Texas Instrument calculator I had with me and saying that would be the only computing power we would ever need..........LOL!
27
posted on
04/11/2015 11:51:07 AM PDT
by
Hot Tabasco
(Uncle Sy: "Beavers are like Ninjas, they only come out at night and they're hard to find")
To: COBOL2Java
28
posted on
04/11/2015 11:53:28 AM PDT
by
Engraved-on-His-hands
(Conservative 2016!! The Dole, H.W. Bush, McCain, Romney experiment has failed.)
To: zeebee; Utilizer
I agree with zeebee , get at least 4gb with win7 , get a 64 bit OS , 8gb is a reasonable upgrade amount ... but get a SSD or a hybrid SSD/HDD and place your swap file on the SSD portion...
I’m running Vista with 3GB and it’s fine for “normal” stuff...
29
posted on
04/11/2015 11:53:58 AM PDT
by
Neidermeyer
("Our courts should not be collection agencies for crooks." — John Waihee, Governor of Hawaii, 1986-)
To: Engraved-on-His-hands
Actually, I forgot. My first computer wasn’t a Timex Sinclair; it was one of those building-sized things that you gave punch cards to some guy at a window.
30
posted on
04/11/2015 11:55:37 AM PDT
by
Engraved-on-His-hands
(Conservative 2016!! The Dole, H.W. Bush, McCain, Romney experiment has failed.)
To: Utilizer
Need?
.
Like so many things in life, bigger is better. Period.
31
posted on
04/11/2015 11:55:43 AM PDT
by
Jeff Chandler
(Doctrine doesn't change. The trick is to find a way around it.)
To: Utilizer
If you are talking PCs and you still run XP 32bit, you only need 2 Gb because that is all it can access. Anything above XP I would say to get what you can afford. I try to have at least 6 Gb on a laptop, but on some of my workstations I have 8, 16, or 32 Gb. Usually the difference between 6 and 32 Gb is not noticeable when just doing web access and simple things like word processing, but when I require continuous number crunching, opening and closing numerous files automatically, and running numerous background programs, the 16 and 32 Gb systems leaves the others in the dust. Don’t forget to get as much graphics memory that you can afford, especially if you are doing gaming or anything that uses rendering.
32
posted on
04/11/2015 11:55:52 AM PDT
by
Kirkwood
(Zombie Hunter)
To: catnipman
Well, I think you meant GB not MB, but I got your point. My machines are all Linux-based as I mentioned previously, but it helps to know what to recommend to people running the ‘doze OS.
33
posted on
04/11/2015 11:57:39 AM PDT
by
Utilizer
(Bacon A'kbar! - In world today are only peaceful people, and the muzlims trying to kill them)
To: zeebee
I’m still not certain that the speed vs. cost factor leans all that greatly towards an SSD instead of more memory. Perhaps when they start matching prices with standard HDDs then I might consider purchasing one.
34
posted on
04/11/2015 12:01:13 PM PDT
by
Utilizer
(Bacon A'kbar! - In world today are only peaceful people, and the muzlims trying to kill them)
To: Riley
How to: How much RAM do you really need?All of it.
Best answer
35
posted on
04/11/2015 12:02:27 PM PDT
by
RightGeek
(FUBO and the donkey you rode in on)
To: zeebee; Utilizer
The biggest speed bump comes from a SSD instead of a HD.I've heard this also, but have no SSD in service on my machines.
A dual-boot machine with some flavor of Linux is also a good idea to speed up your machine.
36
posted on
04/11/2015 12:02:47 PM PDT
by
kiryandil
(Egging the battleship USS Sarah Palin from their little Progressive rowboats...)
To: Utilizer
Im still not certain that the speed vs. cost factor leans all that greatly towards an SSD instead of more memory. Perhaps when they start matching prices with standard HDDs then I might consider purchasing one.It's easier to justify on a laptop, where you also get to factor in increased battery life because you're not having to run spindle motors.
37
posted on
04/11/2015 12:03:20 PM PDT
by
tacticalogic
("Oh, bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
To: Utilizer
I am running various flavours of Linux on all the machines, which version depends upon which function each machine is geared toward. Most of the customers I work with are running XP or Vista, though. Could you rank your flavors in order of most liked to least liked?
38
posted on
04/11/2015 12:03:53 PM PDT
by
kiryandil
(Egging the battleship USS Sarah Palin from their little Progressive rowboats...)
To: Utilizer
39
posted on
04/11/2015 12:04:23 PM PDT
by
dfwgator
To: COBOL2Java
40
posted on
04/11/2015 12:05:52 PM PDT
by
GeronL
(CLEARLY CRUZ 2016)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-127 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson