If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
RAM utilization
Donna wrote:
Is that under system properties/performance? If so I have 128 MB with 40% free Forget about 40% free, it is a rather meaningless measure. Once again remember that unused memory is wasted memory. With 128MB of RAM and an "in use" swap file hovering around 64MB it is possible that adding 64MB of RAM might show some small improvement but whether it is worth doing is perhaps debatable. The Win Me box I have here runs quite very happily with 128MB of RAM with a copy of Office 2000 installed as well as Corel WordPerfect and PhotoPaint plus all the usual utilities, etc. -- Mike Maltby .. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
RAM utilization
FWIW, I used to run ME on a 64MB box (150MHz), with Office 98 whizzing away
quite happily, - so long as the files I manipulated weren't much more than about 3-5MB, and didn't contain large graphics. It wasn't the speediest thing in the world - but it was rock-solid. -- Noel Paton (MS-MVP 2002-2006, Windows) Nil Carborundum Illegitemi http://www.crashfixpc.com/millsrpch.htm http://tinyurl.com/6oztj Please read http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm on how to post messages to NG's "Mike M" wrote in message ... Donna wrote: Is that under system properties/performance? If so I have 128 MB with 40% free Forget about 40% free, it is a rather meaningless measure. Once again remember that unused memory is wasted memory. With 128MB of RAM and an "in use" swap file hovering around 64MB it is possible that adding 64MB of RAM might show some small improvement but whether it is worth doing is perhaps debatable. The Win Me box I have here runs quite very happily with 128MB of RAM with a copy of Office 2000 installed as well as Corel WordPerfect and PhotoPaint plus all the usual utilities, etc. -- Mike Maltby . |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
RAM utilization
Noel,
The box in question used to only have 64MB of RAM and was always perfectly happy. I only move it up to 128MB of RAM when I found I had a spare 64MB stick after recycling some bits from a sick box that was heading for the dump. :-) -- Mike Noel Paton wrote: FWIW, I used to run ME on a 64MB box (150MHz), with Office 98 whizzing away quite happily, - so long as the files I manipulated weren't much more than about 3-5MB, and didn't contain large graphics. It wasn't the speediest thing in the world - but it was rock-solid. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
RAM utilization
Ok thanks for your help....
sounds like its fine as it then! "Mike M" wrote in message ... Donna wrote: Is that under system properties/performance? If so I have 128 MB with 40% free Forget about 40% free, it is a rather meaningless measure. Once again remember that unused memory is wasted memory. With 128MB of RAM and an "in use" swap file hovering around 64MB it is possible that adding 64MB of RAM might show some small improvement but whether it is worth doing is perhaps debatable. The Win Me box I have here runs quite very happily with 128MB of RAM with a copy of Office 2000 installed as well as Corel WordPerfect and PhotoPaint plus all the usual utilities, etc. -- Mike Maltby . |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
RAM utilization
"Mike M" wrote:
Donna wrote: Is that under system properties/performance? If so I have 128 MB with 40% free Forget about 40% free, it is a rather meaningless measure. Once again remember that unused memory is wasted memory. With 128MB of RAM and an "in use" swap file hovering around 64MB it is possible that adding 64MB of RAM might show some small improvement but whether it is worth doing is perhaps debatable. The Win Me box I have here runs quite very happily with 128MB of RAM with a copy of Office 2000 installed as well as Corel WordPerfect and PhotoPaint plus all the usual utilities, etc. I think that adding more RAM might prove to be more than just a "small" improvement. I have noticed fairly significant gains on a number of systems running Windows Me when the RAM was increased from 128 to 256 mb. With over 60 mb of "Swap file in use" my recommendation would be to add more RAM. Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada -- Microsoft MVP (1997 - 2006) On-Line Help Computer Service http://onlinehelp.bc.ca |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
RAM utilization
In ,
Ron Martell had this to say: My reply is at the bottom of your sent message: "Mike M" wrote: Donna wrote: Is that under system properties/performance? If so I have 128 MB with 40% free Forget about 40% free, it is a rather meaningless measure. Once again remember that unused memory is wasted memory. With 128MB of RAM and an "in use" swap file hovering around 64MB it is possible that adding 64MB of RAM might show some small improvement but whether it is worth doing is perhaps debatable. The Win Me box I have here runs quite very happily with 128MB of RAM with a copy of Office 2000 installed as well as Corel WordPerfect and PhotoPaint plus all the usual utilities, etc. I think that adding more RAM might prove to be more than just a "small" improvement. I have noticed fairly significant gains on a number of systems running Windows Me when the RAM was increased from 128 to 256 mb. With over 60 mb of "Swap file in use" my recommendation would be to add more RAM. Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada While I agree - and I do - that additional RAM will certainly improve the situation the main point and a part I think we all (even me) forgets is that RAM not in use is truly being wasted and if it wasn't then the various RAM compacting tools would be viable. I wish - like a mad man - I could get a couple of GB of RAM fully in use at NORMAL operation time in XP for instance. It gets at about 70% and never seems to want to go beyond that. I get, even with a dual CPU system, 100% CPU first. It makes no sense now nor then. However the it's good to hear that any RAM not in use is really of no value. (Of course if the system can and will use it then there's nothing better and I'd trade a CPU upgrade - back then - for a RAM upgrade any day. More RAM is almost always better.) -- Galen - MS MVP - Windows (Shell/User & IE) http://dts-l.org/ "My life is spent in one long effort to escape from the commonplaces of existence." - Sherlock Holmes |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
RAM utilization
Mike M wrote:
Noel, The box in questionthat'sts to only have 64MB of RAM and was always perfectly happy. I only move it up tpreferr of RAM when I found I had a spare 64MB stick after recycling some bits from a sick box that was heading for the dump. :-) I would mention that while more Ram is good if that's what is needed, its also the speed of the ram and if its buffered or not etc.. I perfer say 2 256mb modules over 1 512mb module but it depends on the ram etc.. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Please help! Display settings !! | Mitzi | Monitors & Displays | 12 | July 11th 04 05:19 AM |