| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 76957 | 2007-02-22 01:38:00 | IBM consultant says Vista users should consider 4GB of RAM | johcar (6283) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 527021 | 2007-02-22 01:38:00 | Link to Slashdot artilce here (slashdot.org) Is this another reason to put off upgrading to Vista, or someone trying to boost RAM sales...??? Disclaimer: I am an IT consultant. I am not anti-Vista. I am not pro-Vista. :) :) |
johcar (6283) | ||
| 527022 | 2007-02-22 03:10:00 | Wow.. now that's just stupid. I could understand having 4GB for very hungry multimedia applications but not an OS. I used vista home on a display pc at noel leemings, slow as! Had decent ram and a 3ghz processor. | jermsie (6820) | ||
| 527023 | 2007-02-22 03:15:00 | what u guys need is a amd x2 and a gt card.. | AMD (11356) | ||
| 527024 | 2007-02-22 04:00:00 | If you read some of the comments, one guys says.... What is not being taken into account in this article is the fact that the 32 bit version of Vista can only handle 3GB of RAM. If you want to use 4GB or greater, then you have to use the 64 bit version. Most computer builders are going to put a maximum of 2GB in their machines to be cost effective and keep from exceeding the 32 bit limit. The flash drive memory being used as RAM is called Ready Boost and works very well. If you have a fast enough flash drive, when you insert it into the Vista computer it will ask you if you want to enable Ready Boost. If you say yes, then you get to select how much space on the drive to allocate as RAM. Considering a 4GB Flash drive is less than $100, this would be a great cost savings for most people versus DDR2. |
plod (107) | ||
| 527025 | 2007-02-22 04:13:00 | Thats gotta be rubbish im running vista home premium and i have 1.7gb of ram on board and im only using 680mb to run the system and it rarely changes from their, so i have 1.06gb of ram doing nothing. | Hitech (9024) | ||
| 527026 | 2007-02-22 04:27:00 | I said 4Gb ages ago. Look at XP, 256mb minimum, 512 for better performance, 1and 2Gb for gaming XP systems. Therefore.............. |
pctek (84) | ||
| 527027 | 2007-02-22 04:40:00 | Rubbish....whoever said that must have been paid by RAM manufacturers to speak rubbish. I had 1GB on Ultimate and everything went fine. 2GB then everything was fine too. | qazwsxokmijn (102) | ||
| 527028 | 2007-02-24 09:28:00 | He didn't say you had to have 4GB RAM to run Vista, but after HIS research mainly on betas, 4GB is best. Scoff if you must. | dolby digital (5073) | ||
| 527029 | 2007-02-24 10:30:00 | Seriously, what is an OPERATING SYSTEM doing using that much memory? 680MB?! The OS is supposed to be something thats "in the background" and helps you to work with your files and to load applications, not sit in the forefront of your screen like a popup ad consuming all resources available. Even WITH about 20 tabs in Firefox, Kontact, amaroK, 2x chat programs, torrent client, encoding a video file, vnc viewer, K3b, OpenOffice Spreadsheet I was still using just under 500MB. THATS how things are supposed to be ;) 4GB is just crazy... |
Chilling_Silence (9) | ||
| 527030 | 2007-02-24 18:46:00 | You got it Chilling. Windows hasn't been an O/S that sits in the background for ages. Its all the crap built into it that hogs the resources. |
pctek (84) | ||
| 1 2 3 | |||||