Vanguard382 Posted June 12, 2005 Share Posted June 12, 2005 I was wondering how much ram you can put on a computer. One of my ferinds said if you put to much it can over load your computer Is this true and if so how much is a good amount. If you need my computer stats just ask:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USSR Posted June 12, 2005 Share Posted June 12, 2005 I was wondering how much ram you can put on a computer. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It is different from pc to pc. Read your motherboardmanual. For example: My first pc could have max 3GB. My new can only have max 2GB. (They are a lot faster though) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agumon Posted June 12, 2005 Share Posted June 12, 2005 I was wondering how much ram you can put on a computer. One of my ferinds said if you put to much it can over load your computer? Is this true and if so how much is a good amount. If you need my computer stats just ask:) depend on your mother board... but try having a minimum of 512MB of RAM if possible... typically having 2GB on a system is more than enough... some mother board can support up to a maximum of 4GB of RAM... but i think that is too much for a typical home user... maybe if i have that much of money i will buy it... --==aGumon==-- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capman Posted June 12, 2005 Share Posted June 12, 2005 If you know the make and model of your computer, go to the Crucial website, use the Crucial Memory Advisor? Tool, when you get to the last stage of it you will be told the maximum RAM allowed in your computer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanguard382 Posted June 12, 2005 Author Share Posted June 12, 2005 it says i can get up to 4096MB. Thats 4GB right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capman Posted June 12, 2005 Share Posted June 12, 2005 it says i can get up to 4096MB. Thats 4GB right? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Thats spot on, Vanguard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eldmannen Posted June 13, 2005 Share Posted June 13, 2005 The more RAM, the better. Motherboards have limits, usually around 2-4 gigabyte. 4096 mb is 4 gb, yes. If you have a new computer, then 512 mb or higher is recommended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjLizard Posted June 13, 2005 Share Posted June 13, 2005 motherboard memory limits are lame -- the 386 processor can address up to 4 GB .... ! Click here if CCleaner Issues are re-appearing DjLizard.net DjLizard.net wiki Dial-a-fix Dial-a-fix tips DjLizard.net software support forum Do you live in Bradenton, Sarasota, Tampa, or St. Petersburg, Florida? Visit Digital Doctors where I work Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eldmannen Posted June 14, 2005 Share Posted June 14, 2005 Indeed. Fortunately any home computer is not likely to need more than 4 gigabyte RAM anyways (yet). 256-512 is enough for most people. 1024 for those who really want to know they have plenty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agumon Posted June 14, 2005 Share Posted June 14, 2005 256-512 is enough for most people i think 512MB should be the minimum if running on Windows XP machine... i have 1 Windows XP machine that run on 256MB... can see that the performance is slow... anyway, is there a different between running a single 1GB of RAM and running on 2x512MB of RAM? --==aGumon==-- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjLizard Posted June 14, 2005 Share Posted June 14, 2005 Yep. Depending on the configuration of the motherboard [dual channel versus not, or even RAMBUS versus DDR] and the configuration of the actual chips on the RAM sticks themselves [the density and bankage, etc] there are certain times when two sticks are faster than one, or one stick is faster than two. (It really depends on even more stuff that I won't get into These days, it's usually better to have two running in dual channel mode than having one bigger module. There's also several other issues that crop up when using one larger stick: 1) More likely to fail, because of higher heat, higher workload, higher voltage than 2x512MB 2) More costly to replace when it does fail 3) Less likely to be compatible with the majority of motherboards 512MB is my personal minimum for computers running Windows XP. Nobody should use anything less. Windows continues to abuse the page file severely (degrading performance severely) until you have 512MB, then it slacks off a LOT. It is obvious that XP is designed for a minimum of 512. Click here if CCleaner Issues are re-appearing DjLizard.net DjLizard.net wiki Dial-a-fix Dial-a-fix tips DjLizard.net software support forum Do you live in Bradenton, Sarasota, Tampa, or St. Petersburg, Florida? Visit Digital Doctors where I work Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newhotness Posted June 14, 2005 Share Posted June 14, 2005 my moms computer (only a year and a half old) has Xp home and it only has 128, when she first bought it it was fast, now its slow as can be, what happened, and before anyone says it, i know this is crazy small amount of ram, but why would they (compaq) put it on in the first place? and what would be a suitable upgrade at this point? thankx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agumon Posted June 14, 2005 Share Posted June 14, 2005 thanks DjLizard for your explaination... my moms computer (only a year and a half old) has Xp home and it only has 128, when she first bought it it was fast, now its slow as can be, what happened, beside the amount of RAM, some other issues might slow down your computer system... like having malware crawling around in your system... lesser hard disk space... fragmented files...and even some system configuration can slow down system performance... there are just too many issues about it... but why would they (compaq) put it on in the first place? well... i think you might want to ask Compaq themselves... and what would be a suitable upgrade at this point actually depend on the usage of the system... if you are using a lot of high end programs, such as graphic editing, 3D graphic editing, you might want to get more RAM... even up to giga-byte... but i recommend having 512MB of RAM if running Windows XP machine... but is really up to you... but before you get any additional RAM, make sure you know the maximum amount of RAM (and the maximum size) your main board can support... --==aGumon==-- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjLizard Posted June 14, 2005 Share Posted June 14, 2005 Compaq put that on because that's what was available at the time -- XP had just come out, and 256 wasn't common in systems. Flash forward to five years later and people are still using 256 in their new system builds. Here are your problems with speed: 1) All of the above that was already mentioned (spyware, etc) 2) Installing software 3) Using the computer Upgrade your RAM to 512 to handle what has been done to it. Format your drive if you don't want to upgrade the RAM, reinstall XP, and don't install or use anything, ever. 128 MB can't handle any additional software or tasks. You're talkin about an old ass machine. Click here if CCleaner Issues are re-appearing DjLizard.net DjLizard.net wiki Dial-a-fix Dial-a-fix tips DjLizard.net software support forum Do you live in Bradenton, Sarasota, Tampa, or St. Petersburg, Florida? Visit Digital Doctors where I work Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newhotness Posted June 14, 2005 Share Posted June 14, 2005 Maybe old in design but fairly new in reality, less than 2 years. I read somewhere else on the forums that an upgrade of 256 would more than triple the speed, is this the case or is that just BS? To upgrade this model by 512 is almost triple the cost to upgrade it by 256, is it really worth the extra? also, i'm fairly certain its SW free or close to it becasue i currently run SB, AdAw, and MSAS, but its probably all the useless apps that r running, i'll rid it of some of that junk and go from there. Thankx for the advice, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agumon Posted June 14, 2005 Share Posted June 14, 2005 Maybe old in design but fairly new in reality, less than 2 years. I read somewhere else on the forums that an upgrade of 256 would more than triple the speed, is this the case or is that just BS? i am not certain about this... it depend what and how they calculate... but minimum amount of RAM size to have should be at least 256MB (in my opinion)... To upgrade this model by 512 is almost triple the cost to upgrade it by 256, is it really worth the extra? it depend on the usage of the system actually... if 256MB can meet your requirement... then upgrade to 256MB as desire... but its probably all the useless apps that r running, i'll rid it of some of that junk and go from there. defragment your hard disk too! --==aGumon==-- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now