256MB vs. 512MB

FrankMasterFlash · Oct 18, 2001

Is there that much of a performance increase between 256MB and 512MB. Is it worth me getting the extra 256MB.

I run Windows 2000 sp2. It will be SD-RAM. I do do some gaming and such. TIA!

Maximus Nickus · Oct 19, 2001

windows 200 will benefit more than win 9x from mem upgrades, if you can afford it then yeah get it, just make sure you dont go over 512mb unless u have xp or it will be slower....

Sonny · Oct 19, 2001

nick_cw said:
windows 200 will benefit more than win 9x from mem upgrades, if you can afford it then yeah get it, just make sure you dont go over 512mb unless u have xp or it will be slower....

W2K will benefit from more memory than W98, that is true. W2K slower with more than 512Mb is wrong. The limit is 2048Mb.

JaY_III · Oct 20, 2001

in XP (may also be 2k) when you have 512 megs of RAM or more you can load the kernal 100% into memory....
This is much faster then when only parts are in memory and other parts of the kernal are in a page file.
That reson alone is why 512 is better than 256

Speed_Freak · Oct 20, 2001

but will having the entire kernel loaded into your memory slow other things down like applications, games, rendering etc?

JaY_III · Oct 21, 2001

not at all....
makes things faster for me as when something needs to acess the kernal, it gets the info strait from RAM...
not having to read from a slow page file.

.. AE 86 .. · Oct 21, 2001

more ram = better

256MB vs. 512MB

FrankMasterFlash

Senior Member

Maximus Nickus

Senior Shaman

Sonny

Senior TIFOSI

JaY_III

Senior of BX

Speed_Freak

Member

JaY_III

Senior of BX

.. AE 86 ..

Member

Similar threads