• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

sorry but how much ram in XP?

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

RangerJoe

All that is Man!
Joined
Nov 24, 2001
Location
Stillwater, Oklahoma
umm...this is an edit..

there isnt really a maximum amount..unless you have this one MSI board that supports like 16gb of ram..which im guessing you dont have...and most motherboards only support 3gb of ram...which is more than any regular users will need for a while

the only limit for ram is your motherboard really
 
Last edited:

TUK101

Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2001
Location
Wash. State
OK, I am not going to give you some broad answer like some of the other guys gave you. Windows XP should have at least 256 mb to work descent, and between 384 and 512 depending on what you do, and what type of gaming that you do to run optimally. If you do a lot of video editing, or graphically intensive work you might need more. For the most part though, shoot for 512mb of ram if you can swing it. And if you do decide on 512mb of ram, do it with one, and no more than two sticks if you plan to do much OC'ing. Windows XP I think physically does not have a real cap on the amount of ram that it can use. Windows 98 based OS had a cap of 512 that needed a registry hack to enable more to be used.
 

OC-Master

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2001
Location
Edmonton, Alberta
Two sticks of 512MB is the only way to go now days. You can get by with 512MB but thats starting to cut it for heavy gaming or photoshoping.


OC-Master
 

cullam3n

Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2002
Location
San Antonio, TX
Namagomi said:


word up to that! 1gig represent! :D You can never have too much ram or too much HD space, if ya ask me :burn:

Damn straight! I want to get 5 of thsoe 200GB drives and put them in RAID 0! Da shiznit!

-PC
 

elBogg

Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2001
Location
orlando, fl
The maximum amount of memory that can be supported on Windows XP Professional and Windows .NET Server is also 4 GB. However, Windows .NET Advanced Server supports 32 GB of physical RAM and Windows .NET Datacenter Server supports 64 GB of physical RAM using the PAE feature.

The virtual address space of processes and applications is still limited to 2 GB unless the /3GB switch is used in the Boot.ini file.



this is what it says . . . and apparently applications have to have "IMAGE_FILE_LARGE_ADDRESS_AWARE" in the process header to use the third gig when you use the above switch. i assume that means you have to be using a program that actually supports that particular switch, right?
 

masitti

Member
Joined
May 16, 2002
Location
Colorado
elBogg said:
However, Windows .NET Advanced Server supports 32 GB of physical RAM and Windows .NET Datacenter Server supports 64 GB of physical RAM using the PAE feature.

That's freakin bigger than my hardrive! lol

Anyways, I am getting a gig of RAM soon for the nForce2 boards. I am tired of buying a little bit more RAM, and seeing a small increase. It just isn't worth it. If I buy a gig of this stuff, it's gonna last a year... and I won't have a slow pope computer. :D
 

Needitcooler

Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2002
Location
Seattle
Henry Rollins II said:
Anything less than gigabytes is for whimps ;)

LOL!! I agree fully, but to save anyone reading this thread some money, I will say that XP only needs 256 megs to function correctly. I had 256 for about 6 months, and everything ran as smooth as butter. I only recently decided to upgrade to 1 gig because less than 1 gig IS for wimps.
 

arkan

Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2001
Location
Raleigh, NC
ive used win xp on a machine that had 4 gigs of ram. it was hella slow. reason was the way xp managed the pagefile and what gets swapped out. if you dont change a few registry keys the page file grows exponentially to the size of ram installed. at 4 gigs of ram the pagefile on this machine had its own disk :( but it didnt help bc the machine was having to manipulate a multigigabyte file everytime it paged out or in from the pagefile. add to that the enormous amount of ram the machine used just to cache the filesystem and it adds up to being very inefficient