[Realistic] specs for VS2005

[Mantorok]

What are realistic PC specs for using Visual Studio 2005?

Thanks
Kev

 

[Guest]

What does "reasistic" mean? I'm working on amd64bit 3200 + 1gb ram and found
it rather suitable for work.

What are realistic PC specs for using Visual Studio 2005?

Thanks
Kev

--
WBR,
Michael Nemtsev :: blog: http://spaces.msn.com/laflour

"At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not
cease to be insipid." (c) Friedrich Nietzsche

 

[Mantorok]

Well, have you seen the specs given by MS? You'll know what I mean when I
say "realistic" then.....

Kev

 

[Guest]

Mantorok,
"Realistic", regardless of what the specs promoted by Microsoft are, is a
subjective issue. You could have a "Realistic" box running Active Directory,
Sql Server, and Exchange server on it and find that it isn't quite suitable.
Peter

--
Co-founder, Eggheadcafe.com developer portal:
http://www.eggheadcafe.com
UnBlog:
http://petesbloggerama.blogspot.com

 

[Guest]

I have.
What's wrong with them?

The level of comfortability is different for each of us.
For one 1600x1200 on 22" panel is realistic, for another it's hard to turn
his head so and he use 1024x768 on his laptop.
One install antivirus, mallware, spyware tools and wonder why 2Ghz proc is
too slow, another is happy with 1.5Ghz proc without unnecessary tools

Well, have you seen the specs given by MS? You'll know what I mean when I
say "realistic" then.....

Kev

--
WBR,
Michael Nemtsev :: blog: http://spaces.msn.com/laflour

"At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not
cease to be insipid." (c) Friedrich Nietzsche

 

[Mantorok]

Mantorok,
"Realistic", regardless of what the specs promoted by Microsoft are, is a
subjective issue. You could have a "Realistic" box running Active
Directory,
Sql Server, and Exchange server on it and find that it isn't quite
suitable.

In which case the box wouldn't be realistic

I understand it's subjective, but I've had VS running on a laptop (P4
2.4Ghz, 1Gb ram) and it's running like a pig swimming in treacle,
particularly for ASP.Net development.

You'd think that spec was enough, but it's horrendously slow.

Kev

 

[Guest]

Everything depends how much you RAM is currently used by other applications.
How much CPU is used. Maybe some apps hungs your machine
These could be verified via TaskManager. And add "Virtual Memmory Size"
column to it too.

laptop HDD could hinder performance too, because in general 2.5" laptop's
HDD are too slow, about in 2 times than desktop one

In which case the box wouldn't be realistic

I understand it's subjective, but I've had VS running on a laptop (P4
2.4Ghz, 1Gb ram) and it's running like a pig swimming in treacle,
particularly for ASP.Net development.

You'd think that spec was enough, but it's horrendously slow.

--
WBR,
Michael Nemtsev :: blog: http://spaces.msn.com/laflour

"At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not
cease to be insipid." (c) Friedrich Nietzsche

 

[Michael D. Ober]

The single biggest factor is RAM. I'd recommend as much as your system can
handle - up to 2Gb for 32 bit versions of Windows. The more RAM you have
the better the performance of the VS IDE and debugger.

Mike Ober.

 

[Adam Clauss]

The single biggest factor is RAM. I'd recommend as much as your system
can
handle - up to 2Gb for 32 bit versions of Windows. The more RAM you have
the better the performance of the VS IDE and debugger.

I agree with this. VS2005 seems to be a huge memory hog - PARTICULARLY when
you have ASP.NET pages open (designer pages). For some reason that jumps it
up rather drasticalyl.

 

[Mantorok]

I agree with this. VS2005 seems to be a huge memory hog - PARTICULARLY
when you have ASP.NET pages open (designer pages). For some reason that
jumps it up rather drasticalyl.

This is why I asked, ASP.Net dev was real slow, I've now got 1.5Gb at the
moment on a Pentium M 2Ghz processor and it seems to run really well.

I was just interested to see what people are finding acceptable.

Kev

 

[Adam Clauss]

This is why I asked, ASP.Net dev was real slow, I've now got 1.5Gb at the
moment on a Pentium M 2Ghz processor and it seems to run really well.

I was just interested to see what people are finding acceptable.

Kev

Generally, 1 GB machine will be more than enough, as long as you are staying
away from ASP.NET development. If you're doing ASP.NET, I would recommend
1.5gb-2gb.

It's too bad. I could actually open up two (sometimes more) instances of
VS2003. This was useful when I needed to compare or review things from
multiple solutions. I wouldn't even dream of it now that we've updated to
VS2005.