Windows 2003 - better memory allocation ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Harry Sufehmi
  • Start date Start date
H

Harry Sufehmi

Hi,

We were told by our hoster that Windows 2003 provides better memory
allocation when a server is equipped with more than 2 GB of RAM.
They said this after we stated our intention to host a server with 9
GB of RAM with them (running Windows 2000)

Could anyone confirm this ?

We have standardised on Windows 2000, and although work is already
underway to prepare Windows 2003 as the next corporate standard, using
Windows 2003 now will cause the existence of a non-standard component
in our IT infrasructure.
Which we'd like to avoid whenever possible.

We'd be grateful if anyone could help confirm whether this is true or
not.


Many thanks,
Harry
 
Harry said:
We were told by our hoster that Windows 2003 provides better memory
allocation when a server is equipped with more than 2 GB of RAM.
They said this after we stated our intention to host a server with 9
GB of RAM with them (running Windows 2000)

Could anyone confirm this ?
Click to expand...

What processor architecture are you using?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Similar Threads

4 GB RAM configuration for Oracle 8i 1
Excel 2003 - Inquiring about the benefits of a higher end PC. 2
How Windows uses physical memory 15
Scanner could not allocate required memory 0
Extending the active partition in Window server 2003 0
Max Memory for 2K Advanced 1
Windows Advanced Server Memory 6 GB 2
Allocating memory in Windows 2000 Pro 3

Back
Top