XP Pro RAM usage

  • Thread starter Thread starter _DD
  • Start date Start date
D

_DD

I know that in general, XP will try to make use of as much ram as is
available. But I'd love to know where the performance tradeoffs
'corner' in systems with medium to heavy usage.

In other words, I expect the change from 512MB to 1GB to be fairly
significant. How will the change from 1GB to 1.5GB compare to that?
(I would not expect a linear curve)
 
_DD said:
I know that in general, XP will try to make use of as much ram as is
available. But I'd love to know where the performance tradeoffs
'corner' in systems with medium to heavy usage.

In other words, I expect the change from 512MB to 1GB to be fairly
significant. How will the change from 1GB to 1.5GB compare to that?
(I would not expect a linear curve)
Click to expand...

It sounds like a cop out, but it depends on what applications you're
running. Photoshop, for instance is a memory hog, as are many games.
 
An observation;
If you run memory intensive apps, typically graphics, an increase to 1gb
'may' show
however if you run std office apps you are unlikelt to notice, even with
several open at the same time.
 
Hi _DD,

Adding ram benefits to relieve paging (which is generally slower and can
cause excessive hard drive activity). Depending on the system, its
configuration, and the software installed and actively used, once you reach
the point where active paging is minimal there is no real benefit to
additional ram. There is no "set" point that applies to everyone. Users of
video editing and hard core gamers often will make full use of 2GB of ram or
better, while Grandma doing email and surfing crocheting sites will be just
fine with 256MB. An average home user can do fine with 512MB until they are
infested with spy/adware, at which point the system will slow to a grinding
halt. It doesn't mean they need more ram, it means they need to clean out
the junk.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP

Windows help - www.rickrogers.org
 
I am a performance junky.

I a freely admit this.

I generally like to see at least 45% of my RAM not being utilized when I am
at normal activity levels. This allows for there to be resources available
for bursts of activity.
So my main desktop has 2GB of RAM , My laptop has 1GB of RAM.

Theretically 4GB is the MAX I think, but if I am using that much RAM, I
probably shouldn't be using XP.

I realize that is unrealistic for most people, but RAM is relatively cheap.

Also do not forget there are four basic performance bottlenecks, CPU, RAM,
Disk access speed, and for some things Network access speed.
A deficiency in any one of these can cause a systemic slow down.

To a lesser extent, GPU is also a factor.

--
Manny Borges
MCSE NT4-2003 (+ Security)
MCT, Certified Cheese Master

There are 10 kinds of people in the world. Those who do understand binary
and those who don't.
 
As a very general rule of thumb you have to double the existing ram to
notice a difference. 256 MB to 512 MB you will notice a big difference, 512
to 1 GB is quite noticable, 1 GB to 2 GB is noticable but the returns are
starting to diminish for normal use. Above 2 GB you won't notice much
difference ecept with some special purpose programs. Contrary to what others
are saying I can notice a difference up to the 2 GB mark. This all assumes
that something else like the CPU or a slow hard drive aren't causing a
bottleneck.
 
_DD said:
I know that in general, XP will try to make use of as much ram as is
available. But I'd love to know where the performance tradeoffs
'corner' in systems with medium to heavy usage.

In other words, I expect the change from 512MB to 1GB to be fairly
significant.
Click to expand...


Actually, it probably will *not* be significant (although it depends on what
apps you run). The improvement may even be zero.

How will the change from 1GB to 1.5GB compare to that?
(I would not expect a linear curve)
Click to expand...


It not only isn't linear, it really isn't even a curve. For most people,
going from 1GB to 1.5GB will provide *no* increase in performance.

You get good performance if the amount of RAM you have keeps you from using
the page file, and that depends on what apps you run. Most people running a
typical range of business applications find that somewhere around 256-384MB
works well, others need 512MB. Almost anyone will see poor performance with
less than 256MB. Some people, particularly those doing things like editing
large photographic images, can see a performance boost by adding even more
than 512MB--sometimes much more.

If you are currently using the page file significantly, more memory will
decrease or eliminate that usage, and improve your performance. If you are
not using the page file significantly, more memory will do nothing for you.
Go to http://billsway.com/notes_public/winxp_tweaks/ and download
WinXP-2K_Pagefile.zip and monitor your pagefile usage. That should give you
a good idea of whether more memory can help, and if so, how much more.
 
Back
Top