0

in windows xp i only get 248mb when i have 256mb but if i was to upgrade to windows vista that requires 512mb and i get 512mb of ram would it read below 512mb so it wouldnt be compatible

please help
i want to get vista
cheers
bondi 007

8
Contributors
28
Replies
29
Views
10 Years
Discussion Span
Last Post by bondi007
0

I doubt it would run anyway. Vista on 512mb is unbearable. 1 gig under vista yields about the same performance as 256mb does on XP.

0

im only using it for testing all the good features are turned off but is it possible or would it take away memory

cheers
bondi 007

0

yeah it would be below

e.g i have a thinkpad. Its graphics card steals 8mb of ram

e.g if i have 128mb ram i get 120, if i have 512 i get 508 etc....

so yes you will end up with less than 512mb.

0

damn, man.. you are all over Daniweb! It doesn't matter which forum I go to, you are there helping people :) I'm not as patient or skilled to be able to do that yet..

so yes you will end up with less than 512mb.

but, you might still be able to install.. just try and see what happens.

0

i got a bit greedy and just bot 1 gig of ram because you said it runs like 256 in xp so i trusted you

cheers 4 advice

0

yea, youll need it. Vista is a memory hog. When idle it uses like 400mb (about 700 aero with effects, sidebat erc)

0

My calculations here says that while viewing with IE and typing right now and running the computer as I normally do (full usage), vista uses about 600-610 mb.

0

i actually run vista with 1 gig, and i'm expecting my pc to die someday soon... i think it was a bad idea installing vista on a computer this old... (about 2 years)... i've already reached its maximum capacity...

though somewhere out there i read that vista has a new feature in which you can use flash devices as auxiliary ram... how accurate is that?

0

NO DONT DO IT!

That is NOT a new techonlogy even although MS are making it out to be.

Its the same idea as paging to the hard disk which is almost as old as computers themselves.

Basically when you run out fo RAM it pages to the HDD. HDD = Slow as its mechanical. RAM = fast as its electric. Thats why when you do something intensive you can hear the hard disk clicking away and the light goes

Hard disks are still much faster than USB devices though. Therefore, using USB devices as RAM is a BAD idea.

Also, hard disks are designed for paging but memory keys etc... are not. A usb memory key will wear out after about 100,000 reads/writes. If you play a game and it pages a lot, for example you could wear out your memory key in a day.

Silly ms....

0

NO DONT DO IT!

That is NOT a new techonlogy even although MS are making it out to be.

Its the same idea as paging to the hard disk which is almost as old as computers themselves.

Basically when you run out fo RAM it pages to the HDD. HDD = Slow as its mechanical. RAM = fast as its electric. Thats why when you do something intensive you can hear the hard disk clicking away and the light goes

Hard disks are still much faster than USB devices though. Therefore, using USB devices as RAM is a BAD idea.

Also, hard disks are designed for paging but memory keys etc... are not. A usb memory key will wear out after about 100,000 reads/writes. If you play a game and it pages a lot, for example you could wear out your memory key in a day.

Silly ms....

Really? I've been using my usb as ram for a month now and I've been playing a LOT of games during the time. The usb's still alive and kicking. :-/

0

that's curious, because flash based hard drives should wear out after some time using it, just as jbennet said...

oh my god!!!! you've discovered the immortal usb drive!!! grant us with your mercy, oh! divine usb drive...

0

it runs ok just like my xp did but is 1gig good fro game for the vista

cheers
bondi 007

0

no.

vista uses like 400 - 700mb just to run , leaving you with nothing fot games.

general rule is that you half the ram

e.g

1gb in vista is the same performance as 512 in XP

2gb in vista is the same performance as 1gb in XP

0

it runs ok just like my xp did but is 1gig good fro game for the vista

cheers
bondi 007

Depends on the game -- Chess Titans, Solitaire, Hearts, etc all run ok on 1 gig. I also like Silverfall which was horribly slow so I bought another gig. It ran a lot better but still somewhat sluggish. Someone told me Vista wants all programs to run completly in memory and not swap from its own program file as it would have in previous versions of MS-Windows.

0

hey i use a gig too....i find it handles the sims 2 extremely well (a known resource hog) even in wondowed mode (which, in vista, is really the bad way to play games since vista uses up your resources for its "aero").

I think it has something to do as well with your GPU and CPU. If your GPU is low end, vista will eat into your processor to get the resources it needs, and if your processor is also low end...then you'd be better off without vista.

As for memory hogging, it does do it, and jbennet is right about the average it uses, but when i play my games they run just fine, and that doesn't seem to affect the speed of my apps either (and I multitask a lot with some apps on the more demanding side), so I don't really pay attention to it. I even have a theory about what it might be (remember that superfetch ridiculousness they kept bragging about?), even though i have neither the time nor the inclination to turn it off and be sure...

0

You know.. its interesting in vista.. you know how they give you a score for your hardware components or w/e? Well, when I initially installed vista, I had one gig of ram and a rating of 4.2. After my cpu and ram upgrade to 2 gigs, my score fail to 4.0 lol.. wth is up with that? All the ram is read fine btw..

0

My pc gets 2.3 Its a new dell, Core 2 Duo with 2gb ram, geforce 7600 etc.... whereas my old dell with P4HT, radeon x600 and 1gb ram gets 2.2 ??? wtf!

0

yea, my score is like 2.3 b/c my graphics card is some cheap $20 piece of junk.. but every other component is like 4+

I wonder what you would need to have a score of 10..

0

They do the score based on the weakest component in the computer, and according to them its not an average...whatever the weakest component gets, the whole comp gets it.

So uh...what's the point of this whole score thing dissing our comps anyway?

0

Yea, I know how the scoring works...

And idk how the hell ms gave the server a 1.4 lmao.. musta had some crappy graphics card or somethn

0

I've got a score of 2.5..

3.4 for 2400 MHz processor (not dual core) :confused:
4.0 for 1 gb ram:?:
2.5 for desktop graphics -256 mb geforce 5500:'(
2.6 for gaming graphics ditto
a whopping 4.9 for a 40 gb hard drive with two 20 gb partitions one of which vista is installed on :-O

0

ok then vista is telling us totally wron ideas

i dont get it

ha

cheers
bondi007

This topic has been dead for over six months. Start a new discussion instead.
Have something to contribute to this discussion? Please be thoughtful, detailed and courteous, and be sure to adhere to our posting rules.