Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.161.128.52

Forum Moderators: open

Message Too Old, No Replies

XP Home Addition

Is 128 MB of RAM enough?

     
10:57 pm on Aug 3, 2005 (gmt 0)

New User

10+ Year Member

joined:June 24, 2005
posts:9
votes: 0


Hello it was suggested to me that unless I have at least 512 MB of memory, My XP Home Edition performance will be slower than I already have with my current Windows ME. I have a DSL service. That's almost a 400% increase in memory needed for this upgraded? I only have basic program files on my hard drive (only 25% used). Is this large increase really necessary. I know the 128 MB is the minimum required.

Thanks

7:04 am on Aug 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

Administrator from JP 

WebmasterWorld Administrator bill is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Oct 12, 2000
posts:14895
votes: 112


Microsoft's minimum requirements are usually a bit of wishful thinking. ;) Operating Windows XP with anything less than 256MB RAM would be a bit trying. However, adding RAM to your machine is probably one of the cheapest and easiest ways to improve the performance of your machine. With an OS like XP it doesn't pay to skimp on memory.
12:45 pm on Aug 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Mar 14, 2003
posts:508
votes: 0


I have run XP with 160MB, and a reasonably fast 40GB HDD.

It's usable, programs like word, excel and IE worked, software with bigger memory requirements Paintshop etc. were very sluggish.

Later I updated to 288MB, the improvement in speed was very noticeable, although memory hungry applications were still frustratingly slow.

Turning off everything in XP that you don't need - theme's, IR communications, etc. makes a huge difference.

8:12 pm on Aug 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Aug 27, 2002
posts:765
votes: 0


Get as much RAM as possible.
My employer just upgraded to XP and now everything works so sloooow.
One reason might be an antivirus program running in the background, but everything is much slower than before.
5:45 pm on Aug 9, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Dec 27, 2001
posts:762
votes: 0


I wouldn't run XP on less than 512mb. I use 2gb myself.
6:23 pm on Aug 9, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:June 13, 2003
posts:1281
votes: 0


I run 2gig too. I agree with the 512 meg option too. That's enough to keep it running pretty well. I've tried 128 meg before just to see what would happen, and the test computer dragged even though it has a 2.x ghz processor. RAM's cheap, go crazy.
2:01 pm on Sept 8, 2005 (gmt 0)

New User

10+ Year Member

joined:Aug 12, 2005
posts:15
votes: 0


For a real good performance 256 MB is recomonded. So go for it
2:07 pm on Sept 8, 2005 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Mar 25, 2004
posts:161
votes: 0


512 minimum if you want to keep your hair
2:11 pm on Sept 8, 2005 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

10+ Year Member

joined:May 18, 2005
posts:406
votes: 1


I have an old desktop computer with 128 RAM and WIN98. I once installed WIN XP and it ran much slower, almost unusable. So I had to switch back to 98.
1:28 am on Oct 12, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member billys is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member

joined:June 1, 2004
posts:3181
votes: 0


Besides a new CPU, there is nothing better than lots of RAM - and it's cheap today.

I can remember getting a 386 with 16 megs of RAM inside. That was an upgrade from 8 megs. RAM cost $100 a meg back then - my point?

Buy more RAM, you won't be sorry. I build my own PCs and 512 is usually the minimum on XP, 256 is my minimum on Windows 2000 Pro.

6:08 am on Oct 26, 2005 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Oct 20, 2003
posts:526
votes: 0


More Ram - I am running 1GB in most of the computers that I maintain at the office. 512MB worked ok, but the more the merrier. MS seems to always increase the memory you need when they release new versions of windows. When Vista arrives, I guess we will be upgrading the memory again.

The other little trick is to go to start->settings->control panel->system->Advanced tab and adjust the settings for best performance.

I do this with every pc I can, as well as boosting the RAM. Seems to work pretty well, and does away with the annoying flying graphics.

12:55 am on Nov 17, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member from US 

WebmasterWorld Senior Member jab_creations is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member

joined:Aug 26, 2004
posts:3162
votes: 18


More ram isn't good if you're still using your hard drive as memory. Disable virtual memory (the pagefile).

Once your hard drive is allowed to do it's job I would suggest a minimum of 1GB for most users (512 for grama if she's on a real budget). 2GB's are required to run everything plus world of Warcraft (I'm a heavy multitasker).

Just Internet - 512MB
Most People (no games) - 1GB
Moderate to Heavy Gamer - 2GB

7:34 am on Nov 17, 2005 (gmt 0)

Administrator from JP 

WebmasterWorld Administrator bill is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Oct 12, 2000
posts:14895
votes: 112


More ram isn't good if you're still using your hard drive as memory. Disable virtual memory (the pagefile).

Disabling the virtual memory on a machine that is already underpowered in terms of RAM, as indicated in the initial post, would not be the best advice.

For one thing, doing this would waste a lot of RAM. When programs ask for some virtual memory they often ask for a lot more than they ever actually use. This space has to be allocated somewhere on the system. If you have a page file available, the system can assign it there, but if not, it gets assigned to RAM, and then you're tying up what could be hundreds of megabytes from any actual use.

Standard advice is to set your virtual memory pagefile at 2.5 times the size of your RAM. Some advocate more or less depending on how you use the machine.