-
June 11th, 2004, 06:36 PM
#1
Senior Member
The effects of memory
For example i have 1 pc with 512mb ram an another with 1024mb ram. How is the memory helps the system in performance both of this pc requires to perform a task to encode files.. to burn to vcd using nero.
-
June 11th, 2004, 06:54 PM
#2
The speed of the memory might help, but the quanity will probably not. I have 512MB in my system at home and it burns just about the same as another system I have that only has 256MB of ram. (With Nero and same cd burner)
N00b> STFU i r teh 1337 (english: You must be mistaken, good sir or madam. I believe myself to be quite a good player. On an unrelated matter, I also apparently enjoy math.)
-
June 11th, 2004, 11:08 PM
#3
Quality, speed and quantity all help!
the more memory you have, the more programs you can have running and the more tasks you can have running.
It is possible to have too much memory though, I wouldnt put more than 1024MB in a NT/XP system.
Windows 98 tends to go a bit gaa gaa with more than 512MB.
Im not sure about *nix systems!
if you have too much, the O/S doesnt know what to do with it and takes that little bit longer to find the the stuff it needs from it!
-
June 11th, 2004, 11:36 PM
#4
Been there with win98 going belly up because of too much memory. And I reduced it down to 1024 and it somewhat stablized, but at 512 like was mentioned, I feel that's about the best for ole98.
I haven't used Linux for anything memory demanding, so for the applications I use, the boxes scream with 512 as well. Obviously boost your swap to match or exceed your memory!
Connection refused, try again later.
-
June 12th, 2004, 05:06 PM
#5
Senior Member
Can i say to speed up any application process like burning CDs etc a faster CPU would help, for memory intensive applications like video encoding or multi-tasking more memory would help?
For example a application took about 100mb of memory from the system to perform a task on both system assuming same specification same clockspeed. Only difference in memory 1 with 512MB another with 1024MB which one would complete the task first?
-
June 12th, 2004, 08:22 PM
#6
It wouldnt matter, as long as there is a 100MB free for the application anything left over wouldnt need to be used.
If you had more memory though you could open more app's whilst the program is running!
-
June 12th, 2004, 11:33 PM
#7
D. K.
There's actually a lot involved in how "quick" a computer may be or how quick you may be able to make it. Just some of them are:
CPU Capabilities
Bus Speed
L1 & L2 Cache
Quantity and Type of Memory
Hard Disk Speed
How many applications you are using.
Are those applications memory hogs?
What's running in the background.
etc., etc., etc.
Connection refused, try again later.
-
June 12th, 2004, 11:49 PM
#8
However upgrading memory is usually the first, easiest, cheapest and quickest way to spped your system up!
-
June 12th, 2004, 11:55 PM
#9
Nokia,
Thanks for bringing that up, I should have mentioned that it was usually the first thing to do, the cheapest and easiest to accomplish!
Connection refused, try again later.
-
June 13th, 2004, 05:32 AM
#10
Can i say to speed up any application process like burning CDs etc a faster CPU would help, for memory intensive applications like video encoding or multi-tasking more memory would help?
Generally, burning CDs will depend on the capabilities of the CD drive and media that you are using.
Multitasking uses more memory, so you can go to the maximum that the OS will support/use, in theory.
As a rough "rule of thumb", this is what you should be looking for:
Win 98 - 256Mb
Win98SE -384Mb
Win Me - 512Mb
The Windows 9x/Me operating systems are not stable above 512Mb
Windows XP and 2K are quite happy with 1Gb or more.
Processor and motherboard speed are also influential, as is the speed of the RAM (as opposed to quantity) For example, games tend to work much better with faster memory.
You need to be careful when selecting a motherboard, particularly some of the cheaper ones, as you will probably find that although they will support PC3200 RAM, they probably only handle 512Mb of it, whereas the same board will probably take 2Gb of PC2100.
For all practical purposes, once you have a processor running at 2GHz with 512Mb of PC2700, you don't really notice the difference
Cheers
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|