• Welcome to Tux Reports: Where Penguins Fly. We hope you find the topics varied, interesting, and worthy of your time. Please become a member and join in the discussions.

Adding more RAM to Windows XP?

T

Toni

Flightless Bird
Laptop with Windows XP Pro, 1.66GHz/Duo with 2G of RAM.

If I upgrade to 4G RAM - is it always good to upgrade WinXP from 2G to 4G RAM?

Can anyone tell me if there a noticeable hit to battery life? Any downside anyone can
share?

Thanks!!!
 
P

philo

Flightless Bird
Toni wrote:
> Laptop with Windows XP Pro, 1.66GHz/Duo with 2G of RAM.
>
> If I upgrade to 4G RAM - is it always good to upgrade WinXP from 2G to 4G RAM?
>
> Can anyone tell me if there a noticeable hit to battery life? Any downside anyone can
> share?
>
> Thanks!!!
>
>
>



The 32bit version of XP can use about 3.25 gigs of ram

check your machine specs to see how much RAM the laptop can support
 
S

Shenan Stanley

Flightless Bird
Toni wrote:
> Laptop with Windows XP Pro, 1.66GHz/Duo with 2G of RAM.
>
> If I upgrade to 4G RAM - is it always good to upgrade WinXP from 2G
> to 4G RAM?
> Can anyone tell me if there a noticeable hit to battery life? Any
> downside anyone can share?

Are you using the 2GB now? Do you often run out of memory?

Adding more memory (that what you have now - 2GB - for your operating
system - Windows XP, likely 32-bit) is not necessary for most people. Using
AutoCAD? PhotoShop/Illustrator for some big drawings? Editing multi-track
music? Generating animations or editing some heavy-duty videos? Heavy
calculations of any sort? Intense database searches? If no - you likely
are not even coming close to using 2GB.

CTRL+SHIFT+ESC
Performance Tab

Although not the best reference - it is built in and gives you a quick
enough overview to tell if you are running short.

--
Shenan Stanley
MS-MVP
--
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
 
A

ANONYMOUS

Flightless Bird
philo wrote:

>
> The 32bit version of XP can use about 3.25 gigs of ram
>
> check your machine specs to see how much RAM the laptop can support


Have you got similar facts handy about 32 bit of Vista?
 
K

Ken Blake, MVP

Flightless Bird
On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 18:23:28 -0500, "Toni" <Toni24@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Laptop with Windows XP Pro, 1.66GHz/Duo with 2G of RAM.
>
> If I upgrade to 4G RAM - is it always good to upgrade WinXP from 2G to 4G RAM?



No, not at all. In fact for most people, even 2GB is more than you can
make effective use of.

How much RAM you need for good performance is *not* a
one-size-fits-all situation. You get good performance if the amount of
RAM you have keeps you from using the page file significantly, and
that depends on what apps you run. Most people running a typical range
of business applications under XP find that somewhere around 512MB
works well, others need more. 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 page file usage. That should
give you a good idea of whether more memory can help, and if so, how
much more.

--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP (Windows Desktop Experience) since 2003
Please Reply to the Newsgroup
 
P

(PeteCresswell)

Flightless Bird
Per Toni:
>If I upgrade to 4G RAM - is it always good to upgrade WinXP from 2G to 4G RAM?

I did that just on GPs.

But now that I've done it and begun watching TaskMan, I'm hard
pressed to find situations where I am using more than 1.5 gigs of
memory.

That *may* mean I don't know how to read TaskMan's numbers... but
there it is....
--
PeteCresswell
 
J

Jim

Flightless Bird
Since both Vista and XP use memory mapped I/O, I would expect the same
amount of usable Ram.
Jim
"ANONYMOUS" <ANONYMOUS@EXAMPLE.COM> wrote in message
news:eB0jgJHoKHA.4628@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> philo wrote:
>
>>
>> The 32bit version of XP can use about 3.25 gigs of ram
>>
>> check your machine specs to see how much RAM the laptop can support
>
>
> Have you got similar facts handy about 32 bit of Vista?
>
 
P

philo

Flightless Bird
ANONYMOUS wrote:
>
> philo wrote:
>
>>
>> The 32bit version of XP can use about 3.25 gigs of ram
>>
>> check your machine specs to see how much RAM the laptop can support
>
>
> Have you got similar facts handy about 32 bit of Vista?
>



The OS does not matter it's a function of all 32bit operating systems

the exception is PAE (Google for it)

If one needs large amounts of RAM

then a 64bit OS is the way to go
 
J

Jose

Flightless Bird
On Jan 28, 6:23 pm, "Toni" <Ton...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Laptop with Windows XP Pro, 1.66GHz/Duo  with 2G of RAM.
>
> If I upgrade to 4G RAM - is it always good to upgrade WinXP from 2G to 4GRAM?
>
> Can anyone tell me if there a noticeable hit to battery life? Any downside anyone can
> share?
>
> Thanks!!!

Do what makes sense for you and you environment so the end result will
not leave any questions.

If you have the means ($$$), put in 4GB into your unspecified system.
Then you will know that you have the best you can possibly have.

If you are a general purpose computer user eliminate the questions.

You will never have to wonder if you need more or if adding more will
make your system faster or work "better". It will be physically
impossible for things to be better concerning the amount of much
memory in your system if you have the maximum supported.

No discussion, no what ifs, no might be, no could be, no maybe, no
might need it, no might not need it, nothing to download, nothing to
install, nothing to run, nothing to interpret or monitor, etc.
 
K

Ken Blake, MVP

Flightless Bird
On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 20:27:41 -0600, "Jim" <j.n@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> Since both Vista and XP use memory mapped I/O, I would expect the same
> amount of usable Ram.


Also Windows 7. It's the same maximum amount (depending on your
hardware, between 2 and 3.5GB, usually around 3.1G8) in all 32-bit
versions of Windows.


> "ANONYMOUS" <ANONYMOUS@EXAMPLE.COM> wrote in message
> news:eB0jgJHoKHA.4628@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> > philo wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> The 32bit version of XP can use about 3.25 gigs of ram
> >>
> >> check your machine specs to see how much RAM the laptop can support
> >
> >
> > Have you got similar facts handy about 32 bit of Vista?
> >
>
>

--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP (Windows Desktop Experience) since 2003
Please Reply to the Newsgroup
 
D

db

Flightless Bird
I agree with your response.

it is not for us to determine
how the o.p. will use their
computer.

the upside would be
if the computer had the
available slots for adding
more ram "or"

the downside would be
if the chips the o.p. has
now would have to be
replaced.


--
db·´¯`·...¸><)))º>
DatabaseBen, Retired Professional
- Systems Analyst
- Database Developer
- Accountancy
- Veteran of the Armed Forces
- @Hotmail.com
- nntp Postologist
~ "share the nirvana" - dbZen

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>

"Jose" <jose_ease@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:7c19d296-8b98-499d-b49d-ca4d23253251@y12g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
> On Jan 28, 6:23 pm, "Toni" <Ton...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Laptop with Windows XP Pro, 1.66GHz/Duo with 2G of RAM.
>>
>> If I upgrade to 4G RAM - is it always good to upgrade WinXP from 2G to 4G
>> RAM?
>>
>> Can anyone tell me if there a noticeable hit to battery life? Any
>> downside anyone can
>> share?
>>
>> Thanks!!!
>
> Do what makes sense for you and you environment so the end result will
> not leave any questions.
>
> If you have the means ($$$), put in 4GB into your unspecified system.
> Then you will know that you have the best you can possibly have.
>
> If you are a general purpose computer user eliminate the questions.
>
> You will never have to wonder if you need more or if adding more will
> make your system faster or work "better". It will be physically
> impossible for things to be better concerning the amount of much
> memory in your system if you have the maximum supported.
>
> No discussion, no what ifs, no might be, no could be, no maybe, no
> might need it, no might not need it, nothing to download, nothing to
> install, nothing to run, nothing to interpret or monitor, etc.
>
>
 
T

Twayne

Flightless Bird
In news:edUYtDHoKHA.1556@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl,
Toni <Toni24@yahoo.com> typed:
> Laptop with Windows XP Pro, 1.66GHz/Duo with 2G of RAM.
>
> If I upgrade to 4G RAM - is it always good to upgrade WinXP from 2G
> to 4G RAM?
> Can anyone tell me if there a noticeable hit to battery life? Any
> downside anyone can share?
>
> Thanks!!!

No, it will not impact the BIOS battery life in any way and would be
negligible to a UPS's numbers.

2G is likely enough; it depends on what you do. There are many pagefile
monitors available that you can run and watch to see if your pagefile is
ever maxed out. Task Manager isn't a good indicator for this because it not
only requires RAM space, which skews the numbers, but it doesn't clearly and
concisely pinpoint actual pagefile usage; such has to be deduced and then
isn't accurate depending on WHEN you look at it.

These links should help you out:

http://articles.techrepublic.com.com/5100-10878_11-5073570.html

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555223

http://www.softpedia.com/get/System/File-Management/XP-Page-File-Monitor.shtml


HTH,

Twayne
 
U

Unknown

Flightless Bird
Laptop battery, not the BIOS battery.
"Twayne" <nobody@spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:u0pyGzQoKHA.1552@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> In news:edUYtDHoKHA.1556@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl,
> Toni <Toni24@yahoo.com> typed:
>> Laptop with Windows XP Pro, 1.66GHz/Duo with 2G of RAM.
>>
>> If I upgrade to 4G RAM - is it always good to upgrade WinXP from 2G
>> to 4G RAM?
>> Can anyone tell me if there a noticeable hit to battery life? Any
>> downside anyone can share?
>>
>> Thanks!!!
>
> No, it will not impact the BIOS battery life in any way and would be
> negligible to a UPS's numbers.
>
> 2G is likely enough; it depends on what you do. There are many pagefile
> monitors available that you can run and watch to see if your pagefile is
> ever maxed out. Task Manager isn't a good indicator for this because it
> not only requires RAM space, which skews the numbers, but it doesn't
> clearly and concisely pinpoint actual pagefile usage; such has to be
> deduced and then isn't accurate depending on WHEN you look at it.
>
> These links should help you out:
>
> http://articles.techrepublic.com.com/5100-10878_11-5073570.html
>
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555223
>
> http://www.softpedia.com/get/System/File-Management/XP-Page-File-Monitor.shtml
>
>
> HTH,
>
> Twayne
>
>
>
>
 
T

Toni

Flightless Bird
"Ken Blake, MVP" wrote...
> On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 18:23:28 -0500, "Toni" wrote:
>
>> Laptop with Windows XP Pro, 1.66GHz/Duo with 2G of RAM.
>>
>> If I upgrade to 4G RAM - is it always good to upgrade WinXP from 2G to 4G RAM?
>
:
> 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.

I'm running a page file monitor as part of SystemSuite 7. With 2G RAM and my pagefile
set to 2G, after the past two days my pagefile usage has been 42% max, 35% typical.

During a typical work day, I run Firefox with 15 or more open tabs. FF starts up using
150M, but after a few hours it sucks 500M+ of RAM and my system noticeably slows - I
need to close FF then reopen to reclaim the RAM.

From reading the responses on this thread, there seems to be no downside to upgrading
RAM from 2G to 4G other than cost. As far as battery draw, I guess I'll have to get the
specs on the RAM modules and run the current draw numbers myself.

Thanks to everyone that replied!
 
K

Ken Blake, MVP

Flightless Bird
On Sat, 30 Jan 2010 12:51:03 -0500, "Toni" <Toni24@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
> "Ken Blake, MVP" wrote...
> > On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 18:23:28 -0500, "Toni" wrote:
> >
> >> Laptop with Windows XP Pro, 1.66GHz/Duo with 2G of RAM.
> >>
> >> If I upgrade to 4G RAM - is it always good to upgrade WinXP from 2G to 4G RAM?
> >
> :
> > 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.
>
> I'm running a page file monitor as part of SystemSuite 7. With 2G RAM and my pagefile
> set to 2G, after the past two days my pagefile usage has been 42% max, 35% typical.



Where are you seeing that number? Be careful not to mix up page file
allocation with page file use.


> During a typical work day, I run Firefox with 15 or more open tabs. FF starts up using
> 150M, but after a few hours it sucks 500M+ of RAM and my system noticeably slows - I
> need to close FF then reopen to reclaim the RAM.
>
> From reading the responses on this thread, there seems to be no downside to upgrading
> RAM from 2G to 4G other than cost.


Right. It's a waste of money for most people (even 2GB is more than
most people running XP can make effective use of), but it doesn't hurt
you in any way.


> As far as battery draw, I guess I'll have to get the
> specs on the RAM modules and run the current draw numbers myself.
>
> Thanks to everyone that replied!
>
>

--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP (Windows Desktop Experience) since 2003
Please Reply to the Newsgroup
 
T

Toni

Flightless Bird
"Toni"wrote...
> Laptop with Windows XP Pro, 1.66GHz/Duo with 2G of RAM.
>
> If I upgrade to 4G RAM - is it always good to upgrade WinXP from 2G to 4G RAM?
>
> Can anyone tell me if there a noticeable hit to battery life? Any downside anyone can
> share?
>
> Thanks!!!
>

Follow-up...

Went from 2G to 4G RAM (of course, XP shows only 3.24G available), and after testing
reduced my swap file setting from 2G/4G to 1.5G/1.5G.

Laptop is NOTICEABLY FASTER!!! Max swap file usage never goes above 12% and is normally
at 2%. RAM usage has never gone above 56%.

Oddly enough, battery life seems to be improved?!?!?!? It must be that accessing the
extra RAM is more efficient than hard disk usage for the swap file - never thought of
that!

Toni
 
T

Tim Slattery

Flightless Bird
"Toni" <Toni@nowhere.com> wrote:

>Went from 2G to 4G RAM (of course, XP shows only 3.24G available), and after testing
>reduced my swap file setting from 2G/4G to 1.5G/1.5G.

>Laptop is NOTICEABLY FASTER!!! Max swap file usage never goes above 12% and is normally
>at 2%. RAM usage has never gone above 56%.

>Oddly enough, battery life seems to be improved?!?!?!? It must be that accessing the
>extra RAM is more efficient than hard disk usage for the swap file - never thought of
>that!

I can easily believe that operating the disk takes more juice than
reading/writing RAM.

--
Tim Slattery
Slattery_T@bls.gov
http://members.cox.net/slatteryt
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top