Upgrade of memory question

June 7, 2008

Hi, ive got a computer thats about 3 years old right now its got 1gb DDR PC3200

im not sure whats the max i can put in it is it 2 gig or??

Ive got 512mb DDR and not sure if its ok if i put it in or not.. any

suggestions??

Thanks very much for your help

June 7, 2008

Re: Upgrade of memory question

--Ivan-- wrote:

> Hi, ive got a computer thats about 3 years old right now its got 1gb DDR PC3200

> im not sure whats the max i can put in it is it 2 gig or??

> Ive got 512mb DDR and not sure if its ok if i put it in or not.. any

> suggestions??

> Thanks very much for your help

You should have a manual or you can go to your manufacturer's home page

and see what they have for download.

Failing that, then I like this utility from CPUID called CPU-Z.

http://www.cpuid.com/index.php

It seems to dump a good amount of info about the memory chips and the

sockets you have etc.

Crucial.com also has a scanner that you can run to diagnose the same

issue. Crucial is a good manufacturer of memory. I download the

utility, did not run the online scan. (just me).

June 7, 2008

Re: Upgrade of memory question

What is the Make and Model of your PC?

JS

"--Ivan--" <Ivan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message

news:CEC260F0-00A9-4DE6-A101-0EEE18710CC4@microsoft.com...

> Hi, ive got a computer thats about 3 years old right now its got 1gb DDR

> PC3200

> im not sure whats the max i can put in it is it 2 gig or??

> Ive got 512mb DDR and not sure if its ok if i put it in or not.. any

> suggestions??

> Thanks very much for your help

June 7, 2008

Re: Upgrade of memory question

--Ivan-- wrote:

> Hi, ive got a computer thats about 3 years old right now its got 1gb DDR PC3200

> im not sure whats the max i can put in it is it 2 gig or??

> Ive got 512mb DDR and not sure if its ok if i put it in or not.. any

> suggestions??

> Thanks very much for your help

Go to http://www.crucial.com/ and use the tools on that web page.

--

Lem -- MS-MVP

To the moon and back with 2K words of RAM and 36K words of ROM.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_Guidance_Computer

http://history.nasa.gov/afj/compessay.htm

June 7, 2008

Re: Upgrade of memory question

--Ivan-- wrote:

> Hi, ive got a computer thats about 3 years old right now its got 1gb

DDR PC3200

> im not sure whats the max i can put in it is it 2 gig or??

> Ive got 512mb DDR and not sure if its ok if i put it in or not.. any

> suggestions??

> Thanks very much for your help

Probably 4GB max. Adding the 512MB module should be fine. Dual channel

memory controllers may require it be placed in a specific slot.

June 7, 2008

Re: Upgrade of memory question

--Ivan-- wrote:

> Hi, ive got a computer thats about 3 years old right now its got 1gb DDR PC3200

> im not sure whats the max i can put in it is it 2 gig or??

> Ive got 512mb DDR and not sure if its ok if i put it in or not.. any

> suggestions??

> Thanks very much for your help

I've read messages about people having issues with >3gigs. Seems

someplace around 3.x gigs on XP 32 bit, it can't see. So putting 4

gig in might not be of value. I have no specs on all this, but for sure

2 or 3 gig would not hurt you (max). 512 is worth thinking about

upgrading.

Someone might interject some factual info on this upper limit.

June 7, 2008

Re: Upgrade of memory question

On Jun 6, 9:32 pm, Big_Al <Bi...@MD.com> wrote:

> I've read messages about people having issues with >3gigs. Seems

> someplace around 3.x gigs on XP 32 bit, it can't see. So putting 4

> gig in might not be of value. I have no specs on all this, but for sure

> 2 or 3 gig would not hurt you (max). 512 is worth thinking about

> upgrading.

Also, a little known fact about my motherboard is that using the 4Gb

max will force you to run @ 333Mhz instead of the normal 400Mhz max.

I would rather have 3Gbs @ 400Mhz than 4Gbs @ 333Mhz.

Always read the fine print.

June 7, 2008

Re: Upgrade of memory question

Big_Al wrote:

> --Ivan-- wrote:

>> Hi, ive got a computer thats about 3 years old right now its got 1gb

>> DDR PC3200

>> im not sure whats the max i can put in it is it 2 gig or??

>> Ive got 512mb DDR and not sure if its ok if i put it in or not.. any

>> suggestions??

>> Thanks very much for your help

> I've read messages about people having issues with >3gigs. Seems

> someplace around 3.x gigs on XP 32 bit, it can't see. So putting 4

> gig in might not be of value. I have no specs on all this, but for sure

> 2 or 3 gig would not hurt you (max). 512 is worth thinking about

> upgrading.

>

> Someone might interject some factual info on this upper limit.

It's not "issues." See "4 GB RAM in Windows XP" by MS-MVP Tim Slattery

http://members.cox.net/slatteryt/RAM.html

--

Lem -- MS-MVP

To the moon and back with 2K words of RAM and 36K words of ROM.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_Guidance_Computer

http://history.nasa.gov/afj/compessay.htm

June 7, 2008

Re: Upgrade of memory question

Unless he's got a good reason for adding memory 1GB is fine for most PC's.

He also did not say how many free slots are available.

JS

"--Ivan--" <Ivan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message

news:CEC260F0-00A9-4DE6-A101-0EEE18710CC4@microsoft.com...

> Hi, ive got a computer thats about 3 years old right now its got 1gb DDR

> PC3200

> im not sure whats the max i can put in it is it 2 gig or??

> Ive got 512mb DDR and not sure if its ok if i put it in or not.. any

> suggestions??

> Thanks very much for your help

June 7, 2008

Re: Upgrade of memory question

Lem wrote:

> Big_Al wrote:

>> --Ivan-- wrote:

>>> Hi, ive got a computer thats about 3 years old right now its got 1gb

>>> DDR PC3200

>>> im not sure whats the max i can put in it is it 2 gig or??

>>> Ive got 512mb DDR and not sure if its ok if i put it in or not.. any

>>> suggestions??

>>> Thanks very much for your help

>> I've read messages about people having issues with >3gigs. Seems

>> someplace around 3.x gigs on XP 32 bit, it can't see. So putting 4

>> gig in might not be of value. I have no specs on all this, but for

>> sure 2 or 3 gig would not hurt you (max). 512 is worth thinking

>> about upgrading.

>>

>> Someone might interject some factual info on this upper limit.

>

> It's not "issues." See "4 GB RAM in Windows XP" by MS-MVP Tim Slattery

> http://members.cox.net/slatteryt/RAM.html

>

Well, if its not an issue then what is it, a hidden feature?

By 'issue' I mean its a thing that users are dealing with. If it were

not an issue then no one would be asking questions.

Its semantics, issue/smissue, but call it what you want, its still

something to know and understand.

June 7, 2008

Re: Upgrade of memory question

On Sat, 07 Jun 2008 01:32:45 GMT, Big_Al <BigAl@MD.com> wrote:

> --Ivan-- wrote:

> > Hi, ive got a computer thats about 3 years old right now its got 1gb DDR PC3200

> > im not sure whats the max i can put in it is it 2 gig or??

> > Ive got 512mb DDR and not sure if its ok if i put it in or not.. any

> > suggestions??

> > Thanks very much for your help

> I've read messages about people having issues with >3gigs. Seems

> someplace around 3.x gigs on XP 32 bit, it can't see. So putting 4

> gig in might not be of value.

All 32-bit client versions of Windows (not just XP) have a 4GB address

space. That's the theoretical upper limit beyond which you can not go.

But you can't use the entire 4GB of address space. Even though you

have a 4GB address space, you can only use *around* 3.1GB of RAM.

That's because some of that space is used by hardware and is not

available to the operating system and applications. The amount you can

use varies, depending on what hardware you have installed, but can

range from as little as 2GB to as much as 3.5GB. It's usually around

3.1GB.

Note that the hardware is using the address *space*, not the actual

RAM itself. The rest of the RAM goes unused because there is no

address space to map it too.

> I have no specs on all this, but for sure

> 2 or 3 gig would not hurt you (max).

4GB won't hurt him either. It may not help, but certainly won't hurt.

Over and above how much RAM he *can* install, Ivan should think about

how much he can make effective use of. Despite how often you hear that

more RAM will increase your performance, that's true only up to a

limit, and for most people, the 1GB he already has is already above

that limit.

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, 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%5Fpublic/winxp%5Ftweaks/ 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.

--

Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience

Please Reply to the Newsgroup

June 7, 2008

Re: Upgrade of memory question

Question Ken,

If you only have 512MB of ram (which for most users is considered enough)

then where does XP go to use that memory often mentioned by you and others

as "some of that space is used by hardware". And if so does it include

hardware such as a Video card with 256MB of onboard ram and how much memory

would the video card use of that 4GB of memory?

JS

"Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote in message

news:c3bl44dsf4l3kgh9qrvp7eil549kg2nn3m@4ax.com...

> On Sat, 07 Jun 2008 01:32:45 GMT, Big_Al <BigAl@MD.com> wrote:

>

>> --Ivan-- wrote:

>> > Hi, ive got a computer thats about 3 years old right now its got 1gb

>> > DDR PC3200

>> > im not sure whats the max i can put in it is it 2 gig or??

>> > Ive got 512mb DDR and not sure if its ok if i put it in or not.. any

>> > suggestions??

>> > Thanks very much for your help

>

>> I've read messages about people having issues with >3gigs. Seems

>> someplace around 3.x gigs on XP 32 bit, it can't see. So putting 4

>> gig in might not be of value.

>

> All 32-bit client versions of Windows (not just XP) have a 4GB address

> space. That's the theoretical upper limit beyond which you can not go.

> But you can't use the entire 4GB of address space. Even though you

> have a 4GB address space, you can only use *around* 3.1GB of RAM.

> That's because some of that space is used by hardware and is not

> available to the operating system and applications. The amount you can

> use varies, depending on what hardware you have installed, but can

> range from as little as 2GB to as much as 3.5GB. It's usually around

> 3.1GB.

>

> Note that the hardware is using the address *space*, not the actual

> RAM itself. The rest of the RAM goes unused because there is no

> address space to map it too.

>

>> I have no specs on all this, but for sure

>> 2 or 3 gig would not hurt you (max).

>

> 4GB won't hurt him either. It may not help, but certainly won't hurt.

>

> Over and above how much RAM he *can* install, Ivan should think about

> how much he can make effective use of. Despite how often you hear that

> more RAM will increase your performance, that's true only up to a

> limit, and for most people, the 1GB he already has is already above

> that limit.

>

> 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, 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%5Fpublic/winxp%5Ftweaks/ 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.

>

> --

> Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience

> Please Reply to the Newsgroup

June 7, 2008

Re: Upgrade of memory question

On Sat, 7 Jun 2008 12:09:37 -0400, "JS" <@> wrote:

> Question Ken,

>

> If you only have 512MB of ram (which for most users is considered enough)

> then where does XP go to use that memory often mentioned by you and others

> as "some of that space is used by hardware".

No, note that it does not use *memory* for that which I've cited as

"some of that space is used by hardware." What it uses is *address

space*, which is not physical RAM. It has a 4GB address space,

regardless of how much RAM you have. If, for example, it needs 1GB of

address space for your hardware, that leaves 3GB of address space to

map your physical RAM. RAM can't be used unless it has available

address space to map to, so that remaining 3GB of address space is the

limiting factor for how much RAM you can use.

Note the last paragraph of my first comment below: "Note that the

hardware is using the address *space*, not the actual RAM itself. The

rest of the RAM goes unused because there is no address space to map

it too."

> And if so does it include

> hardware such as a Video card with 256MB of onboard ram and how much memory

> would the video card use of that 4GB of memory?

>

> JS

>

> "Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote in message

> news:c3bl44dsf4l3kgh9qrvp7eil549kg2nn3m@4ax.com...

> > On Sat, 07 Jun 2008 01:32:45 GMT, Big_Al <BigAl@MD.com> wrote:

> >

> >> --Ivan-- wrote:

> >> > Hi, ive got a computer thats about 3 years old right now its got 1gb

> >> > DDR PC3200

> >> > im not sure whats the max i can put in it is it 2 gig or??

> >> > Ive got 512mb DDR and not sure if its ok if i put it in or not.. any

> >> > suggestions??

> >> > Thanks very much for your help

> >

> >> I've read messages about people having issues with >3gigs. Seems

> >> someplace around 3.x gigs on XP 32 bit, it can't see. So putting 4

> >> gig in might not be of value.

> >

> > All 32-bit client versions of Windows (not just XP) have a 4GB address

> > space. That's the theoretical upper limit beyond which you can not go.

> > But you can't use the entire 4GB of address space. Even though you

> > have a 4GB address space, you can only use *around* 3.1GB of RAM.

> > That's because some of that space is used by hardware and is not

> > available to the operating system and applications. The amount you can

> > use varies, depending on what hardware you have installed, but can

> > range from as little as 2GB to as much as 3.5GB. It's usually around

> > 3.1GB.

> >

> > Note that the hardware is using the address *space*, not the actual

> > RAM itself. The rest of the RAM goes unused because there is no

> > address space to map it too.

> >

> >> I have no specs on all this, but for sure

> >> 2 or 3 gig would not hurt you (max).

> >

> > 4GB won't hurt him either. It may not help, but certainly won't hurt.

> >

> > Over and above how much RAM he *can* install, Ivan should think about

> > how much he can make effective use of. Despite how often you hear that

> > more RAM will increase your performance, that's true only up to a

> > limit, and for most people, the 1GB he already has is already above

> > that limit.

> >

> > 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, 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%5Fpublic/winxp%5Ftweaks/ 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.

> >

> > --

> > Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience

> > Please Reply to the Newsgroup

>

--

Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience

Please Reply to the Newsgroup

June 7, 2008

Re: Upgrade of memory question

Thanks Ken, very good and clear explanation.

JS

"Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote in message

news:nrkl4419nud8te3moofdoh433infd8p660@4ax.com...

> On Sat, 7 Jun 2008 12:09:37 -0400, "JS" <@> wrote:

>

>> Question Ken,

>>

>> If you only have 512MB of ram (which for most users is considered enough)

>> then where does XP go to use that memory often mentioned by you and

>> others

>> as "some of that space is used by hardware".

>

> No, note that it does not use *memory* for that which I've cited as

> "some of that space is used by hardware." What it uses is *address

> space*, which is not physical RAM. It has a 4GB address space,

> regardless of how much RAM you have. If, for example, it needs 1GB of

> address space for your hardware, that leaves 3GB of address space to

> map your physical RAM. RAM can't be used unless it has available

> address space to map to, so that remaining 3GB of address space is the

> limiting factor for how much RAM you can use.

>

> Note the last paragraph of my first comment below: "Note that the

> hardware is using the address *space*, not the actual RAM itself. The

> rest of the RAM goes unused because there is no address space to map

> it too."

>

>> And if so does it include

>> hardware such as a Video card with 256MB of onboard ram and how much

>> memory

>> would the video card use of that 4GB of memory?

>>

>> JS

>>

>> "Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote in message

>> news:c3bl44dsf4l3kgh9qrvp7eil549kg2nn3m@4ax.com...

>> > On Sat, 07 Jun 2008 01:32:45 GMT, Big_Al <BigAl@MD.com> wrote:

>> >

>> >> --Ivan-- wrote:

>> >> > Hi, ive got a computer thats about 3 years old right now its got 1gb

>> >> > DDR PC3200

>> >> > im not sure whats the max i can put in it is it 2 gig or??

>> >> > Ive got 512mb DDR and not sure if its ok if i put it in or not.. any

>> >> > suggestions??

>> >> > Thanks very much for your help

>> >

>> >> I've read messages about people having issues with >3gigs. Seems

>> >> someplace around 3.x gigs on XP 32 bit, it can't see. So putting 4

>> >> gig in might not be of value.

>> >

>> > All 32-bit client versions of Windows (not just XP) have a 4GB address

>> > space. That's the theoretical upper limit beyond which you can not go.

>> > But you can't use the entire 4GB of address space. Even though you

>> > have a 4GB address space, you can only use *around* 3.1GB of RAM.

>> > That's because some of that space is used by hardware and is not

>> > available to the operating system and applications. The amount you can

>> > use varies, depending on what hardware you have installed, but can

>> > range from as little as 2GB to as much as 3.5GB. It's usually around

>> > 3.1GB.

>> >

>> > Note that the hardware is using the address *space*, not the actual

>> > RAM itself. The rest of the RAM goes unused because there is no

>> > address space to map it too.

>> >

>> >> I have no specs on all this, but for sure

>> >> 2 or 3 gig would not hurt you (max).

>> >

>> > 4GB won't hurt him either. It may not help, but certainly won't hurt.

>> >

>> > Over and above how much RAM he *can* install, Ivan should think about

>> > how much he can make effective use of. Despite how often you hear that

>> > more RAM will increase your performance, that's true only up to a

>> > limit, and for most people, the 1GB he already has is already above

>> > that limit.

>> >

>> > 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, 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%5Fpublic/winxp%5Ftweaks/ 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.

>> >

>> > --

>> > Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience

>> > Please Reply to the Newsgroup

>>

>

> --

> Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience

> Please Reply to the Newsgroup

June 7, 2008

Re: Upgrade of memory question

On Sat, 7 Jun 2008 15:29:07 -0400, "JS" <@> wrote:

> Thanks Ken, very good and clear explanation.

You're welcome, and thanks for the kind words.

> "Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote in message

> news:nrkl4419nud8te3moofdoh433infd8p660@4ax.com...

> > On Sat, 7 Jun 2008 12:09:37 -0400, "JS" <@> wrote:

> >

> >> Question Ken,

> >>

> >> If you only have 512MB of ram (which for most users is considered enough)

> >> then where does XP go to use that memory often mentioned by you and

> >> others

> >> as "some of that space is used by hardware".

> >

> > No, note that it does not use *memory* for that which I've cited as

> > "some of that space is used by hardware." What it uses is *address

> > space*, which is not physical RAM. It has a 4GB address space,

> > regardless of how much RAM you have. If, for example, it needs 1GB of

> > address space for your hardware, that leaves 3GB of address space to

> > map your physical RAM. RAM can't be used unless it has available

> > address space to map to, so that remaining 3GB of address space is the

> > limiting factor for how much RAM you can use.

> >

> > Note the last paragraph of my first comment below: "Note that the

> > hardware is using the address *space*, not the actual RAM itself. The

> > rest of the RAM goes unused because there is no address space to map

> > it too."

> >

> >> And if so does it include

> >> hardware such as a Video card with 256MB of onboard ram and how much

> >> memory

> >> would the video card use of that 4GB of memory?

> >>

> >> JS

> >>

> >> "Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote in message

> >> news:c3bl44dsf4l3kgh9qrvp7eil549kg2nn3m@4ax.com...

> >> > On Sat, 07 Jun 2008 01:32:45 GMT, Big_Al <BigAl@MD.com> wrote:

> >> >

> >> >> --Ivan-- wrote:

> >> >> > Hi, ive got a computer thats about 3 years old right now its got 1gb

> >> >> > DDR PC3200

> >> >> > im not sure whats the max i can put in it is it 2 gig or??

> >> >> > Ive got 512mb DDR and not sure if its ok if i put it in or not.. any

> >> >> > suggestions??

> >> >> > Thanks very much for your help

> >> >

> >> >> I've read messages about people having issues with >3gigs. Seems

> >> >> someplace around 3.x gigs on XP 32 bit, it can't see. So putting 4

> >> >> gig in might not be of value.

> >> >

> >> > All 32-bit client versions of Windows (not just XP) have a 4GB address

> >> > space. That's the theoretical upper limit beyond which you can not go.

> >> > But you can't use the entire 4GB of address space. Even though you

> >> > have a 4GB address space, you can only use *around* 3.1GB of RAM.

> >> > That's because some of that space is used by hardware and is not

> >> > available to the operating system and applications. The amount you can

> >> > use varies, depending on what hardware you have installed, but can

> >> > range from as little as 2GB to as much as 3.5GB. It's usually around

> >> > 3.1GB.

> >> >

> >> > Note that the hardware is using the address *space*, not the actual

> >> > RAM itself. The rest of the RAM goes unused because there is no

> >> > address space to map it too.

> >> >

> >> >> I have no specs on all this, but for sure

> >> >> 2 or 3 gig would not hurt you (max).

> >> >

> >> > 4GB won't hurt him either. It may not help, but certainly won't hurt.

> >> >

> >> > Over and above how much RAM he *can* install, Ivan should think about

> >> > how much he can make effective use of. Despite how often you hear that

> >> > more RAM will increase your performance, that's true only up to a

> >> > limit, and for most people, the 1GB he already has is already above

> >> > that limit.

> >> >

> >> > 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, 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%5Fpublic/winxp%5Ftweaks/ 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.

> >> >

> >> > --

> >> > Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience

> >> > Please Reply to the Newsgroup

> >>

> >

> > --

> > Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience

> > Please Reply to the Newsgroup

>

--

Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience

Please Reply to the Newsgroup

June 8, 2008

Re: Upgrade of memory question

On Fri, 6 Jun 2008 18:03:12 -0700, --Ivan--

<Ivan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

>Hi, ive got a computer thats about 3 years old right now its got 1gb DDR PC3200

>im not sure whats the max i can put in it is it 2 gig or??

>Ive got 512mb DDR and not sure if its ok if i put it in or not.. any

>suggestions??

>Thanks very much for your help

Why ask HERE? We know NOTHING about you mainboard; also, this has

NOTHING to do with XP.

Ask elsewhere

June 8, 2008

Re: Upgrade of memory question

Gurney wrote:

>

> >Hi, ive got a computer thats about 3 years old right now its got 1gb DDR PC3200

> >im not sure whats the max i can put in it is it 2 gig or??

> >Ive got 512mb DDR and not sure if its ok if i put it in or not.. any

> >suggestions??

> >Thanks very much for your help

> Why ask HERE? We know NOTHING about you mainboard; also, this has

> NOTHING to do with XP.

mainboard info available below

--

http://www.bootdisk.com/

June 8, 2008

Re: Upgrade of memory question

Of course it has to do with XP. Windows XP runs in it.

"Gurney" <none@nobody.net> wrote in message

news:co9m44pj5ftkv9i3120qk9500ajsvgtntg@4ax.com...

> On Fri, 6 Jun 2008 18:03:12 -0700, --Ivan--

> <Ivan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

>

>>Hi, ive got a computer thats about 3 years old right now its got 1gb DDR

>>PC3200

>>im not sure whats the max i can put in it is it 2 gig or??

>>Ive got 512mb DDR and not sure if its ok if i put it in or not.. any

>>suggestions??

>>Thanks very much for your help

> Why ask HERE? We know NOTHING about you mainboard; also, this has

> NOTHING to do with XP.

>

> Ask elsewhere

>

June 9, 2008

Re: Upgrade of memory question

Big_Al <BigAl@MD.com> wrote:

>--Ivan-- wrote:

>> Hi, ive got a computer thats about 3 years old right now its got 1gb DDR PC3200

>> im not sure whats the max i can put in it is it 2 gig or??

>> Ive got 512mb DDR and not sure if its ok if i put it in or not.. any

>> suggestions??

>> Thanks very much for your help

>I've read messages about people having issues with >3gigs. Seems

>someplace around 3.x gigs on XP 32 bit, it can't see.

32-bit systems, both XP and Vista have 4GB of address space. That

space must be used to access BIOS, video RAM, etc as well as system

RAM. Video cards have LOTS of RAM these days, so there's usually

something like 3.2 to 3.5 GB of address space left for RAM after the

other things are taken care of. See

http://members.cox.net/slatteryt/RAM.html

OP has only 1GB at the moment, and is considering another 512MB. That

won't get him near the ceiling. Assuming his motherboard can handle

that much RAM, the OS should see it all.

As to the original question - how much RAM can he put on his MoBo - we

don't know. OP will have to look at the motherboard or system

documentation that came with his machine.

--

Tim Slattery

MS MVP(Shell/User)

Slattery_T@bls.gov

http://members.cox.net/slatteryt

Sign In

Upgrade of memory question

Recommended Posts

Guest --Ivan--

Popular Days

Popular Days

Guest Big_Al

Guest JS

Guest Lem

Guest Hetch

Guest Big_Al

Guest ShadowTek

Guest Lem

Guest JS

Guest Big_Al

Guest Ken Blake, MVP

Guest JS

Guest Ken Blake, MVP

Guest JS

Guest Ken Blake, MVP

Guest Gurney

Guest Plato

Guest Unknown

Guest Tim Slattery

Similar Content

Question out of curiosity.

Taskbar disappear after memory upgrade BITS does not work

Server 2022 WAC SMS Question ?

SQL 2022 developer question on right to use

Memory not fluctuating in Task Manager/Resource Manager

Browse

Activity

Site Info