PC Memory overkill?

[TremblingBluStar]

Zero Hour said:
^ Processor speeds haven't been the bottleneck since the days of the 286 or so.

Agreed. The fsb tends to be the bottleneck in the main bus. However, fsp speeds advance with clock speeds.

My point being, there is a sweet spot with RAM where you are likely to have an outdated system before you have to upgrade. 2GB tends to be the spot this generation.

If you ever feel the need to upgrade to 4GB, I'd wait a few years, until you can get it for the price of 2 today.

 

[Twilight]

I have 4 GB of RAM in my main system, though my 32-bit (vista ultimate) system will of course only recognize slightly over 3.

2 GB will serve you fine - 4 GB may be overkill - I really bought it to bring my system up to 3, knowing that I wouldn't get that last GB from my 32 bit.

 

[Trubinator]

With Windows XP, 2 gigs is fine. If you're using Windows Vista, there is no such thing as RAM overkill. The OS alone eats up 50% of your memory so having 4 GB is even recommended for high stress applications like video games.

 

[Bill Morris]

I just got a new machine with Vista and had to pay extra to get Home Premium rather than Home Basic. I'm not amused. Copy a file to floppy, and it shows in the window for the floppy as having been copied, but I take it to another computer to transfer the file, and guess what. Vista only pretended to copy it. It refuses to do all sorts of normal Windows operations. It won't accept mouse clicks on certain Web sites that XP had no problem with. For example, if I click on Image on TrekBBS when posting, it's nonresponsive with this new version of IE. I have to type the UBB code into my post. Windows Mail won't spell-check. Explorer is so bad I just use the command prompt instead. File menus don't want to let you save a file where you want. The list goes on and on. Some of XP's bugs seem to have been fixed, but I've already seen misdisplay bugs that nobody cares about, like text leaking out of an input box and displayed on the frame.