How much RAM for Win 2K?

Lmandrake · Post by **Lmandrake** » Fri May 25, 2001 2:19 pm

I know the obvious answer is as much as you can cram in, but I am thinking about going to win 2k for more stablity. How much RAM is needed for it to run well if you just surf and do light gaming? I have 3 sticks of 128 now and could easily go for a fourth one for 512 total, but if I go to 256 sticks I will have to sell some of what I have now at a serious loss.....

smb · Post by **smb** » Fri May 25, 2001 2:59 pm

I use 512, but i alos do some cad drawings every once in a while. I've also had no problems using 256 or 384 either. I would think 384 would be a good amount.

wvjohn · Post by **wvjohn** » Fri May 25, 2001 3:36 pm

running folding or seti in the background my system uses ~200 megs of ram - i have 512 in both my systems, 2x128 in one and 2x 256 in the other - probably overkill but with ram so cheap and remembering the agonizing days of can i afford to go from 64 mb to 128, why not?

256-384 gets you the most bang for the buck in win 2k i think

smb · Post by **smb** » Fri May 25, 2001 4:07 pm

Originally posted by wvjohn
running folding or seti in the background my system uses ~200 megs of ram

wow, that is alot of memory. with nothing running, and only 15 necessary services running, i'm below 65 megs of ram. running a floding instance, ie explorer, and winamp, I just barely go over 110megs.

wvjohn · Post by **wvjohn** » Fri May 25, 2001 5:53 pm

right now, surfing and folding ~160k

i used to run 2x seti in the background on this machine and then it would go up to around ~ 300 when surfing and doing other stuff -

probly a lot of other junk running that doesn't need to be but

1) it never crashes
2) it never crashes
3) it never crashes

unless i try for the 1 gig overclock on the 800e (or 992 is not enough!)

so i'm gonna let it be

Post by **FlyingPenguin** » Fri May 25, 2001 6:27 pm

Base your decision on this: In my opinion the minimum for power users or gamers under Win9x is 128 Mb. The minimum under Win2K is 256Mb (Win2K uses a LOT more ram).

Everything will run fine with 256Mb, however if you're a power user and run several apps at one time or use memory hungry apps like Photoshop you'll want more.

I'm a Photoshop user and usually have several apps open when doing web design (Frontpage or GoLive, Photoshop, ImageReady, several instances of IE and at least one of Netscape, ACDSee, Textpad, Outlook express, Winamp (gotta listen to tunes while I work) and maybe a couple of others. I have 512Mb installed under Win2K and when I'm deeply involved in work I see free ram go down as low as 90 Mb.

Kakarot · Post by **Kakarot** » Fri May 25, 2001 7:52 pm

384mb is the sweet spot right now for the majority of users.

Kazer · Post by **Kazer** » Fri May 25, 2001 10:07 pm

I'm running with 256MB just fine, play games and all. I'm about to upgrade to 512MB though.

poop · Post by **poop** » Wed May 30, 2001 11:08 am

I was running ok at 128, and 256 is super for me.

I hover around 120 MB for normal usage. Anytime I use a really large app, it is run all by itself. I don't exactly multi-task while playing black & white.

Post by **FlyingPenguin** » Thu May 31, 2001 9:39 am

IMO for serious gaming you want at least 256 Mb in Win2K (128Mb minimum in Win98). Win2K is a RAM hog and uses around 90 Mb just to run itself.

If you're a power user (you like to gave several apps and windows open at the same time) or use a ram intensive app like Photoshop, you'll probably want more. Unlike Win98 Win2K will take all the ram you can throw at it, although realistically you'll likely never need anymore than 512Mb.

I'm a heavy Photoshop user, and when I do web work I have a dozen apps running. I have 512Mb installed and it's not unusual for me to see my available ram dwindle down to under 100 Mb while I'm working.

Corrado · Post by **Corrado** » Wed Jul 11, 2001 10:17 pm

I've been running 256 forever and have NEVER had a prob with win2k. If you're a hardcore tweaker, you can get win2k under 40mb of ram, i've done it on a laptop with 64mb. Right now, i'm using 86mb with mirrc, am, IE, OE, and winamp running. I've done NO tweaking. With 86mb used, I could get away with running with 128mb, but 256 is nice. My 512 of PC2100 should be here monday htough, and we'll see how that is. ;c)

Corrado

dadx2mj · Post by **dadx2mj** » Wed Jul 11, 2001 11:12 pm

I jsut switched to Win2K a few weeks ago. I had 256megs of ram and everything ran fine but I kept reading how Win2K loves ram and with prices what they are I bought another 128megs just to see. I was absolutly amazed what a difference it made. At this point I would have to agree with karakot that 384 megs is a sweet spot, but maybe I will change my mind when I pick up another 128 megs and try 512 megs

DocSilly · Post by **DocSilly** » Mon Jul 16, 2001 4:56 pm

I agree on 256MB as minimum for Win2000 + gaming.
I got lots of programs running just for fun (windowblinds and stuff) and I'm currently at 230MB surfing with Winamp, ICQ and a couple browserwindows (IE and Mozilla). My current Peak memory is 368MB, that was playing Diablo 2 Xpac.
But the usual Win2000 gamer should bet set with 256MB for minimum.

Post by **FlyingPenguin** » Tue Jul 17, 2001 6:39 pm

Sup Doc!!! Long time, Dude!

<waves>

DocSilly · Post by **DocSilly** » Tue Jul 17, 2001 8:51 pm

I know FP .... I left the service and moved back to Germany, no more broadband and no more flatrate.
Finally managed to mod my setup some more and add watercooling.
Maybe I'll find more time to check here more regularly.