Tiger Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 Just bought 256 megs of pc133 ram for $99. new total 384megs! Woohoo bring on the smoke! Tiger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJMello Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 Ya, I noticed the prices dropping and the larger sticks out. If I wasn't so lazy I would go right now and pick some up but then we have this storm on the way so....... ------------------ Order, Counterorder, Disorder. - von Moltke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wanderer Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 It's fantastic, I saw 128 meg for 50 quid. I almost bought it, but I had no money. They better still be there tomorrow. Woo hoo! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Williams Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 You guys buy ram at brick & mortars? I can't remember the last time I bought a computer part anywhere but online. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mannheim Tanker Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 Anybody had much luck with more than 128MB in Windows 98? I've read that 98 doesn't benefit much from anything >128MB (can't keep track of all of it or somefink). Also, while we're on the subject (and before Matt slams the lock on), has anyone had any problems running CM in Windows 2000? I'm considering making the leap, but I'd die if CM didn't work any more... I'd prefer Linux, but neither CM nor my work software will run on it [This message has been edited by Mannheim Tanker (edited 03-04-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy w/gun Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 I ran Win98 with 256MB just fine. I don't know if 98 used it efficiently but I know that it did read that I indeed had 256MB. I heard that over 256 won't be recognized, but will still be utilized. WinME recognizes RAM >256MB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maximus Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 Originally posted by Mannheim Tanker: Anybody had much luck with more than 128MB in Windows 98? I've read that 98 doesn't benefit much from anything >128MB (can't keep track of all of it or somefink). Also, while we're on the subject (and before Matt slams the lock on), has anyone had any problems running CM in Windows 2000? I'm considering making the leap, but I'd die if CM didn't work any more... I'd prefer Linux, but neither CM nor my work software will run on it You are in fact correct, but if you're smart enough to set up a RAM disk, then Windows 98 can utilize more than 128MB. TechTV talks about this from time to time, if I'm not mistaken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Commissar Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 Tiger, A RAM disk you say? Care to point me in the general direction of more knowledge on the subject? Im about to get 256 megs myself, and I have Win 98. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wwb_99 Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 Best place to find RAM is www.pricewatch.com. Just buy the biggest, cheapest stick of PC133 SDRAM you can afford. WWB ------------------ Before battle, my digital soldiers turn to me and say, Ave, Caesar! Morituri te salutamus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisl Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 Originally posted by Mannheim Tanker: Anybody had much luck with more than 128MB in Windows 98? I've read that 98 doesn't benefit much from anything >128MB (can't keep track of all of it or somefink). LOL. From the same guy who said nobody would ever need more than 640K... ------------------ "If you can taste the difference between caviar on a cracker and ketchup on a Kit-Kat while blindfolded, you have not had enough aquavit to be ready for lutefisk." (stolen from some web page about lutefisk) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rwcanuck Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 I have PC100 ram in my computers. Someone told me it is not good to mix PC100 and PC133 ram. Is this true? It is getting harder to find PC100 ram anymore. RW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brooktrout Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 Originally posted by rwcanuck: I have PC100 ram in my computers. Someone told me it is not good to mix PC100 and PC133 ram. Is this true? It is getting harder to find PC100 ram anymore. RW I've never had a problem with mixing 'em. They will just run at the lowest speed of the mix. PC133 is as cheap now as PC100. Might as well go with the PC133 and use it for later upgrade to 133 bus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mannheim Tanker Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 Originally posted by chrisl: LOL. From the same guy who said nobody would ever need more than 640K... Hehe...I'm with you on this, but unfortunately I've heard this from several sources, and none of them were MS. Win98 will apparently take up to 256MB, but cannot handle more than 128 (IE will not gain any speed by the additional memory). In fact, I have a friend that actually had his machine slow down with the additional memory. Not being a true hardware guru, I can only guess at the reason, but I reckon it has something to do with the infamous Windows 98 memory leak. Thanks for the heads up on the RAM drive. I'll have to look into it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Itchy Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 I've Just upgraded my PIII 450 from 128meg -256meg. It previously benchmarked (On Norton Utilities )at 212 times faster than a 386. It now runs at 217 times faster than a 386. Thats using Windows Me as O.S. I have noticed that I can handle a lot more units on screen before getting any slowdown. As for the Windows environment it seems to deal with multitasking a lot better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GriffinCheng+ Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 Well, yep the price of PC-133 SDRAM is dropping like a meteor. However, the price of new generation DDR PC2100 RAM and PC800 RDRAM are still sky high. BTW, thanks for the tips of mixing PC100 and PC133 RAM. Griffin. ------------------ "When you find your PBEM opportents too hard to beat, there is always the AI." "Can't get enough Tank?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fytinghellfish Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 Dumb question - how can I tell what RAM I have? I've got an HP with 128mb and I can't seem to find out where it say what kind of RAM I have in my system... ------------------ hellfish erk! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanks a Lot Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 Originally posted by fytinghellfish: Dumb question - how can I tell what RAM I have? I've got an HP with 128mb and I can't seem to find out where it say what kind of RAM I have in my system... Try this program. http://www.tweakfiles.com/memory/dimmid.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Compassion Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 Originally posted by GriffinCheng+: However, the price of new generation DDR PC2100 RAM and PC800 RDRAM are still sky high. As someone with too much invested in socket 370 parts, I don't have to worry about DDR ram for a while... As far as PC800 RDRAM goes, I saw a 128 meg stick for about $160 the other day. NOt cheap by any means, but about half of what I saw it for about 3 months ago. THings are coming down all over. ...just hope that there isn't another earthquake in Taiwan... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GriffinCheng+ Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 Me too. Have your fingers crossed. BTW, most of the RDRAM and also PC2100 DDR RAM out here are made by Samsung, that means they are probably made in South Korea or Malaysia. Griffin. Originally posted by Compassion: ...just hope that there isn't another earthquake in Taiwan... ------------------ "When you find your PBEM opportents too hard to beat, there is always the AI." "Can't get enough Tank?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olle Petersson Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 Originally posted by The Commissar: Tiger, A RAM disk you say? Care to point me in the general direction of more knowledge on the subject?Bumping, cause I'd like to know this too. Cheers Olle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gremlin Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 Windows 98 can address up to 2GB of memory. For most applications, 128MB is all you need, plus extra RAM to cover any apps you have running in the background. From experience and the article I got this info from, 192MB RAM is plenty. More than that, and you get relatively little benefit, except in RAM-hungry apps like Photoshop. (Data from Dec. 00 Maximum PC, pages 54-5) *** Someone mentioned you can find RAM cheaply through pricewatch.com, which is true, but it's important to buy quality RAM or you can easily experience problems. Crucial and Mushkin are among the best, afaik. Regardless, buy RAM now, while the getting is good. ------------------ Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way, when you criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrapGame Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 I bought 128mb stick of CAS-2 pc-133 at crucial.com for 64$ delivered about 2 weeks ago. Now its $58 bucks. Makes Win 98 run a little better with a lot of junk in the background. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Croda Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 Regarding Win '98 not handling RAM > 128 meg: For those of you who run Unreal Tournament, you know that the game takes a long time to load on a beefy machine. Several of us running machines that were 700Mhz or greater with 128 meg had the splash screen hang for a while as the game loaded. This is typical. Well, a buddy of mine running a PII 450 also loaded very slowly, until he slapped a bunch of extra RAM in, that is. He borrowed 2 128 MB dimms from someone and slapped then on top of his 64, and UT loaded faster than I've ever seen and he's running Win '98. This sure looks to me like the OS using that extra RAM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gremlin Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 UT is a perfect example of a RAM hog. I first played it on a system with 64MB RAM, then moved up to 192MB--enormous difference. All the other UT players I know have also commented on how much better it runs with more RAM. That and the proc are at least as important as the vid card for that game, unlike, say, Q3, which is more vid-card dependent. I now have 256MB (and a new 1.1 G AMD Tbird), and UT loads way faster. No more naps between levels Of course, I now also have ATA/66 support with a new mobo, which undboutedly helps. ------------------ I pity the fool, thug, or soul who tries to take over the world, then goes cryin' home to his momma. --Mr. T [This message has been edited by Gremlin (edited 03-05-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Williams Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 Windows 98 can indeed address more than 128 Meg of ram. I currently have 384 Meg installed. When I went from 128 to 384, I noticed a difference in the frequency of virtual memory writes. Everyone knows about virtual memory, otherwise known as the "swap file", right? This is an area on the hard drive that Windows uses to simulate ram when it runs out of actual ram. This keeps Windows from crashing with "out of memory" errors, but is much, much slower than actual ram. The best way to speed Windows up if you notice lots of swap file activity is adding more ram. There is something else you can do however: You should have your entire memory (ram + swap file) equal to 512 Meg. So, as you add ram, you can decrease your swap file size. Here is how: Right click on My Computer and then choose Properties. Click on the performance tab, then Virtual Memory. Choose "let me specify my own virtual memory settings". Type the same number into the minimum and maximum boxes, such that your ram plus swap file size equals 512 meg. Example: You have 256 meg of ram. Type 256 in both boxes (256 + 256 = 512). If you have 128 meg of ram, type 384 in both boxes. Your PC will ask to reboot after this, click yes. Here is another little trick: Click Start then Run. Type "sysedit" then return. Find the system.ini file and then the [386Enh] heading. Scroll to the bottom of the [386Enh] heading and add a line that says ConservativeSwapfileUsage=1 (just like I typed it). This forces Windows to use all available ram before going to the swap file. Also, remember to keep your hard drive defragmented. Norton Speed Disk is the best, but the Disk Defragmenter that comes with Windows will suffice. -Doug ------------------ expert \'ek-,spert'\ n : someone who knows more and more about less and less until eventually they know everything about nothing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts