1GB -> 2GB in Vista = New life

My desktop specs:

2.8Ghz P4 Prescott
2GB RAM
160GB HDD
6600GT AGP
Windows Vista Ultimate X86 (32-bit)



My machine is rather old, about 3 years of age. However, once I made the transition from 1GB to 2GB, it felt like a totally new machine. I could have more programs opened simultaneously and the computer wouldn't bog down. Launching programs also became faster because of more RAM cached.

After using Vista on 1GB for a couple months and then making the transition to 2GB, I have come to a conclusion that it's definitely worth the upgrade. Anyone who's considering buying a Vista preinstalled computer or upgrading to Vista should definitely have at least 2GB of RAM.

One small thing I'd like to mention about about Vista is the memory management. Memory management in Vista, compared to XP, is a totally different system. For those of you on XP, you may notice that in Task Manager you'll have 'X' amount of unused RAM. This means when you aren't gaming or doing anything that requires a lot of memory, the RAM does not get used; it just sits there. In Vista, however, all RAM gets used. Even if your computer is just idling, the extra memory will be cached enabling you to launch your programs faster the next time you open them. This is Vista's SuperFetch system.

 

How fast was your system with 1GB of RAM? I have been debating of adding more RAM to my Northwood system, which still has 512MB, and was wondering if it would help with it's longevity. Also, I don't think this machine is Vista ready, so that irrelevant.

 

that is strange, my 1GB machine feels very snappy and only use 400M or so after stablized, with IE opened.

 

Yea ram makes a big difference in Vista.

 

It was decent on 1GB of RAM, but speed wise, XP was probably faster than Vista. The fact that Vista was already using 70-80% of RAM under normal usage didn't give it a lot of memory for SuperFetch. Now I'm hovering at around 50% memory usage with the other 50% for cache.

What's the specs of your Northwood computer? It depends on what OS you're using on it. I'd recomend 1GB for XP and 2GB for Vista.

 

Does a P4 make any diff? branch prediction, or no? do it 5 times not once or twice. just asking.

 

I dont think 2GB is necessary. Once i used system with 1,5GB of RAM (come with 512 and upgraded with 1GB stick). The system is fast and the multitasking is feel much better.

For some with money constraint, i think if you buy system with 512MB preinstalled, upgrading it with 1GB stick will also increase Vista overall speed and you can work comfortably.

 

Yeah, I agree. I'm using 1.5 GB now, and it (Vista) runs very smoothly. However, I plan on purchasing an additional 512 MB stick of RAM because I want the most speed I can get.

Seriously, though, 1.5 GB is great. If you can't afford 2 GB, but don't want to settle for 1 GB, 1.5GB is obviously a great compromise.

Matt

 

Hey I'm in the 1.5gb ram crew too, but still on XP Don't you mean buy another 1gb module? Unless you have more than 2 slots or something?

 

i have a Thinkpad t30, running vista Ultimate! & Is fast look i have

 

Oh crap... forgot about that... lol... I guess I'm stuck... I only have 2 slots... I don't really feel like buying a 1 GB stick and selling my 512 MB stick...

Thanks for pointing that out, though... I would have been screwed.

Matt

 

In my experience I think 2GB is necessary, MS even states you should have 2GB for optimal performance.

I only used Vista on two machines, My 2GB Acer Laptop & my 1GB HP desktop.

For my Desktop I "msconfig" and disabled alot of services. Made a HUGE differ in performance. Not to mention I learned a lot about what services do what .....from trial and error.

 

2GB isn't necessary if you can barely operate a web browser, IE at that. (Half the world.)

Matt

 

1,5GB is more than enough for DVDs, IE, Office 2007, Adobe Reader. Tested.

Oh, and forget something, plus Norton Internet Security 2007 running in the background.

 

Yep. So far, the biggest beating I've put on my RAM is:

- Photoshop CS3
- Firefox 2.0.0.1 (This was a while back)
- Defragmenting the hard drive
- WinPatrol running in the background
- Unzipping a 5 GB RAR file
- Playing music via iTunes
- Copying images from my phone via Bluetooth

This was all at once... of course, I did this intentionally, not coincidentally.

Matt

 

I have 2gb ram.
My ram usage is generally at around 40% while doing general tasks (web browsing, chatting, etc)
it's higher while i'm doing processor intensive tasks, such as video conversions.
I highly recommend a vista <s>widget</s> gadget called Multi Meter. it will show how much your cpu/ram usage is. if you don't got it already, you totally should get it.
http://gallery.live.com/liveItemDetail.aspx?li=f5b13626-b266-4334-b2e5-157bd66ca5af

 

Vista + gaming requires 2GB for smooth performance.

Ivan

 

2gb is not enough for me man!!! i need and upgrade to 4gb barely enough when working with photoshop alone.... and im using xp

 

Yea Photoshop Is a Killer

 

Ever since moving to Vista with the desktop (E6600, 2GB RAM) I've found it to be much more responsive than XP. The people who are complaining that Vista is death slow have probably never used Vista on a nice machine. Sure with minimal memory, it's going to be slow, but once you give it some breathing room, I prefer it over XP, no questions asked. I don't even notice any performance issues in games, so I'm happy.

 

I think most people should just upgrade to 2GB which is recommended for Vista. RAM prices are dirt cheap right now.

 

I have a new Dell Inspiron 6400. Its not known for its high end components, but its a core duo 2*1.73 with 2 gigs of ram. Honestly I expected more, alot more in the area of performace. I couldnt imagine it with less ram. Vista takes longer to boot than my 1.6/512/XPP machine. What gives? All my msconfig is diabled. I still continue to use Vista only because I know that this will be the supported OS of tomarrow.