Another seemingly noobie question.

[bettablue]

I built this computer about 18 months ago and all is great running Windows 7
64. The question I have right now is whether or not I really need to add
memory. I am running a gigabyte mobo with a 3 gig dual core Intel processor
along with 4 gigs of RAM. My wife found another 4 Gigs somewhere and picked
it up, thinking that she would use it on her computer, but it won't work for
her system, wrong type. But, it will go into mine so she gave it to me and
bought the correct memory for hers. (Yes, I love my wife) Will I gain
anything by installing the additional 4 gigs? I do a lot of video work and
imaging along with some heavy gaming, but I am not using anything like
Virtual XP mode, although I might try it for some older programs I have.

What do you think?

 

[Mr Baracuda]

I think this is a noobie question...

and frank STILL cant answer it!

lol

of course you should install more ram but how many RAM slots do you have?

How many Gb is each ram stick?

If you have 4 slots, and the sticks are 2 gb each then you are ok...
But before you put those sticks inside

Can you beat the heck out of frank with a stick on his empty head?

Just in case you don’t know, frank is this newsgroups (and many others too)
CLOWN.



"bettablue" wrote in message

I built this computer about 18 months ago and all is great running Windows 7
64. The question I have right now is whether or not I really need to add
memory. I am running a gigabyte mobo with a 3 gig dual core Intel processor
along with 4 gigs of RAM. My wife found another 4 Gigs somewhere and picked
it up, thinking that she would use it on her computer, but it won't work for
her system, wrong type. But, it will go into mine so she gave it to me and
bought the correct memory for hers. (Yes, I love my wife) Will I gain
anything by installing the additional 4 gigs? I do a lot of video work and
imaging along with some heavy gaming, but I am not using anything like
Virtual XP mode, although I might try it for some older programs I have.

What do you think?

 

[Muad'Dib]

I built this computer about 18 months ago and all is great running Windows 7
64. The question I have right now is whether or not I really need to add
memory. I am running a gigabyte mobo with a 3 gig dual core Intel processor
along with 4 gigs of RAM. My wife found another 4 Gigs somewhere and picked
it up, thinking that she would use it on her computer, but it won't work for
her system, wrong type. But, it will go into mine so she gave it to me and
bought the correct memory for hers. (Yes, I love my wife) Will I gain
anything by installing the additional 4 gigs? I do a lot of video work and
imaging along with some heavy gaming, but I am not using anything like
Virtual XP mode, although I might try it for some older programs I have.

What do you think?

I don't get the odd memory size in the first place, (3gig), but
whatever. Memory, memory, memory, it's a GOOD thing. You have 4 more
gigs to install if your MB will accept it all, so do it. More mem = less
page files, (Swap), thus better performance, period. A powerful video
card, (chip set), makes a big difference as well for gaming and video
intensive applications, but still, a good amount of regular memory CAN'T
hurt that is for sure. Pop it in and see how things run. I don't think
you will want to remove it once you see how much better things run! (Not
to mention how much more multitasking you will be able to do) I have
6gigs on my newest machine, and it rocks for all that I do. ..Still, I'm
thinking about upping it to 8gb! (Win7)

G'day

 

[Roy Smith]

Muad'Dib said the following on 7/25/2010 6:15 AM:

I don't get the odd memory size in the first place, (3gig), but
whatever. Memory, memory, memory, it's a GOOD thing. You have 4 more

The 3Gig he's referring to is the processor clock speed... (3 Ghz).
Later on he does say that he has 4 Gigs of memory.


--

Roy Smith
Windows 7 Professional
Postbox 1.1.5
Sunday, July 25, 2010 6:46:35 AM

 

[Muad'Dib]

Muad'Dib said the following on 7/25/2010 6:15 AM:

The 3Gig he's referring to is the processor clock speed... (3 Ghz).
Later on he does say that he has 4 Gigs of memory.

Oh oops, missed that. LONG day, and now morning.. Thanks

G'day

 

[Ken Blake]

I built this computer about 18 months ago and all is great running Windows 7
64. The question I have right now is whether or not I really need to add
memory. I am running a gigabyte mobo with a 3 gig dual core Intel processor
along with 4 gigs of RAM. My wife found another 4 Gigs somewhere and picked
it up, thinking that she would use it on her computer, but it won't work for
her system, wrong type. But, it will go into mine so she gave it to me and
bought the correct memory for hers. (Yes, I love my wife) Will I gain
anything by installing the additional 4 gigs? I do a lot of video work and
imaging along with some heavy gaming, but I am not using anything like
Virtual XP mode, although I might try it for some older programs I have.

Two points:

1. How much memory you can effectively use depends on what apps you
run. You say "a lot of video work and imaging along with some heavy
gaming" and those strongly suggest that more than 4GB *will* help your
performance.

2. It's unfortunately highly unlikely that you can add the 4GB she
found unless it matches the RAM you already have in all respects
(brand, speed, etc.).

 

[Stefan Patric]

I built this computer about 18 months ago and all is great running
Windows 7 64. The question I have right now is whether or not I really
need to add memory. I am running a gigabyte mobo with a 3 gig dual core
Intel processor along with 4 gigs of RAM. My wife found another 4 Gigs
somewhere and picked it up, thinking that she would use it on her
computer, but it won't work for her system, wrong type. But, it will go
into mine so she gave it to me and bought the correct memory for hers.
(Yes, I love my wife) Will I gain anything by installing the additional
4 gigs? I do a lot of video work and imaging along with some heavy
gaming, but I am not using anything like Virtual XP mode, although I
might try it for some older programs I have.

What do you think?

Generally, the more RAM, the better. (I consider 4GB the absolute
minimum for a useful Windows 7 system anyway.) And since you do video
editing--a heavy RAM user, more RAM would be beneficial. However, check
your motherboard's max RAM capacity. Many, even 64-bit ones, max out at
4GB.

With my current system--now about 3.5 years old--I had to really hunt to
find a motherboard (64-bit) that would take 8GB max RAM as well as
satisfy my other requirements.

Stef

 

[Gordon]

Generally, the more RAM, the better. (I consider 4GB the absolute
minimum for a useful Windows 7 system anyway.)

Tosh. Mime performs perfectly well on only 2GB...

 

[Death]

Tosh. Mime performs perfectly well on only 2GB...

6GB runs Minesweeper pretty well.

 

[bettablue]

Two points:

1. How much memory you can effectively use depends on what apps you
run. You say "a lot of video work and imaging along with some heavy
gaming" and those strongly suggest that more than 4GB *will* help your
performance.

2. It's unfortunately highly unlikely that you can add the 4GB she
found unless it matches the RAM you already have in all respects
(brand, speed, etc.).

Ken as always, good info. The RAM she bought is the same as far as that it
is the same type. The brand is different, but the brochure that came with
my board suggests that it won't be a problem. The speed is the same, the
type is the same. The sticks look very different though. I'm going to
install it and see how it goes.

 

[Ken Blake]

Ken as always, good info.

Thanks for the kind words.

The RAM she bought is the same as far as that it
is the same type. The brand is different, but the brochure that came with
my board suggests that it won't be a problem. The speed is the same, the
type is the same. The sticks look very different though. I'm going to
install it and see how it goes.

Sure. You have nothing to lose by trying. If it fails (and my guess is
that it will) you can always take it out.

 

[Ken Blake]

Generally, the more RAM, the better.

Not correct. If your apps don't need much RAM, more won't help you at
all. To take an extreme example, if all you do is play solitaire, you
wouldn't be able to tell the difference between 1GB and 16GB.

(I consider 4GB the absolute
minimum for a useful Windows 7 system anyway.)

Also not correct. Here are two examples:

1. My wife has 2GB. She doesn't run much in the way of RAM-hungry
apps, and her performance for what she does is just fine. She has
turned down my offer to add RAM to her machine.

2. My netbook has 1GB of RAM. Performance is far from great, and
undoubtedly more would help. But considering that I do almost nothing
with it but e-mail, while traveling, it's just fine.

And since you do video
editing--a heavy RAM user, more RAM would be beneficial.

You are very likely correct there.

 

[Char Jackson]

Two points:

1. How much memory you can effectively use depends on what apps you
run. You say "a lot of video work and imaging along with some heavy
gaming" and those strongly suggest that more than 4GB *will* help your
performance.

2. It's unfortunately highly unlikely that you can add the 4GB she
found unless it matches the RAM you already have in all respects
(brand, speed, etc.).

Technically, it only needs to be the same type (correct number of
pins, primarily). Brand, speed, and module size are not important.
Having said, I normally recommend installing memory in pairs for
optimum performance, but even that isn't important.

I've never run into a motherboard that has a problem with mixed
brands, speeds, or module sizes.

 

[Death]

Technically, it only needs to be the same type (correct number of
pins, primarily). Brand, speed, and module size are not important.
Having said, I normally recommend installing memory in pairs for
optimum performance, but even that isn't important.

I've never run into a motherboard that has a problem with mixed
brands, speeds, or module sizes.

Hahahaha.
Try a Dell.
N00b.

 

[Stefan Patric]

Tosh. Mime performs perfectly well on only 2GB...

The rule of thumb (for general use) I've used for years with Windows, and
it has served me pretty well, is to take the RAM minimum recommended by
Microsoft and double it. The minimum is for installing and running the
OS, and it is always stated so, i.e. "...to run Windows 7 on your PC."
MS doesn't say anything about the additional RAM needed for the apps,
etc. So, you need more than the minimum for the system to run well.

And it, of course, depends on what you're doing. Memory intensive apps
like the OP's video editing needs more than the minimums. Lots more.

Stef

 

[Ken Blake]

Technically, it only needs to be the same type (correct number of
pins, primarily). Brand, speed, and module size are not important.
Having said, I normally recommend installing memory in pairs for
optimum performance, but even that isn't important.

I've never run into a motherboard that has a problem with mixed
brands, speeds, or module sizes.

OK--you haven't, but many other people have.

 

[Ken Blake]

The rule of thumb (for general use) I've used for years with Windows, and
it has served me pretty well, is to take the RAM minimum recommended by
Microsoft and double it.

To take a single example, Microsoft's minimum for Windows XP was 64MB.
Have you ever tried running it with 128MB? Unless you do little more
than play solitaire, 128MB isn't enough for anyone. Almost everyone
needs at least 256MB, and depending on what apps they run, many people
need more.

The minimum is for installing and running the
OS, and it is always stated so, i.e. "...to run Windows 7 on your PC."

Yes.


MS doesn't say anything about the additional RAM needed for the apps,
etc. So, you need more than the minimum for the system to run well.

Almost always true.

And it, of course, depends on what you're doing. Memory intensive apps
like the OP's video editing needs more than the minimums.

Exactly right!

 

[Stefan Patric]

Not correct. If your apps don't need much RAM, more won't help you at
all. To take an extreme example, if all you do is play solitaire, you
wouldn't be able to tell the difference between 1GB and 16GB.

I stand by my very generalized statement. However, as with all
generalizations, specifically you can always find situations where they
don't apply.

[snip]

 

[Stefan Patric]

The rule of thumb (for general use) I've used for years with Windows,
and it has served me pretty well, is to take the RAM minimum
recommended by Microsoft and double it.

To take a single example, Microsoft's minimum for Windows XP was 64MB.
Have you ever tried running it with 128MB? Unless you do little more
than play solitaire, 128MB isn't enough for anyone. Almost everyone
needs at least 256MB, and depending on what apps they run, many people
need more.

[snip]

MS "recommends" 128MB for XP Home even though they say "at least" 64MB.
I would double the 128, since they recommend that amount over 64.

Yes, I have installed and run XP Home on a 128MB system, but to get
decent performance, I had to "turn off" a lot of nonessential features
and background processes. Also, made sure that no apps were "preloaded"
on boot up. For e-mail, web, word processing, printing, etc. it worked
fine, which was all it was going to be used for. Although, as you said,
256MB of RAM would have been better.


Stef

 

[Ken Blake]

On Sun, 25 Jul 2010 17:01:00 +0100, Gordon wrote:

On 25/07/2010 16:38, Stefan Patric wrote:


Generally, the more RAM, the better. (I consider 4GB the absolute
minimum for a useful Windows 7 system anyway.)

Tosh. Mime performs perfectly well on only 2GB...

The rule of thumb (for general use) I've used for years with Windows,
and it has served me pretty well, is to take the RAM minimum
recommended by Microsoft and double it.

To take a single example, Microsoft's minimum for Windows XP was 64MB.
Have you ever tried running it with 128MB? Unless you do little more
than play solitaire, 128MB isn't enough for anyone. Almost everyone
needs at least 256MB, and depending on what apps they run, many people
need more.

[snip]

MS "recommends" 128MB for XP Home even though they say "at least" 64MB.

I can't find the web pages now, but I've seen both those numbers
*recommended*. They weren't always consistent.

I would double the 128, since they recommend that amount over 64.

Yes, I agree. 256MB is about the minimum almost anyone should have.