Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

win98se too much memory?

Last response: in Memory
Share
Anonymous
a b } Memory
April 26, 2001 1:52:12 AM

i have heard that too much memory will slow down 98se??? running athlon'c' 1.2 g,msi k7t turbo(133fsb),256 meg ram,thinking about adding another 512 meg ram. ne1 with experience? btw this combo is absolutely rock solid!thanks for any help/replies

More about : win98se memory

April 26, 2001 2:13:59 AM

from what i have heard and read, adding more ram wont slow the system down, but with windows 98 if you have more than 512mb total, windows has trouble effectivly using it all, so its basically wasted ram space.
i would have thought that 512mb is oodles enough... what are you doing on that system?

*has a PII-300 with 256Mb of ram. does wonders for my sanity.

ThePoo!
Anonymous
a b } Memory
April 26, 2001 2:20:20 AM

never enough speed!!
Related resources
April 26, 2001 2:30:39 AM

bah. hoon!
well why dontcha give that crappy *grin* system of yours to ME and find a faster one????

ill even throw in my p2-300 for free!

ThePoo!
April 26, 2001 1:21:30 PM

Win 95/98/Me is fine with up to 512MB (don't expect it to be much faster than 128MB though), but has problems with over 512MB. It becomes unstable (usually it won't even post). I've heard that modifying the registry might allow over 512MB, but I don't know any details about that.

If you actually need over 512MB of memory then you shouldn't be using Win98 anyway. If you're using lots of professional apps then WinNT/2000, or Linux are much better for you.
Anonymous
a b } Memory
April 26, 2001 1:33:25 PM

thanks all
Anonymous
a b } Memory
April 26, 2001 4:31:34 PM

i know that 95\98\98se\ME wont use over 512 vary well and i wonder if older OS's will even use that much there are apps out there that can make the system use ram more effectivly like cacheman 4.0 says it can fix the ram over 512 megs problem u can get it at downloads.com i cant say if it dose since im only running 256megs of pc-133 ram but tis worth a try if u want to continue useing 98se for some reason i use ME and wonder why people talk so bad about it. i havent had one system crash sine i installed it. aside from a small system praformance bang in windows it seems to run much better them my old 98 98se system.


Computer Shop owner and Head tech.
May 6, 2001 3:48:36 PM

Is the RAM used directly for Programms or for a SWAP-File?

At Lostcircuit more RAM brought between 40-80% at one test for memoryintensive work on AV.
However I could not find any reference why/how.

And if windows cannot utelize it why not as RAM-Disc which should be faster then any HDD?
May 7, 2001 11:42:45 PM

Correct me if I am wrong...

but swap files are an area on your hard disk that windows will use to store files that should be in the ram, when you are out of ram space. For instance you load 156mb of info into the ram and you only have 64mb of ram the remaining 92mb will be saved in the swap file and when accessed will be loaded into the Ram from the Hard drive. Ram cannot be used as a swap file because the swap file is only there to back up the ram.

The idea behind a RAM disc is often thought of but again would be pointless to have. Since the random access memory is cleared every time you shut down your system you would loose all your files every time you power down.

Madison
mmcmajor@apex.net
May 8, 2001 12:20:35 AM

"you would loose all your files every time you power down"

This is true for conventional memory systems, also known as volatile memory. There is a more expensive form of memory that is static. It does not require current refreshes to hold its state, and thus its data. This would be useful for mass storage at extremely fast access rates. I'm looking forward to this technology.

-Raystonn

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
May 8, 2001 6:18:54 AM

well there is flash ram, but that only goes up to 256mb or maybe 512mb sticks.

what we need is 5 gig sticks *grin* *drool*

"Don't be too proud of this technological terror you have created"~Darth Vader, Star wars
May 10, 2001 11:41:05 AM

too much memory does slow down win98se
my duron 600 performance actually improved when i removed one 128 MB DIMM from the system and left it with 128.
maybe the situation is worse with 256-512 MB

<font color=blue>die-hard fans don't have heat-sinks!</font color=blue>
Anonymous
a b } Memory
May 10, 2001 2:05:08 PM

WinME has overcome the 512 problem.
I sometimes borrow a 512 from my old mashine and put it in my new one (1024 altogether), when running heavy memory hoging programs, and it boost my preformance by atleast 15 -20 %...

Win 95-98 is another story altogether, they won't even post whis more that 512 in them, atleast I can't get win 98 to do it.

Just Remember, "If you where any other man, I would kill you where you stand..."
a b } Memory
May 20, 2001 4:57:43 PM

Microsoft actually said in their article on the matter that the reason that Win9x can't use more than 512MB ram is that there is not enough space alocated in the lower memory regions to address more than 512MB. So running more than 512MB can result in an "out of memory" error at boot. They even gave instructions on how to fix the problem.

Cast not thine pearls before the swine
May 22, 2001 5:34:48 PM

Were they the same brand of ram? Have you seen the performance gains matched no matter which stick you use? I'm just having a problem beleiving that 128 megs is better than 256...

No man stands so tall, as when he stoops to tweak his rig.
May 24, 2001 1:18:42 PM

I noticed a MAJOR performance increase when I went from 128 to 256, this was on my baby machine, a k6-3 450

Next time you wave - use all your fingers
!