What is enough RAM?

[JCW]

I am putting a system together and I want to know if 128 mhz RAM is enough
for a 1.8 AMD with a 40 gig HD running Me for an OS? It doesn't have to be a
rocket just function correctly. Thanks in Advance

JCW

[Jason Tsang]

You ought to have more than128 megabytes (not mhz) of ram

With today's prices for memory, you probably at to have no less than 256
megabytes.

--
Jason Tsang - Microsoft MVP

Find out about the MS MVP Program -
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/default.aspx

"JCW" > wrote in message
...
> I am putting a system together and I want to know if 128 mhz RAM is enough
> for a 1.8 AMD with a 40 gig HD running Me for an OS? It doesn't have to be
> a
> rocket just function correctly. Thanks in Advance
>
> JCW
>
>

[Amethyst]

JCW wrote:
> I am putting a system together and I want to know if 128 mhz RAM is enough
> for a 1.8 AMD with a 40 gig HD running Me for an OS? It doesn't have to be
a
> rocket just function correctly. Thanks in Advance
>
> JCW

Not another one! This group is for Windows XP. Toddle off and find an ME
group, there's a good chap...

--�
Cassandra
Card carrying member of the Fresh Start Club 'The Undead Are People Too!'

Reply address is fake. Please send all praise, abuse, insults, bequests
of £1million to cassandra (at) craigy34 (dot) freeserve (dot) co (dot)
uk. Change the obvious to the obvious.
Private requests for assistance will not be acknowledged. Please post all
correspondence to the group so that all may benefit. Thank you.

[Crusty \(-: Old Bastard :-\)]

That's Windows ME, Jason. 128 meg is more than enough!

"Jason Tsang" > wrote in message
...
> You ought to have more than128 megabytes (not mhz) of ram
>
> With today's prices for memory, you probably at to have no less than 256
> megabytes.
>
> --
> Jason Tsang - Microsoft MVP
>
> Find out about the MS MVP Program -
> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/default.aspx
>
> "JCW" > wrote in message
> ...
> > I am putting a system together and I want to know if 128 mhz RAM is
enough
> > for a 1.8 AMD with a 40 gig HD running Me for an OS? It doesn't have to
be
> > a
> > rocket just function correctly. Thanks in Advance
> >
> > JCW
> >
> >
>

[JCW]

Come on Amethyst,
You have always been so helpful and now you act like total idiot. I am an
avid XP Pro user and I just thought I would use this NG where I can count on
the people I trust as far as knowledge and willingness to help to ask one
simple question. And then you show the kind of person you really are, Oh but
I forgot you were born with a copy of XP up your nose right? Take care ....
"Amethyst" > wrote in message
...
> JCW wrote:
> > I am putting a system together and I want to know if 128 mhz RAM is
enough
> > for a 1.8 AMD with a 40 gig HD running Me for an OS? It doesn't have to
be
> a
> > rocket just function correctly. Thanks in Advance
> >
> > JCW
>
> Not another one! This group is for Windows XP. Toddle off and find an ME
> group, there's a good chap...
>
> --�
> Cassandra
> Card carrying member of the Fresh Start Club 'The Undead Are People Too!'
>
> Reply address is fake. Please send all praise, abuse, insults, bequests
> of £1million to cassandra (at) craigy34 (dot) freeserve (dot) co (dot)
> uk. Change the obvious to the obvious.
> Private requests for assistance will not be acknowledged. Please post all
> correspondence to the group so that all may benefit. Thank you.
>
>

[JCW]

Thanks Jason and Crusty, I appreciate the help, and I will try to post in ME
NG from now on in an effort to keep it simple for some people. Thanks again
"Crusty (-: Old ******* :-)" > wrote in
message ...
> That's Windows ME, Jason. 128 meg is more than enough!
>
> "Jason Tsang" > wrote in message
> ...
> > You ought to have more than128 megabytes (not mhz) of ram
> >
> > With today's prices for memory, you probably at to have no less than 256
> > megabytes.
> >
> > --
> > Jason Tsang - Microsoft MVP
> >
> > Find out about the MS MVP Program -
> > http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/default.aspx
> >
> > "JCW" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > I am putting a system together and I want to know if 128 mhz RAM is
> enough
> > > for a 1.8 AMD with a 40 gig HD running Me for an OS? It doesn't have
to
> be
> > > a
> > > rocket just function correctly. Thanks in Advance
> > >
> > > JCW
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>

[Jason Tsang]

If your motherboard can handle more, I certainly wouldn't want to cripple
such an installation with only 128 megs of ram....

--
Jason Tsang - Microsoft MVP

Find out about the MS MVP Program -
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/default.aspx

"Crusty (-: Old ******* :-)" > wrote in
message ...
> That's Windows ME, Jason. 128 meg is more than enough!
>
> "Jason Tsang" > wrote in message
> ...
> > You ought to have more than128 megabytes (not mhz) of ram
> >
> > With today's prices for memory, you probably at to have no less than 256
> > megabytes.
> >
> > --
> > Jason Tsang - Microsoft MVP
> >
> > Find out about the MS MVP Program -
> > http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/default.aspx
> >
> > "JCW" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > I am putting a system together and I want to know if 128 mhz RAM is
> enough
> > > for a 1.8 AMD with a 40 gig HD running Me for an OS? It doesn't have
> > > to
> be
> > > a
> > > rocket just function correctly. Thanks in Advance
> > >
> > > JCW
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>

[Amethyst]

JCW wrote:
> Come on Amethyst,
> You have always been so helpful and now you act like total idiot. I am an
> avid XP Pro user and I just thought I would use this NG where I can count
on
> the people I trust as far as knowledge and willingness to help to ask one
> simple question. And then you show the kind of person you really are, Oh
but
> I forgot you were born with a copy of XP up your nose right? Take care
.....
> "Amethyst" > wrote in message
> ...
>> JCW wrote:
>>> I am putting a system together and I want to know if 128 mhz RAM is
enough
>>> for a 1.8 AMD with a 40 gig HD running Me for an OS? It doesn't have to
be a
>>> rocket just function correctly. Thanks in Advance
>>>
>>> JCW
>>
>> Not another one! This group is for Windows XP. Toddle off and find an ME
>> group, there's a good chap...
>>
>> --�
>> Cassandra
>> Card carrying member of the Fresh Start Club 'The Undead Are People Too!'
>>
>> Reply address is fake. Please send all praise, abuse, insults, bequests
>> of £1million to cassandra (at) craigy34 (dot) freeserve (dot) co (dot)
>> uk. Change the obvious to the obvious.
>> Private requests for assistance will not be acknowledged. Please post all
>> correspondence to the group so that all may benefit. Thank you.

No, but I was born with a modicum of common sense and learnt how to read...

--�
Cassandra
Card carrying member of the Fresh Start Club 'The Undead Are People Too!'

Reply address is fake. Please send all praise, abuse, insults, bequests
of £1million to cassandra (at) craigy34 (dot) freeserve (dot) co (dot)
uk. Change the obvious to the obvious.
Private requests for assistance will not be acknowledged. Please post all
correspondence to the group so that all may benefit. Thank you.

[Bob Willard]

JCW wrote:
> I am putting a system together and I want to know if 128 mhz RAM is enough
> for a 1.8 AMD with a 40 gig HD running Me for an OS? It doesn't have to be a
> rocket just function correctly. Thanks in Advance
>
> JCW
>
>

For ME or any other W9x variant, 128MB is enough unless you plan
to run apps that chew up lots of RAM. Image processing (still or
video) and audio processing may bog down a lot with 128MB, but
surfing the net and most work with Office on smallish documents
will work fine.
--
Cheers, Bob

[JCW]

Thanks allot everyone. Appreciate the help.
GOD BLESS AMERICA
JCW
"Bob Willard" > wrote in message
...
> JCW wrote:
> > I am putting a system together and I want to know if 128 mhz RAM is
enough
> > for a 1.8 AMD with a 40 gig HD running Me for an OS? It doesn't have to
be a
> > rocket just function correctly. Thanks in Advance
> >
> > JCW
> >
> >
>
> For ME or any other W9x variant, 128MB is enough unless you plan
> to run apps that chew up lots of RAM. Image processing (still or
> video) and audio processing may bog down a lot with 128MB, but
> surfing the net and most work with Office on smallish documents
> will work fine.
> --
> Cheers, Bob
>

[Russ]

If u cant contribute anything worthwhile keep ur @#%@=20
fingers off the keyboard
>-----Original Message-----
>JCW wrote:
>> Come on Amethyst,
>> You have always been so helpful and now you act like=20
total idiot. I am an
>> avid XP Pro user and I just thought I would use this=20
NG where I can count
>on
>> the people I trust as far as knowledge and willingness=20
to help to ask one
>> simple question. And then you show the kind of person=20
you really are, Oh
>but
>> I forgot you were born with a copy of XP up your nose=20
right? Take care
>.....
>> "Amethyst" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> JCW wrote:
>>>> I am putting a system together and I want to know if=20
128 mhz RAM is
>enough
>>>> for a 1.8 AMD with a 40 gig HD running Me for an OS?=20
It doesn't have to
>be a
>>>> rocket just function correctly. Thanks in Advance
>>>>
>>>> JCW
>>>
>>> Not another one! This group is for Windows XP. Toddle=20
off and find an ME
>>> group, there's a good chap...
>>>
>>> --=81
>>> Cassandra
>>> Card carrying member of the Fresh Start Club 'The=20
Undead Are People Too!'
>>>
>>> Reply address is fake. Please send all praise, abuse,=20
insults, bequests
>>> of =A31million to cassandra (at) craigy34 (dot)=20
freeserve (dot) co (dot)
>>> uk. Change the obvious to the obvious.
>>> Private requests for assistance will not be=20
acknowledged. Please post all
>>> correspondence to the group so that all may benefit.=20
Thank you.
>
>No, but I was born with a modicum of common sense and=20
learnt how to read...
>
>--=81
>Cassandra
>Card carrying member of the Fresh Start Club 'The Undead=20
Are People Too!'
>
>Reply address is fake. Please send all praise, abuse,=20
insults, bequests
>of =A31million to cassandra (at) craigy34 (dot) freeserve=20
(dot) co (dot)
>uk. Change the obvious to the obvious.
>Private requests for assistance will not be=20
acknowledged. Please post all
>correspondence to the group so that all may benefit.=20
Thank you.
>
>
>.
>

[Kevin M]

"JCW" > wrote in message
...
| Come on Amethyst,
| You have always been so helpful and now you act like total idiot. I am an


Ummmm....go search google for her post history. Usually, Cass is quite
abrasive.

Kev

[Peter R. Fletcher]

256 Mb should be quite enough RAM for the applications you are
running. I would look elsewhere for the cause of your internet
connection problems.

On Mon, 26 Jul 2004 09:30:26 -0700, "Dan"
> wrote:

>Basically I was wondering if I have enough RAM.
>
>I have six computers networked togeather just using a
>router. The computers are all running xp home. The
>computers are all the same, AMD Athlon 2400 processors
>and have 256 MB of RAM.
>
>All we use them for is to use the internet, Microsoft
>Access and nortons antivirus run in the background.
>
>The backend of the microsoft access file is stored on one
>computer and it has 768 MB of RAM. The backend is linked
>to the frontend which is stored on the other computers.
>
>The computers seem to have a hard time staying
>connected to the network. One computer will seem to loose
>the connection and then has to be restarted in order to
>regain it again. Three computers are using Access 2003
>and the other three is using Access xp.


Please respond to the Newsgroup, so that others may benefit from the exchange.
Peter R. Fletcher

[Jim Macklin]

Check on how much disk access is actually being used by
virtual memory on each machine, also how big are those
ACCESS files? Adding some more RAM won't hurt, but might
not help if pagefile swapping is minimal.
You can add another 256 MB to each of your 6 machines for
less than $180 total cost. If your machines use shared RAM
for video and you have the Internet, the LAN, ACCESS and
Norton, I think adding the 256 to the most troublesome
machine as an experiment can't hurt.


--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.


"Peter R. Fletcher" <pfletch(at)fletchers(hyphen)uk.com>
wrote in message
...
| 256 Mb should be quite enough RAM for the applications you
are
| running. I would look elsewhere for the cause of your
internet
| connection problems.
|
| On Mon, 26 Jul 2004 09:30:26 -0700, "Dan"
| > wrote:
|
| >Basically I was wondering if I have enough RAM.
| >
| >I have six computers networked togeather just using a
| >router. The computers are all running xp home. The
| >computers are all the same, AMD Athlon 2400 processors
| >and have 256 MB of RAM.
| >
| >All we use them for is to use the internet, Microsoft
| >Access and nortons antivirus run in the background.
| >
| >The backend of the microsoft access file is stored on one
| >computer and it has 768 MB of RAM. The backend is linked
| >to the frontend which is stored on the other computers.
| >
| >The computers seem to have a hard time staying
| >connected to the network. One computer will seem to loose
| >the connection and then has to be restarted in order to
| >regain it again. Three computers are using Access 2003
| >and the other three is using Access xp.
|
|
| Please respond to the Newsgroup, so that others may
benefit from the exchange.
| Peter R. Fletcher

[John R Weiss]

"Dan" > wrote...
>
> computers are all the same, AMD Athlon 2400 processors
> and have 256 MB of RAM.
>
> All we use them for is to use the internet, Microsoft
> Access and nortons antivirus run in the background.
>
> The computers seem to have a hard time staying
> connected to the network.

You don't say what the size of the database or the extent of the
transactions are, but...

First, check your pagefile for adequate size. Try adding another 256 MB to
that computer. If the problem is fixed, your RAM and/or pagefile may be
marginal.

[Ron Martell]

"Dan" > wrote:

>Basically I was wondering if I have enough RAM.
>
>I have six computers networked togeather just using a
>router. The computers are all running xp home. The
>computers are all the same, AMD Athlon 2400 processors
>and have 256 MB of RAM.
>
>All we use them for is to use the internet, Microsoft
>Access and nortons antivirus run in the background.
>
>The backend of the microsoft access file is stored on one
>computer and it has 768 MB of RAM. The backend is linked
>to the frontend which is stored on the other computers.
>
>The computers seem to have a hard time staying
>connected to the network. One computer will seem to loose
>the connection and then has to be restarted in order to
>regain it again. Three computers are using Access 2003
>and the other three is using Access xp.

Adding more memory can noticeably improve performance only if the
added memory results in reduced usage of the virtual memory paging
file. Therefore if the paging file is not currently being used to any
significant extent then adding more memory will not provide a
significant improvement.

Unfortunately there is no ready way of determing actual paging file
usage provided with Windows XP - it does not have an equivalent to the
'Memory Manager - Swap File In Use" reporting provided by the System
Monitor utility in Windows 95/98/Me.

There is a free utility that you can download and run which will
provide this information for you. It was written by MVP Bill James and
you can get if from
http://www.dougknox.com/xp/utils/xp_pagefilemon.htm or from
http://billsway.com/notes_public/WinXP_Tweaks/

If that utility shows actual page file usage of 50 mb or more on a
regular basis then that is indicative of fairly significant paging
file activity. Adding more RAM will reduce or even eliminate entirely
this activity thereby improving performance.

This apples regardless of how much or how little RAM is currently
installed in the computer, at least up to the 4 gb RAM maximum for
Windows XP.

Good luck


Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
--
Microsoft MVP
On-Line Help Computer Service
http://onlinehelp.bc.ca

"The reason computer chips are so small is computers don't eat much."

[Peter R. Fletcher]

256 Mb should be quite enough RAM for the applications you are
running. I would look elsewhere for the cause of your internet
connection problems.

On Mon, 26 Jul 2004 09:30:26 -0700, "Dan"
> wrote:

>Basically I was wondering if I have enough RAM.
>
>I have six computers networked togeather just using a
>router. The computers are all running xp home. The
>computers are all the same, AMD Athlon 2400 processors
>and have 256 MB of RAM.
>
>All we use them for is to use the internet, Microsoft
>Access and nortons antivirus run in the background.
>
>The backend of the microsoft access file is stored on one
>computer and it has 768 MB of RAM. The backend is linked
>to the frontend which is stored on the other computers.
>
>The computers seem to have a hard time staying
>connected to the network. One computer will seem to loose
>the connection and then has to be restarted in order to
>regain it again. Three computers are using Access 2003
>and the other three is using Access xp.


Please respond to the Newsgroup, so that others may benefit from the exchange.
Peter R. Fletcher

[Jim Macklin]

Check on how much disk access is actually being used by
virtual memory on each machine, also how big are those
ACCESS files? Adding some more RAM won't hurt, but might
not help if pagefile swapping is minimal.
You can add another 256 MB to each of your 6 machines for
less than $180 total cost. If your machines use shared RAM
for video and you have the Internet, the LAN, ACCESS and
Norton, I think adding the 256 to the most troublesome
machine as an experiment can't hurt.


--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.


"Peter R. Fletcher" <pfletch(at)fletchers(hyphen)uk.com>
wrote in message
...
| 256 Mb should be quite enough RAM for the applications you
are
| running. I would look elsewhere for the cause of your
internet
| connection problems.
|
| On Mon, 26 Jul 2004 09:30:26 -0700, "Dan"
| > wrote:
|
| >Basically I was wondering if I have enough RAM.
| >
| >I have six computers networked togeather just using a
| >router. The computers are all running xp home. The
| >computers are all the same, AMD Athlon 2400 processors
| >and have 256 MB of RAM.
| >
| >All we use them for is to use the internet, Microsoft
| >Access and nortons antivirus run in the background.
| >
| >The backend of the microsoft access file is stored on one
| >computer and it has 768 MB of RAM. The backend is linked
| >to the frontend which is stored on the other computers.
| >
| >The computers seem to have a hard time staying
| >connected to the network. One computer will seem to loose
| >the connection and then has to be restarted in order to
| >regain it again. Three computers are using Access 2003
| >and the other three is using Access xp.
|
|
| Please respond to the Newsgroup, so that others may
benefit from the exchange.
| Peter R. Fletcher

[John R Weiss]

"Dan" > wrote...
>
> computers are all the same, AMD Athlon 2400 processors
> and have 256 MB of RAM.
>
> All we use them for is to use the internet, Microsoft
> Access and nortons antivirus run in the background.
>
> The computers seem to have a hard time staying
> connected to the network.

You don't say what the size of the database or the extent of the
transactions are, but...

First, check your pagefile for adequate size. Try adding another 256 MB to
that computer. If the problem is fixed, your RAM and/or pagefile may be
marginal.

[Ron Martell]

"Dan" > wrote:

>Basically I was wondering if I have enough RAM.
>
>I have six computers networked togeather just using a
>router. The computers are all running xp home. The
>computers are all the same, AMD Athlon 2400 processors
>and have 256 MB of RAM.
>
>All we use them for is to use the internet, Microsoft
>Access and nortons antivirus run in the background.
>
>The backend of the microsoft access file is stored on one
>computer and it has 768 MB of RAM. The backend is linked
>to the frontend which is stored on the other computers.
>
>The computers seem to have a hard time staying
>connected to the network. One computer will seem to loose
>the connection and then has to be restarted in order to
>regain it again. Three computers are using Access 2003
>and the other three is using Access xp.

Adding more memory can noticeably improve performance only if the
added memory results in reduced usage of the virtual memory paging
file. Therefore if the paging file is not currently being used to any
significant extent then adding more memory will not provide a
significant improvement.

Unfortunately there is no ready way of determing actual paging file
usage provided with Windows XP - it does not have an equivalent to the
'Memory Manager - Swap File In Use" reporting provided by the System
Monitor utility in Windows 95/98/Me.

There is a free utility that you can download and run which will
provide this information for you. It was written by MVP Bill James and
you can get if from
http://www.dougknox.com/xp/utils/xp_pagefilemon.htm or from
http://billsway.com/notes_public/WinXP_Tweaks/

If that utility shows actual page file usage of 50 mb or more on a
regular basis then that is indicative of fairly significant paging
file activity. Adding more RAM will reduce or even eliminate entirely
this activity thereby improving performance.

This apples regardless of how much or how little RAM is currently
installed in the computer, at least up to the 4 gb RAM maximum for
Windows XP.

Good luck


Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
--
Microsoft MVP
On-Line Help Computer Service
http://onlinehelp.bc.ca

"The reason computer chips are so small is computers don't eat much."

[Peter R. Fletcher]

256 Mb should be quite enough RAM for the applications you are
running. I would look elsewhere for the cause of your internet
connection problems.

On Mon, 26 Jul 2004 09:30:26 -0700, "Dan"
> wrote:

>Basically I was wondering if I have enough RAM.
>
>I have six computers networked togeather just using a
>router. The computers are all running xp home. The
>computers are all the same, AMD Athlon 2400 processors
>and have 256 MB of RAM.
>
>All we use them for is to use the internet, Microsoft
>Access and nortons antivirus run in the background.
>
>The backend of the microsoft access file is stored on one
>computer and it has 768 MB of RAM. The backend is linked
>to the frontend which is stored on the other computers.
>
>The computers seem to have a hard time staying
>connected to the network. One computer will seem to loose
>the connection and then has to be restarted in order to
>regain it again. Three computers are using Access 2003
>and the other three is using Access xp.


Please respond to the Newsgroup, so that others may benefit from the exchange.
Peter R. Fletcher

[Robert Smith]

7/26/2004 12:30:26 PM

Dan > wrote in message

>



> Basically I was wondering if I have enough RAM.

>

> I have six computers networked togeather just using a

> router. The computers are all running xp home. The

> computers are all the same, AMD Athlon 2400 processors

> and have 256 MB of RAM.

>

> All we use them for is to use the internet, Microsoft

> Access and nortons antivirus run in the background.

>

> The backend of the microsoft access file is stored on one

> computer and it has 768 MB of RAM. The backend is linked

> to the frontend which is stored on the other computers.

>

> The computers seem to have a hard time staying

> connected to the network. One computer will seem to loose

> the connection and then has to be restarted in order to

> regain it again. Three computers are using Access 2003

> and the other three is using Access xp.



Another consideration is your network card. What brands are you
using? Are they all the same on the Athlons? On the DB Server? Do
you have the latest drivers installed for them?

There are a number of factors that can lead to NICs losing connections...