Win10 and RAM

On 16/06/2020 23:05, BugHunter wrote:
Dex schreef op Di 16 Jun 2020 om 22:36:
On 16/06/2020 15:43, BugHunter wrote:
Ken Blake schreef op Di 16 Jun 2020 om 07:39:
On 6/16/2020 7:24 AM, BugHunter wrote:
Ken Blake schreef op Di 16 Jun 2020 om 07:01:
On 6/16/2020 5:47 AM, philo wrote:
When Win10 was first released I tired it on a few lower end
machines and
found performance totally unsatisfactory with 4 gigs of RAM.

6 gigs was "sort of " acceptable but I announced here (a few months
ago)
that I would not bother with Win10 unless the machine has at least 8
gigs of RAM.

Someone mentioned that 4 gigs was working fine for them...so I
decided
to try Win10 version 2004 on a machine with only 4 gigs of RAM.


I'll be darned, it was usable.


My next step though is to see if the mobo will support more RAM.



How much RAM is appropriate for Windows 10, or any other version of
Windows, depends on what programs you run. It is *not* a
one-size-fits-all situation.


For a good working PC, you need 8GB.


That is *not* correct. As I said, it is *not* a one-size-fits-all
situation. My wife's computer has 4GB. She does very little besides
e-mail, web searches, and solitaire, and the performance on her
computer
is just fine.


Well, let her play streaming video and at the same
time another application.


Operating System
Windows 10 Pro 64-bit (1909)
CPU
AMD Athlon II X2 220 41 °C
Regor 45nm Technology
RAM
4.00GB Dual-Channel DDR3 @ 530MHz (7-7-7-19)
Motherboard
FOXCONN 2AAF (CPU 1) 35 °C
Graphics
SyncMaster (1280x1024@60Hz)
1919MB ATI Radeon 3000 Graphics (HP)
Storage
465GB Crucial CT500MX500SSD1 (SATA (SSD))
111GB SATA SSD (SATA (SSD))
465GB Seagate ST3500312CS (SATA (SSD))
8GB Microsoft Virtual Disk (File-backed Virtual (SSD))


Runs fine, can even stream 1080p. Not 2 or 4K, cant even do that on Win7.


But with 8GB RAM, it runs more fine. For heavy
tasks, 4GB is not enough. Like streaming video,
or runnung a VM.


If I want to play Fortnite Battle Royale I don't stand a chance, if all
I want to do is browse, sent mail and watch movies it's fine.

https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/18476782

Dex schreef op Wo 17 Jun 2020 om 10:12:
On 16/06/2020 23:05, BugHunter wrote:
Dex schreef op Di 16 Jun 2020 om 22:36:
On 16/06/2020 15:43, BugHunter wrote:
Ken Blake schreef op Di 16 Jun 2020 om 07:39:
On 6/16/2020 7:24 AM, BugHunter wrote:
Ken Blake schreef op Di 16 Jun 2020 om 07:01:
On 6/16/2020 5:47 AM, philo wrote:
When Win10 was first released I tired it on a few lower end
machines and
found performance totally unsatisfactory with 4 gigs of RAM.

6 gigs was "sort of " acceptable but I announced here (a few months
ago)
that I would not bother with Win10 unless the machine has at least 8
gigs of RAM.

Someone mentioned that 4 gigs was working fine for them...so I
decided
to try Win10 version 2004 on a machine with only 4 gigs of RAM.


I'll be darned, it was usable.


My next step though is to see if the mobo will support more RAM.



How much RAM is appropriate for Windows 10, or any other version of
Windows, depends on what programs you run. It is *not* a
one-size-fits-all situation.


For a good working PC, you need 8GB.


That is *not* correct. As I said, it is *not* a one-size-fits-all
situation. My wife's computer has 4GB. She does very little besides
e-mail, web searches, and solitaire, and the performance on her
computer
is just fine.


Well, let her play streaming video and at the same
time another application.


Operating System
Windows 10 Pro 64-bit (1909)
CPU
AMD Athlon II X2 220 41 °C
Regor 45nm Technology
RAM
4.00GB Dual-Channel DDR3 @ 530MHz (7-7-7-19)
Motherboard
FOXCONN 2AAF (CPU 1) 35 °C
Graphics
SyncMaster (1280x1024@60Hz)
1919MB ATI Radeon 3000 Graphics (HP)
Storage
465GB Crucial CT500MX500SSD1 (SATA (SSD))
111GB SATA SSD (SATA (SSD))
465GB Seagate ST3500312CS (SATA (SSD))
8GB Microsoft Virtual Disk (File-backed Virtual (SSD))


Runs fine, can even stream 1080p. Not 2 or 4K, cant even do that on Win7.


But with 8GB RAM, it runs more fine. For heavy
tasks, 4GB is not enough. Like streaming video,
or runnung a VM.


If I want to play Fortnite Battle Royale I don't stand a chance, if all
I want to do is browse, sent mail and watch movies it's fine.

https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/18476782


If you do nothing. 2GB is emaugh. :-)

--
\ / https://home.deds.nl/~jawade/
---------///--------------------------------------
/ \ Bye, BugHunter

On Tue, 16 Jun 2020 08:24:29 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:

On 6/16/2020 7:43 AM, BugHunter wrote:
Ken Blake schreef op Di 16 Jun 2020 om 07:39:
On 6/16/2020 7:24 AM, BugHunter wrote:
Ken Blake schreef op Di 16 Jun 2020 om 07:01:
On 6/16/2020 5:47 AM, philo wrote:
When Win10 was first released I tired it on a few lower end
machines and found performance totally unsatisfactory with 4
gigs of RAM.

6 gigs was "sort of " acceptable but I announced here (a few
months ago) that I would not bother with Win10 unless the
machine has at least 8 gigs of RAM.

Someone mentioned that 4 gigs was working fine for them...so
I decided to try Win10 version 2004 on a machine with only 4
gigs of RAM.



I'll be darned, it was usable.



My next step though is to see if the mobo will support more
RAM.

How much RAM is appropriate for Windows 10, or any other version of
Windows, depends on what programs you run. It is *not* a
one-size-fits-all situation.

For a good working PC, you need 8GB.

That is *not* correct. As I said, it is *not* a
one-size-fits-all situation. My wife's computer has 4GB. She
does very little besides e-mail, web searches, and solitaire,
and the performance on her computer is just fine.

Well, let her play streaming video and at the same
time another application.

Again, as I said, it is *not* a one-size-fits-all situation. It
depends on what programs are running.

But the programs and the OS come to that, will grab all the memory
they can so build large caches to speed things up.

On 6/17/2020 1:15 AM, T wrote:
Not that I have noticed and I have to look at the
resource monitor ALL THE TIME.Â* It is unusual to get
above 3 GB.

Yeah, I'm seeing about 5 to 6 GB filled, there is 7 GB in standby
memory, and the rest is just free memory on my 16 GB desktop.

And it is really easy to tell if you need more RAM.
I use to sell a lot of it in prior years. Now-A-Days,
folks generally have more than they need.

Yup, generally true for newer systems, but there are older systems that
have not been upgraded, nor can they be upgraded, these are the cases
you have to worry about.

Yousuf Khan

On 6/16/2020 3:05 PM, BugHunter wrote:
Dex schreef op Di 16 Jun 2020 om 22:36:
On 16/06/2020 15:43, BugHunter wrote:
Ken Blake schreef op Di 16 Jun 2020 om 07:39:
On 6/16/2020 7:24 AM, BugHunter wrote:
Ken Blake schreef op Di 16 Jun 2020 om 07:01:
On 6/16/2020 5:47 AM, philo wrote:
When Win10 was first released I tired it on a few lower end
machines and
found performance totally unsatisfactory with 4 gigs of RAM.

6 gigs was "sort of " acceptable but I announced here (a few months
ago)
that I would not bother with Win10 unless the machine has at least 8
gigs of RAM.

Someone mentioned that 4 gigs was working fine for them...so I decided
to try Win10 version 2004 on a machine with only 4 gigs of RAM.


I'll be darned, it was usable.


My next step though is to see if the mobo will support more RAM.



How much RAM is appropriate for Windows 10, or any other version of
Windows, depends on what programs you run. It is *not* a
one-size-fits-all situation.


For a good working PC, you need 8GB.


That is *not* correct. As I said, it is *not* a one-size-fits-all
situation. My wife's computer has 4GB. She does very little besides
e-mail, web searches, and solitaire, and the performance on her computer
is just fine.


Well, let her play streaming video and at the same
time another application.


Operating System
Windows 10 Pro 64-bit (1909)
CPU
AMD Athlon II X2 220 41 °C
Regor 45nm Technology
RAM
4.00GB Dual-Channel DDR3 @ 530MHz (7-7-7-19)
Motherboard
FOXCONN 2AAF (CPU 1) 35 °C
Graphics
SyncMaster (1280x1024@60Hz)
1919MB ATI Radeon 3000 Graphics (HP)
Storage
465GB Crucial CT500MX500SSD1 (SATA (SSD))
111GB SATA SSD (SATA (SSD))
465GB Seagate ST3500312CS (SATA (SSD))
8GB Microsoft Virtual Disk (File-backed Virtual (SSD))


Runs fine, can even stream 1080p. Not 2 or 4K, cant even do that on Win7.


But with 8GB RAM, it runs more fine.



For heavy
tasks, 4GB is not enough.


I wasn't going to post any further in this thread, but since you said
that, I completely agree. That's been exactly my point all along. For
"non-heavy" tasks, 4GB is fine, and not everyone runs heavy tasks.



--
Ken

Dex wrote:
On 16/06/2020 23:05, BugHunter wrote:
Dex schreef op Di 16 Jun 2020 om 22:36:
On 16/06/2020 15:43, BugHunter wrote:
Ken Blake schreef op Di 16 Jun 2020 om 07:39:
On 6/16/2020 7:24 AM, BugHunter wrote:
Ken Blake schreef op Di 16 Jun 2020 om 07:01:
On 6/16/2020 5:47 AM, philo wrote:
When Win10 was first released I tired it on a few lower end
machines and
found performance totally unsatisfactory with 4 gigs of RAM.

6 gigs was "sort of " acceptable but I announced here (a few months
ago)
that I would not bother with Win10 unless the machine has at
least 8
gigs of RAM.

Someone mentioned that 4 gigs was working fine for them...so I
decided
to try Win10 version 2004 on a machine with only 4 gigs of RAM.


I'll be darned, it was usable.


My next step though is to see if the mobo will support more RAM.



How much RAM is appropriate for Windows 10, or any other version of
Windows, depends on what programs you run. It is *not* a
one-size-fits-all situation.


For a good working PC, you need 8GB.


That is *not* correct. As I said, it is *not* a one-size-fits-all
situation. My wife's computer has 4GB. She does very little besides
e-mail, web searches, and solitaire, and the performance on her
computer
is just fine.


Well, let her play streaming video and at the same
time another application.


Operating System
Windows 10 Pro 64-bit (1909)
CPU
AMD Athlon II X2 220 41 °C
Regor 45nm Technology
RAM
4.00GB Dual-Channel DDR3 @ 530MHz (7-7-7-19)
Motherboard
FOXCONN 2AAF (CPU 1) 35 °C
Graphics
SyncMaster (1280x1024@60Hz)
1919MB ATI Radeon 3000 Graphics (HP)
Storage
465GB Crucial CT500MX500SSD1 (SATA (SSD))
111GB SATA SSD (SATA (SSD))
465GB Seagate ST3500312CS (SATA (SSD))
8GB Microsoft Virtual Disk (File-backed Virtual (SSD))


Runs fine, can even stream 1080p. Not 2 or 4K, cant even do that on
Win7.


But with 8GB RAM, it runs more fine. For heavy
tasks, 4GB is not enough. Like streaming video,
or runnung a VM.


If I want to play Fortnite Battle Royale I don't stand a chance, if all
I want to do is browse, sent mail and watch movies it's fine.

https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/18476782

"Posted on 2019-01-24 by guenni"

https://borncity.com/win/2019/01/24/...-it-trustable/

Nothing earthshaking really.

*******

It looks like the EXEs are inside it, on-board.
I was worried initially, that the original download
was a stub and would download stuff without telling you.

06/17/2020 05:24 PM DIR $PLUGINSDIR
06/17/2020 05:35 AM 11,264 System.dll
06/17/2020 05:35 AM 6,656 md5dll.dll
06/17/2020 05:35 AM 20,992 inetc.dll
06/17/2020 05:35 AM 7,168 ShellExecAsUser.dll
06/17/2020 05:35 AM 6,656 RealProgress.dll
06/17/2020 05:35 AM 6,656 nsExec.dll

02/29/2020 08:19 PM 823,296 UserBenchMarkRunEngine.exe
02/29/2020 08:19 PM 443,904 UBMCPUBench.exe
02/29/2020 08:19 PM 587,264 UBMRAMBench.exe
02/29/2020 08:19 PM 297,984 UBMGPUStats.exe
02/29/2020 08:19 PM 593,408 UBMDriveBench.exe
02/29/2020 08:19 PM 754,688 SHADOW.exe
06/17/2020 05:24 PM DIR Media
02/29/2020 08:19 PM 757,248 CUBE.exe
02/29/2020 08:19 PM 768,000 POM.exe
02/29/2020 08:19 PM 785,408 FLOCK.exe
02/29/2020 08:19 PM 756,224 NBODY.exe
02/29/2020 08:19 PM 779,776 RTAGS.exe
05/26/2010 06:41 AM 2,106,216 D3DCompiler_43.dll
05/26/2010 06:41 AM 1,998,168 d3dx9_43.dll
05/26/2010 06:41 AM 470,880 d3dx10_43.dll

Pretty impressive for a 5,836,041 byte download. Usually
benchmarks are a lot larger.

Paul

Ken Blake schreef op Wo 17 Jun 2020 om 07:52:
On 6/16/2020 3:05 PM, BugHunter wrote:
Dex schreef op Di 16 Jun 2020 om 22:36:
On 16/06/2020 15:43, BugHunter wrote:
Ken Blake schreef op Di 16 Jun 2020 om 07:39:
On 6/16/2020 7:24 AM, BugHunter wrote:
Ken Blake schreef op Di 16 Jun 2020 om 07:01:
On 6/16/2020 5:47 AM, philo wrote:
When Win10 was first released I tired it on a few lower end
machines and
found performance totally unsatisfactory with 4 gigs of RAM.

6 gigs was "sort of " acceptable but I announced here (a few months
ago)
that I would not bother with Win10 unless the machine has at least 8
gigs of RAM.

Someone mentioned that 4 gigs was working fine for them...so I decided
to try Win10 version 2004 on a machine with only 4 gigs of RAM.


I'll be darned, it was usable.


My next step though is to see if the mobo will support more RAM.



How much RAM is appropriate for Windows 10, or any other version of
Windows, depends on what programs you run. It is *not* a
one-size-fits-all situation.


For a good working PC, you need 8GB.


That is *not* correct. As I said, it is *not* a one-size-fits-all
situation. My wife's computer has 4GB. She does very little besides
e-mail, web searches, and solitaire, and the performance on her computer
is just fine.


Well, let her play streaming video and at the same
time another application.


Operating System
Windows 10 Pro 64-bit (1909)
CPU
AMD Athlon II X2 220 41 °C
Regor 45nm Technology
RAM
4.00GB Dual-Channel DDR3 @ 530MHz (7-7-7-19)
Motherboard
FOXCONN 2AAF (CPU 1) 35 °C
Graphics
SyncMaster (1280x1024@60Hz)
1919MB ATI Radeon 3000 Graphics (HP)
Storage
465GB Crucial CT500MX500SSD1 (SATA (SSD))
111GB SATA SSD (SATA (SSD))
465GB Seagate ST3500312CS (SATA (SSD))
8GB Microsoft Virtual Disk (File-backed Virtual (SSD))


Runs fine, can even stream 1080p. Not 2 or 4K, cant even do that on Win7.


But with 8GB RAM, it runs more fine.



For heavy
tasks, 4GB is not enough.


I wasn't going to post any further in this thread, but since you said
that, I completely agree. That's been exactly my point all along. For
"non-heavy" tasks, 4GB is fine, and not everyone runs heavy tasks.


But when you buy a computer, you are sure to get
it use only for "non-heavy" tasks ??

--
\ / https://home.deds.nl/~jawade/
---------///--------------------------------------
/ \ Bye, BugHunter

BugHunter wrote:
Ken Blake schreef op Wo 17 Jun 2020 om 07:52:

I wasn't going to post any further in this thread, but since you said
that, I completely agree. That's been exactly my point all along. For
"non-heavy" tasks, 4GB is fine, and not everyone runs heavy tasks.


But when you buy a computer, you are sure to get
it use only for "non-heavy" tasks ??

That's a function of the user.

For people who are computer-phobes, their usage of
a computer can be quite limited. They might not even
install software on it, and just use what is on the
machine.

Such people might use the machine for comms, and not
for content creation.

Paul

Paul schreef op Do 18 Jun 2020 om 12:18:
BugHunter wrote:
Ken Blake schreef op Wo 17 Jun 2020 om 07:52:

I wasn't going to post any further in this thread, but since you said
that, I completely agree. That's been exactly my point all along. For
"non-heavy" tasks, 4GB is fine, and not everyone runs heavy tasks.


But when you buy a computer, you are sure to get
it use only for "non-heavy" tasks ??

That's a function of the user.

For people who are computer-phobes, their usage of
a computer can be quite limited. They might not even
install software on it, and just use what is on the
machine.

Such people might use the machine for comms, and not
for content creation.


OK

--
\ / https://home.deds.nl/~jawade/
---------///--------------------------------------
/ \ Bye, BugHunter

On 2020-06-17 06:43, Yousuf Khan wrote:
On 6/17/2020 1:15 AM, T wrote:
Not that I have noticed and I have to look at the
resource monitor ALL THE TIME.Â* It is unusual to get
above 3 GB.

Yeah, I'm seeing about 5 to 6 GB filled, there is 7 GB in standby
memory, and the rest is just free memory on my 16 GB desktop.

And it is really easy to tell if you need more RAM.
I use to sell a lot of it in prior years. Now-A-Days,
folks generally have more than they need.

Yup, generally true for newer systems, but there are older systems that
have not been upgraded, nor can they be upgraded, these are the cases
you have to worry about.

Â*Â*Â*Â*Yousuf Khan

I sometimes get the impression that there is a debate between
husband and wife and one of them is using me to tell the other
it is time for a new computer.

My motherboard takes up to 32 GB, but I only have 16 installed.
Right now with a ton of stuff running and two Virtual Machines (W7 and
W109) fired up, I am sitting at 15 GB used.

Hmmmm...... I thin I will reclaim a few GB from W10

On Tue, 16 Jun 2020 22:18:21 -0700, T wrote:

On 2020-06-16 21:25, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Tue, 16 Jun 2020 13:20:29 -0700, T wrote:

On 2020-06-16 07:48, Yousuf Khan wrote:
On 6/16/2020 8:47 AM, philo wrote:
When Win10 was first released I tired it on a few lower end machines
and found performance totally unsatisfactory with 4 gigs of RAM.

6 gigs was "sort of " acceptable but I announced here (a few months
ago) that I would not bother with Win10 unless the machine has at
least 8 gigs of RAM.

Someone mentioned that 4 gigs was working fine for them...so I decided
to try Win10 version 2004 on a machine with only 4 gigs of RAM.


I'll be darned, it was usable.


My next step though is to see if the mobo will support more RAM.

It depends on how much crapware is loaded upon bootup about how well it
runs on 4 GB.

Â*Â*Â*Â*Yousuf Khan


Start your task manager, fire up all your programs,
check and see how much memory you are using. If
you are under 3.5 GB, don't waste your money.

I've got Forte Agent, Firefox, Light Room, Photoshop, Task Manager,
Settings - all running. Most of them doing nothing much, and I am
using 7.6 GB. I can end up with a screen full of Firefox Tabs or on
other occasions several Photoshop and Light Room images running but I
doubt that it takes much more. 8GB would be a squeeze but 16 seems to
be ample.



Hi Erin,

I'd go with 16. You need the margin! And RAM is really
cheap now-a-days.

I've actually got 32GB.

There have been occasions when I have seen it heavily loaded.


Here is a good placed to start.

https://www.kingston.com/us/memory?m...0and%20Laptops

scroll down past the advertising. Gives nice specs
on your motherboard's memory slots too.

In 24 years of using Kingston, I have only had one bad
memory module and they replaced it on the spot

-T



--

Regards,

Eric Stevens