Win10 and RAM

On 6/16/2020 10:39 AM, BugHunter wrote:
Ken Blake schreef op Di 16 Jun 2020 om 10:33:
On 6/16/2020 8:38 AM, BugHunter wrote:
Ken Blake schreef op Di 16 Jun 2020 om 08:24:
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.


Of course, but for normal use 8GB is the minimal
size. Think about that W10 is updated and asks
also more RAM.


There is no *normal* use. We are all different and use our computers in
different ways. What's the minimum for one person is not the same as
what's minimum for everyone.


Okay, for average use.


We clearly disagree, but I don't want to argue with you any further. You
are welcome to believe whatever you want.

--
Ken

nospam wrote:
In article , Ken Blake
wrote:

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.

Of course, but for normal use 8GB is the minimal
size. Think about that W10 is updated and asks
also more RAM.

There is no *normal* use. We are all different and use our computers in
different ways. What's the minimum for one person is not the same as
what's minimum for everyone.

there definitely is normal use, with outliers at either end.

someone who does nothing but email can get away with very little
memory, but that's hardly representative of what people do with a
computer.

meanwhile, someone pushing it to the limit, such as video rendering,
virtual machines, etc., will need as much memory as they can afford or
the maximum that the computer can support, whichever one is the
limiting factor (usually the former).

most people fall somewhere in the middle, with 8 gig being be a minimum
to use modern apps and 16 gig being more comfortable.

Carrying excessive RAM can be counterproductive.

If you only use your excessively large RAM once a year,
you're going to hate the rest of the year while
you pay for the overheads:

- extended BIOS start time
- extended OS boot time (Win10 charges you approximately
0.3 seconds startup delay per gigabyte of RAM it will be using)
- large hibernation file reservation
- potentially long hibernation times (imagine waiting 8 minutes
to shutdown, then waiting 8 minutes to start up, for some value
of excessive RAM and slow hard drive). The time is a function
of the RAM actually being used, so an "idle desktop" still
hibernates quickly.

The 16GB number, if you really don't need gobs of RAM,
is a good place to stop.

Bill Gates could easily have a system with 2TB of RAM
(for $40,000), but he'd have to take a nap while it
booted :-)

And a machine big enough to run that much memory,
you run the Win10 Workstation OS version, to get
your moneys worth out of the hardware. It benches
a bit better (as seen in the bench tables on
some of the enthusiast sites).

Paul

In article , Paul
wrote:

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.

Of course, but for normal use 8GB is the minimal
size. Think about that W10 is updated and asks
also more RAM.

There is no *normal* use. We are all different and use our computers in
different ways. What's the minimum for one person is not the same as
what's minimum for everyone.

there definitely is normal use, with outliers at either end.

someone who does nothing but email can get away with very little
memory, but that's hardly representative of what people do with a
computer.

meanwhile, someone pushing it to the limit, such as video rendering,
virtual machines, etc., will need as much memory as they can afford or
the maximum that the computer can support, whichever one is the
limiting factor (usually the former).

most people fall somewhere in the middle, with 8 gig being be a minimum
to use modern apps and 16 gig being more comfortable.

Carrying excessive RAM can be counterproductive.

no.

If you only use your excessively large RAM once a year,
you're going to hate the rest of the year while
you pay for the overheads:

- extended BIOS start time
- extended OS boot time (Win10 charges you approximately
0.3 seconds startup delay per gigabyte of RAM it will be using)

cold-booting, when a memory test is done, is rarely needed, and the
time it takes depends on cpu and memory speed.

sleep/wake when not in use, or leave it running and just turn off the
display.

- large hibernation file reservation

who cares. disk space is cheap.

- potentially long hibernation times (imagine waiting 8 minutes
to shutdown, then waiting 8 minutes to start up, for some value
of excessive RAM and slow hard drive). The time is a function
of the RAM actually being used, so an "idle desktop" still
hibernates quickly.

something is very wrong if it's taking 8 minutes to hibernate.

The 16GB number, if you really don't need gobs of RAM,
is a good place to stop.

16 gig reasonable for most people, at least currently (that will of
course change in a few years).

however, more memory is always good, which can be used for cache if
apps aren't using it.

Bill Gates could easily have a system with 2TB of RAM
(for $40,000), but he'd have to take a nap while it
booted :-)

2tb memory is a lot less than $40k nor does it need a nap to boot,
which doesn't need to be done very often anyway.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

Even when multitasking a lot? I only have 6 GB of RAM on my decade old PC.
--
Picard Day!
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly.
/\___/\ Ant(Dude) @ http://aqfl.net & http://antfarm.home.dhs.org /
/ /\ /\ \ http://antfarm.ma.cx. Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail.
| |o o| |
\ _ /
( )

Though for my own purposes I agree that 8 -16 gigs would be ideal...
My point was simply to retract my statement that 4 gigs would be unusable.

For general browsing and a word processor one could get by.

On 6/16/2020 10:55 AM, Rene Lamontagne wrote:
Right, Just checked task manager and with Firefox and Thunderbird
running my system is using 2.6 GB out of 16 GB. with other programs
running rarely does it go over 3.4 GB.

Well, Windows will use as much memory as it can get, it doesn't matter
how many programs are loaded, or how much each program takes up. Since
the Windows (and many other OS's) memory model uses a demand-paging
system, the OS loads as much of a program into memory as it can fit, and
whatever parts can't fit, it just leaves on the disk, to be loaded later
when needed. The more memory you have, the more of the programs can be
loaded into memory right at the start. Of course, if you got only a
couple of major programs running with a bunch of minor programs in the
background, then it's not going to be able to fill all of memory, if you
have more RAM than there are programs running requiring it.

Yousuf Khan

In article m, philo
wrote:

Though for my own purposes I agree that 8 -16 gigs would be ideal...
My point was simply to retract my statement that 4 gigs would be unusable.

For general browsing and a word processor one could get by.

barely, especially with modern web sites or more than a tab or two.

philo wrote:

Though for my own purposes I agree that 8 -16 gigs would be ideal...
My point was simply to retract my statement that 4 gigs would be
unusable.

For general browsing and a word processor one could get by.

On my el-cheapo 11" 4G RAM laptop I currently have open Windows
Explorer, Chrome (streaming a local TV station), Firefox (sans
JavaScript), Kindle (with ebook loaded), Microsoft News (the Windows
app), BlueStacks (Android emulator with Android app SmartNews loaded),
and Thunderbird with which I am currently posting this.

Task Manager says the memory is at 85%. I leave all this open so I don't
have to wait for the apps I use often to load. I leave it sleeping when
not in use so it resumes in a just a few seconds. Even when hibernating
it resumes in around 15 seconds.

A very usable (and very portable) device, even at 4G IMO...YMMV.

ASUS VivoBook L203MA-DS04
Intel Celeron N4000 Processor (4M Cache, upto 2.6 GHz)
Intel UHD Graphics 600
11.6 inch HD (1366 x 768) display
64GB eMMC flash storage
4GB LPDDR4 RAM
HD Webcam
0.7 inch thin, 2.2 pounds

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.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On 6/16/2020 4:20 PM, T wrote:
Start your task manager, fire up all your programs,
check and see how much memory you are using.Â* If
you are under 3.5 GB, don't waste your money.

Windows will use as much memory as it can use and try to fill up
whatever amount of RAM you have. If you have more RAM, then Windows will
load more parts of a program into RAM rather keep it in virtual memory
and have to access the disk.

Yousuf Khan

On 2020-06-16 21:46, Yousuf Khan wrote:
On 6/16/2020 4:20 PM, T wrote:
Start your task manager, fire up all your programs,
check and see how much memory you are using.Â* If
you are under 3.5 GB, don't waste your money.

Windows will use as much memory as it can use and try to fill up
whatever amount of RAM you have. If you have more RAM, then Windows will
load more parts of a program into RAM rather keep it in virtual memory
and have to access the disk.

Â*Â*Â*Â*Yousuf Khan

Not that I have noticed and I have to look at the
resource monitor ALL THE TIME. It is unusual to get
above 3 GB.

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.

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.

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