From: John Poltorak (jpolt_at_bradnet.legend.co.uk)
Date: Mon Apr 03 2000 - 05:40:12 EDT
On Sat, Apr 01, 2000 at 12:38:34PM -0500, sehh of H.I.C. & D.B.S. wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Mar 2000 09:01:18 -1000 (HST), Vincent Poy wrote:
> > I run lots of apps under W98 and I did the Crucial upgrade on my
> >770Z with the 128 meg upgrade twice. The first one putting it up to 256MB
> >helped a little and was a NEC Module. The second time, it was a Micron
> >module. I wonder if there is any performance differences between the two
> >since the second time even after going to 320 MB's, it didn't seem to make
> >a difference.
> Its true that things may be faster on a system with more memory, for example
> from 32 to 64 or 64 to 128. But higher than 128 or 256 will depend on your applications.
If you have 250MB of RAM I would expect the system would get a considerable
boost if you used HPFS386 with a 150MB cache, especially for doing stuff
like compilations of source code.
> Remember that more memory doesn't mean the computer will read or calculate
> data any faster. It just has more memory to store things temporarily.
> More memory in reality means more applications can run at the same time, or
> applications that require huge amounts of memory will run without swapping.
> The difference of speed comes from eliminating swapping when you add more
> memory. On systems with 128megs of ram, the average user shouldn't even
> need to swap!
> My 600E with 64megs of ram with OS/2 doesn't use swap memory unless i load
> lots of server applications and do heavy internet stuff. When i use it for normal
> applications memory usage doesn't exceed 45 megs. And it shouldn't.
> A DB2 server serving a T1 with a few million transactions shouldn't need more
> than 160megs of ram.
> Ofcourse considering you are using OS/2 or Linux... ;>
> þ H.I.C. & D.B.S. þ OS/2 Warp þ Hellas þ
> þ ServerConfig þ ConfigEdit þ OS/2 UK UG þ
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Thu Jan 23 2003 - 09:55:57 EST