Ian
Site Administrator
Registered: 28th Aug 99
Location: Liverpool
User status: Offline
|
quote:
I run Vista 64 on an 8-core 2.8 GHz machine with 10 GB RAM, and it runs fine. The problems start when people run Vista on underpowered machines.
http://www.engadget.com/2008/04/28/microsoft-says-xp-is-defintely-dead-in-june-dell-says-itll-kee/
Now forgive me for being a bit of an old-schooler where hardware is concerned but this guy considers less than 10Gb of RAM to be underpowered?
10 thousand million bytes? That's loads.
|
_Allan_
Member
Registered: 24th Mar 04
User status: Offline
|
I think most people would be hard pushed to use more than 8GB. I have 4 in a new machine and it's fine. Although not running vista. I'd say 8 max is more than enough for modern applications and games. Unless using some rendering or cad programs etc... Maybe in a few years time 
|
Leighton
Member
Registered: 21st Feb 01
Location: Liverpool
User status: Offline
|
Anything more than 4 gig and you must be running a server or some meety rendering programs
i remember nibbles what a game that was now my phone has a 3d version
bring back original nibbles and that one with the gorilas throwing bananas at each other accross a "city skyline" and you had to put the angle in and power
what a game that was 
|
ed
Member
Registered: 10th Sep 03
User status: Offline
|
I'd use 10gb of RAM for Solidworks. That program is more bloated and full of more shit than Vista alone. It'd probably still manage to run out and crash the machine after a few hours of hacking too.
|
ed
Member
Registered: 10th Sep 03
User status: Offline
|
Rendering doesn't use much RAM. It uses a lot of maths.
|
Jambo
Member
Registered: 8th Sep 01
Location: Maidenhead, Drives: VXR Arctic
User status: Offline
|
im no techy but vista seems very slow compared to XP using 512mb ram and im using 4gb ram 
[Edited on 28-04-2008 by Jambo]
|
Neo
Member
Registered: 20th Feb 07
Location: Essex
User status: Offline
|
I have seen Vista Running on HUNDREDS of machines, literally. I would at no point in time say you require 10 GB's of Ram to use it.
I have seen it running perfectly fine on dual core 1.8's with 2gb of Ram (laptop) so thats just overkill.
Just a tosser trying to show off. Give him a month and won't have the most highest tech machine and will feel like a dick.
|
Russ
Member
Registered: 14th Mar 04
Location: Armchair
User status: Offline
|
runs fine on my 8gb ram and 4x3.7ghz cpu's 
|
pow
Premium Member
Registered: 11th Sep 06
Location: Hazlemere, Buckinghamshire
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Neo
I have seen Vista Running on HUNDREDS of machines, literally. I would at no point in time say you require 10 GB's of Ram to use it.
I have seen it running perfectly fine on dual core 1.8's with 2gb of Ram (laptop) so thats just overkill.
Just a tosser trying to show off. Give him a month and won't have the most highest tech machine and will feel like a dick.
My work laptop, basic as it is runs Vista Business very well - Celeron M processor and 2GB of RAM. I keep the system well cleaned and I never have to wait for anything to load?
|
Daveskater
Premium Member
Registered: 29th Apr 08
Location: Oxford, UK Drives: Jap wagon
User status: Offline
|
I run Vista Ultimate on an Athlon XP-M 2600+ (in a desktop) and 1GB PC2100. I had to upgrade my CPU and RAM for it, but it's not too bad. In comparison to my dad's E6550 and 2GB PC2 5300 it's like a 486, but it gets me by until I get the money for a new rig hehe.
BTW, first post  , and yes, I'm a nerd 
Numberwang!
Originally posted by AlunJ
I like you Dave, you are a man of men
Originally Whatapp'd by Neo
Dave's maybe capable of a drive-by cuddle
Look at my pictures
|
PhilC
Member
Registered: 21st Jan 06
Location: Lancs, UK
User status: Offline
|
Vista runs fine on my 900mhz eee pc.
|
