Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Posted: 12/14/2001 12:56:23 PM EST
Just got back from Circuit City where I picked up 2 256M PC133 RAM chips for $20 each after rebate. My current system running Win 98 with an AMD ATHLON 900MHZ was choking on the 128M it came with (this should be a crime against nature, but that's another story). Just, DAMN! [i]Everything[/i]is faster, including page loading on the 'net - feels like a cable connection! Get to Circuit City NOW![:D]
Link Posted: 12/14/2001 1:04:41 PM EST
Not to rain on your parade or anything, but you should of bought the 512m's. If you think 384m is fast, you should see how much faster 1mb loads.
Link Posted: 12/14/2001 1:06:07 PM EST
EeeeEEEeeeeWWWwwww, you [b]don't[/b] have a cable or DSL connection? [:)] I forgot what a modem looked like years ago. I hate dial-up with a passion. Back in the day (1995) I went to a ISDN line for a whopping $250 a month... but it was 128K of digital sweetness. Then cable, then DSL. Man, if you have cable or DSL in your area, GET IT. If you're into speed it will be the best $40 a month you've ever spent. I do realize not everyone has access to such services though... and for you, I am truly sorry. [:D]
Link Posted: 12/14/2001 1:10:46 PM EST
Originally Posted By shooterX308: Just got back from Circuit City where I picked up 2 256M PC133 RAM chips for $20 each after rebate. My current system running Win 98 with an AMD ATHLON 900MHZ was choking on the 128M it came with (this should be a crime against nature, but that's another story). Just, DAMN! [i]Everything[/i]is faster, including page loading on the 'net - feels like a cable connection! Get to Circuit City NOW![:D]
View Quote
Cheap RAM has really been a godsend to those of us in the 3d business.. all my machines have 2 GB RAM now.. which means nice, large, juicy textures and complex models. Mmmmmmm.... textures....
Link Posted: 12/14/2001 1:11:32 PM EST
I could have sworn that Win9x couldn't really use anything above 128meg of RAM. Anything above was just wasted. Win9x did not have the proper code to use large memory models. That is why one would run the NT line (NT 3.x, 4.x, Win2k, XP). But hey, if it feels faster, that is all that counts.
Link Posted: 12/14/2001 1:43:51 PM EST
Originally Posted By Guzzler: I could have sworn that Win9x couldn't really use anything above 128meg of RAM. Anything above was just wasted. Win9x did not have the proper code to use large memory models. That is why one would run the NT line (NT 3.x, 4.x, Win2k, XP). But hey, if it feels faster, that is all that counts.
View Quote
Not true...
Link Posted: 12/14/2001 2:11:26 PM EST
so....you guys are saying my e-machines 600 celery with 64 meg-o-ram and running at 49k dialup is...uh...er... i'm crushed.
Link Posted: 12/14/2001 2:15:02 PM EST
640MRAM ROCKS!
View Quote
640MRAM(sic) should be enough for anybody.z
Link Posted: 12/14/2001 2:53:00 PM EST
640.....psssshhhhh.... olympus:/usr/sbin> ./prtconf System Configuration: Sun Microsystems sun4u Memory size: 4096 Megabytes Thbbpppptttt! [:P] Windows would still sucks a$$ on that much RAM.
Link Posted: 12/14/2001 7:21:20 PM EST
Originally Posted By Guzzler: I could have sworn that Win9x couldn't really use anything above 128meg of RAM. Anything above was just wasted. Win9x did not have the proper code to use large memory models. That is why one would run the NT line (NT 3.x, 4.x, Win2k, XP). But hey, if it feels faster, that is all that counts.
View Quote
You're thinking early DOS. Even late in the DOS game you had access to EMS, XMS, and DPMI memory above 1mb. Windows 9x can use that memory. The major problem with 9x is the OS is 16-bit. 32-bit calls into the OS have to be "thunked" down to 16-bit calls. There are issues with the virtual machine structure and multitasking as well. Anyway, this is egghead crap so I won't bore anyone with it. NT and 2000 are superior OS's however.
Top Top