Is there a point of diminishing returns for memory? I currently have 1.25GB
installed in an Athlon 2800+ system. The mobo supports 3GB. Task manager
shows 557MB physical memory available when I load every program I typically
run and I usually don't have them all open at the same time. Does that
imply that more RAM won't do much other than increase the amount of memory
available (and sitting there unused) with a bunch of programs loaded?
Thanks for the help.
Malke - 24 May 2008 14:17 GMT
> Is there a point of diminishing returns for memory? I currently have
> 1.25GB
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> imply that more RAM won't do much other than increase the amount of memory
> available (and sitting there unused) with a bunch of programs loaded?
You don't need to add memory for SP2, or even SP3 which is the current
Service Pack level now. XP typically runs very well with the amount of
memory you have installed. Unless you're experiencing some difficulties,
and it doesn't sound like you are, there's no reason to increase the amount
of memory you have in the system.
Malke

Signature
MS-MVP
Elephant Boy Computers
www.elephantboycomputers.com
Don't Panic!
Gerry - 24 May 2008 17:33 GMT
Lee
You're looking at memory usage / available from the wrong perspective.
Available RAM at any given time is less important than the extent to
which the system resorts to using the pagefile at any given time. You
can get some idea of pagefile usage by comparing the Peak entry under
Commit Charge to the total installed RAM. If the Peak is more than the
installed RAM, and this is a regular occurence, then you need to add
RAM. If the Peak is less than the installed RAM then the pagefile usage
is minimal. Some usage of the pagefile is inevitable because some
operations require pagefile memory.
You can get more accurate information on pagefile usage using
pagefilemon, a small freeware utility.
Use page file monitor to observe what is the peak usage. Start it to run
immediately after start-up and look at the log. Pagefilemon takes
snapshots. You need to run it at the beginning of the session at then
run it again at intervals throughout the sessions. The log is Pagefile
log.txt. If you right click on the file in Windows Explorer and select
Send to, Desktop (Create Shortcut). The same applies to
XP_PageFileMon.exe.
A small utility to monitor pagefile usage:
http://www.dougknox.com/xp/utils/xp_pagefilemon.htm
Note that programs using undo features, particularly those associated
with graphics and photo editing, require large amounts of memory so if
you use this type of programme check these first observing how the page
usage increases when they start and whether the usage decreases when you
close the programme.
--
Hope this helps.
Gerry
~~~~
FCA
Stourport, England
Enquire, plan and execute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Is there a point of diminishing returns for memory? I currently have
> 1.25GB installed in an Athlon 2800+ system. The mobo supports 3GB.
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> with a bunch of programs loaded?
> Thanks for the help.
db.·.. ><))) ·>` .. . - 24 May 2008 17:59 GMT
a lot of off the shelf
software is designed
for the typical off the
shelf computers having
512 megs of ram.
the need for additional
ram come into play for
software that recommends
more ram like for graphics,
video and computer
programming.

Signature
db·´¯`·...¸><)))º>
> Is there a point of diminishing returns for memory? I currently have 1.25GB
> installed in an Athlon 2800+ system. The mobo supports 3GB. Task manager
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> Thanks for the help.
HeyBub - 24 May 2008 19:18 GMT
> Is there a point of diminishing returns for memory? I currently have
> 1.25GB installed in an Athlon 2800+ system. The mobo supports 3GB. Task
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> increase the amount of memory available (and sitting there unused)
> with a bunch of programs loaded?
There IS a point of diminishing returns, but you run smack up against the
physical limitations of XP (about 3.5GB) before you reach it.
Memory almost never sits there unused. XP tries very hard to maximize memory
utilization under the theory that if not used now, the opportunity is lost
forever.
Twayne - 25 May 2008 01:43 GMT
>> Is there a point of diminishing returns for memory? I currently have
>> 1.25GB installed in an Athlon 2800+ system. The mobo supports 3GB.
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> memory utilization under the theory that if not used now, the
> opportunity is lost forever.
Untrue; depending on what the machine is used for, 512 may well suffice,
a Meg is usually great and then past that the improvements begin to
dwindle quickly or are completely unnoticeable. Only a few very
specialized apps actually require more than a gig of ram; and almost no
normal user does either.
HeyBub - 25 May 2008 14:10 GMT
>> Memory almost never sits there unused. XP tries very hard to maximize
>> memory utilization under the theory that if not used now, the
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> very specialized apps actually require more than a gig of ram; and
> almost no normal user does either.
Is true. "Sufficient" was not the criteria.
Lil' Dave - 25 May 2008 05:09 GMT
> Is there a point of diminishing returns for memory? I currently have
> 1.25GB installed in an Athlon 2800+ system. The mobo supports 3GB. Task
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
> Thanks for the help.
In the specific case you cited, adding RAM won't do anything but increase
the default swapfile size for your configuration.

Signature
Dave
Memorial day:
In honor for those who served and
died for your freedom of speech, exercise
that right where you fear repercussion
the most for your voiced opinion.