Ram to run Windows XP

[John Wolf]

My folks PC only has 512MB of RAM. This seems okay, but for faster speed
would you encourage more?

John

 

[Just D.]

1GB should be good, you will notice the difference right away, 2GB should be
fine, more - better.

Just D.

 

[Malke]

My folks PC only has 512MB of RAM. This seems okay, but for faster speed
would you encourage more?

It depends on what they do with it. For web surfing, email, and maybe writing
a few word processing documents, XP does fine with 512MB of RAM. If the
computer is slow, there are probably other reasons.

Some general reasons for computer slowness:

1. Computer hasn't been maintained -
http://www.elephantboycomputers.com/page2.html#Maintenance

2. Computer is infected with malware -
http://www.elephantboycomputers.com/page2.html#Removing_Malware

3. Hard drive is too full. Remove unnecessary stuff, uninstall unused
programs. Don't forget to back up!
http://www.elephantboycomputers.com/page2.html#Backing_Up

4. Flaky third-party software. Toolbars and add-ons are particular culprits
in this area. Uninstall toolbars (Google, Yahoo, ISP-branded, etc.) and look
carefully at what add-ons are in use in your browser(s).

5. Computer has too many unnecessary programs/processes running in the
background. Manage your Startup:

For XP - How to Troubleshoot By Using the Msconfig Utility in Windows XP -
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=310560
The free Autoruns program is very useful for managing your Startup -
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sysinternals/default.mspx

6. User is running a bloated/invasive antivirus program such as ones from
Norton and McAfee. Replace with a better program. I recommend either NOD32
(commercial) or Avast (free). Avira is also good but the free version has an
unpleasant nag screen (Google for instructions as to how to disable this).
User may also be running more than one real-time antivirus/firewall/security
program.

7. User has installed new programs that are processor and/or memory-
intensive (Photoshop, AutoCAD, Mathmatica or the like) and doesn't have the
necessary hardware power.

8. Hard drive is failing and is in PIO Mode. This is very dramatically slow
(like being back in 1985). See Hans-Georg Michna's information here:
http://winhlp.com/?q=node/10

In addition to the above, also see
http://miekiemoes.blogspot.com/2008/02/help-my-computer-is-slow.html

Note: If computer has always been slow, in addition to items above user may
have purchased a machine with a less powerful processor and not enough RAM
(memory). For normal computer use, 512MB-1GB is usually sufficient for XP;
Vista should have a minimum of 2GB; Windows 7 is less demanding than Vista
but the minimum of 2GB should also be used.

Malke

 

[Shenan Stanley]

My folks PC only has 512MB of RAM. This seems okay, but for faster
speed would you encourage more?

Faster speed? Maybe. Depends - are your parents using all they have now?

CTRL+SHIFT+ESC
Performance tab

What do you see in terms of the memory usage/available?

 

[JS]

My folks PC only has 512MB of RAM. This seems okay, but for faster speed
would you encourage more?

John


--
To drink or not to drink?
http://www.cerm.info/bible_studies/Topical/alcoholic_beverages.htm
AIM-Crucifyself03; Yahoo-johnwjobs; Skype-jwolf6589;
(e-mail address removed); IRC-BibleJohn

For most applications 512MB ram is
more than enough. If however they are doing
a lot of photo or video editing, 1 to 2GB is a
better choice.

If they have an integrated video chip as opposed
to a stand alone Video card then either adding more
memory or installing a video card will help.

Some computers, especially if was a low cost entry
level PC come with slow 5400 RPM hard drives. In
that case a new fast 7200 RPM drive will improve
performance noticeably.

 

[John Wolf]

I am going to try this. Windows does not do as good of a job as the Mac at
maintaining itself. Although it has improved since Win 3.11 /9.x it still
has a while to go before it works as smart as the Mac.

Thanks!


John

 

[John Wolf]

For most applications 512MB ram is
more than enough. If however they are doing
a lot of photo or video editing, 1 to 2GB is a
better choice.

They are not. Windows XP Service pack 3 just prompted up as a update and I
am running it know. Hopefully this will make it run faster. Don't know why
MS has to work like this. But oh well..

If they have an integrated video chip as opposed
to a stand alone Video card then either adding more
memory or installing a video card will help.

Not sure. Computer was built by a friend.

Some computers, especially if was a low cost entry
level PC come with slow 5400 RPM hard drives. In
that case a new fast 7200 RPM drive will improve
performance noticeably.

HD was upgraded recently from the original 80GB to 500GB or something to
that effect (cant remember). However need to fix the speed issues as its not
the HD. Looks like this service pack 3 install is going to take a year.

Right know its inspecting current configuration this is going to take 5
years, can I stop it without infecting my system?


John

 

[JS]

They are not. Windows XP Service pack 3 just prompted up as a update and I
am running it know. Hopefully this will make it run faster. Don't know why
MS has to work like this. But oh well..


Not sure. Computer was built by a friend.


HD was upgraded recently from the original 80GB to 500GB or something to
that effect (cant remember). However need to fix the speed issues as its
not
the HD. Looks like this service pack 3 install is going to take a year.

Right know its inspecting current configuration this is going to take 5
years, can I stop it without infecting my system?


John



--
To drink or not to drink?
http://www.cerm.info/bible_studies/Topical/alcoholic_beverages.htm
AIM-Crucifyself03; Yahoo-johnwjobs; Skype-jwolf6589;
(e-mail address removed); IRC-BibleJohn

It could be a sub-process or application that's running in the background
and taking all the CPU resources and slowing down the PC.

To find and display what could be the problem try Process Explorer:
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb896653.aspx

Once you have Process Explorer installed and running:
In the taskbar select View and check:
'Show Process Tree' and the 'Show Lower Pane' options.
Move your mouse cursor over any column in the right hand pane and
right click and check the following boxes:
'Command Line' and 'Version'.
Then expand the process named 'Explorer' (click on the + sign)
In the column on the left named 'CPU', look for any high CPU usage.
Next click on the CPU column to sort the processes by %CPU usage
(Highest to Lowest).

Move the mouse cursor over any process,
you should see a popup with some detailed info.
Then mouse over the process that's using most or all the CPU %.
Then click on that process to highlight it,
Now that it's highlighted, right click and from the options listed select:
'Search Online'.
This should display what out there on the web about that process.
You can also double click on any process to open up a more detailed
'Properties' window.
Note: some entries like Explorer, System/Services, and Svchost
may need to be expanded to show the detail (sub processes),
in this case click on the + located to the left of the entry.

An alternate method when using Process Explorer
is to double click on the Graph just below the Menu bar.
This will open the 'System Information' window, which has a larger display
of all three graphs. Move your mouse over any spike in the
CPU Usage graph to see what process/application or service is the cause
of the spike.

Another tool available is: What's Running
http://www.whatsrunning.net/whatsrunning/main.aspx

 

[Patrick Keenan]

My folks PC only has 512MB of RAM. This seems okay, but for faster speed
would you encourage more?

John

More can help, but it won't be an overriding factor in system speed. More
important is the processor type and what you're asking the machine to do.

 

[Patrick Keenan]

They are not. Windows XP Service pack 3 just prompted up as a update and I
am running it know. Hopefully this will make it run faster. Don't know why
MS has to work like this. But oh well..

SP3 will *not* make the system faster.

All non-obsolete software requires, and gets, updates. Macs and Linux
systems aren't much different in that regard.

If there are no updates, it's because nobody is using or maintaining the
software.

 

[Shenan Stanley]

I am going to try this. Windows does not do as good of a job as the
Mac at maintaining itself. Although it has improved since Win 3.11
/9.x it still has a while to go before it works as smart as the Mac.

hah
That's funny.

I love the macintosh, but it actually maintaining itself... Thanks - I
needed the laugh.

When you find the OS that maintains itself in all cases and does it well -
I'd say let us know - but we all will already.
*grin*

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

My folks PC only has 512MB of RAM. This seems okay, but for faster speed
would you encourage more?

Although you will undoubtedly get some answers encouraging more, I
don't necessarily. Here's my standard reply on this subject.

How much RAM you need for good performance is *not* a
one-size-fits-all situation. You get good performance if the amount of
RAM you have keeps you from using the page file significantly, and
that depends on what apps you run. Most people running a typical range
of business applications under XP find that somewhere around 512MB
works well, others need more. Almost anyone will see poor performance
with less than 256MB. Some people, particularly those doing things
like editing large photographic images, can see a performance boost by
adding even more than 512MB--sometimes much more.

If you are currently using the page file significantly, more memory
will decrease or eliminate that usage, and improve your performance.
If you are not using the page file significantly, more memory will do
nothing for you. Go to
http://billsway.com/notes_public/winxp_tweaks/ and download
WinXP-2K_Pagefile.zip and monitor your page file usage. That should
give you a good idea of whether more memory can help, and if so, how
much more.

 

[VanguardLH]

My folks PC only has 512MB of RAM. This seems okay, but for faster speed
would you encourage more?

John

Entirely depends on what other than Windows gets loaded at startup.
Look at the Performance tab in Task Manager. How much unused
(available) physical memory is there? Have them load their normal
complement of applications and check this stat. If you have unused
memory, adding more means the OS will probably eat more but you didn't
need it for your apps.

 

[db]

that is sufficient ram to run windows, if it was the only
program installed.

but if you have added more programs and they also have
their requirements for memory,

then you also need to boost your configuration with more
ram.

so another 1/2 gig chip would help relieve your cpu of the
bottleneck.

more ram provides more data to be loaded and processed
by the cpu.


--
db·´¯`·...¸><)))º>
DatabaseBen, Retired Professional
- Systems Analyst
- Database Developer
- Accountancy
- Veteran of the Armed Forces
- @Hotmail.com
- nntp Postologist
~ "share the nirvana" - dbZen

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

[1PW]

My folks PC only has 512MB of RAM. This seems okay, but for faster speed
would you encourage more?

John

Hello John:

If your folks use their system in an average manner, then their
present 512KB will probably be adequate. However, if an eventual
upgrade to most of the Vista editions or even Windows 7 (if drivers
can be found) is contemplated, then an increase in RAM to 1GB or more
is quite reasonable.

 

[Arthur Shapiro]

My folks PC only has 512MB of RAM. This seems okay, but for faster speed
would you encourage more?

I would encourage it.

I've had need to help various folks with their XP boxes and found a half gig
to be discouragingly sluggish. We're not talking power users here - just
normal users doing unremarkable tasks with their machines.

The increase to even 3/4 gig has consistently improved performance, and a full
gig makes the machine decidedly "snappier".

Given the modest cost (in most cases) of a lousy half gig of appropriate
memory, I'd say the upgrade is worth it.

Art