New
#1
More RAM doesn't always amount to better performance
Hi all
Reading these threads a lot I get the impression that a great many people think that simply by adding more RAM on a computer will automatically improve the performance.
This is not necessarily true as there are many many factors that need to be taken into account.
The amount of REAL RAM allocated by the OS is based on very complex algorithims and not purely on the size of the application being run. For example I might have a HUGE powerpoint presentation (say 50 MB -- a lot for a powerpoint demo) but the actual REAL RAM needed is of the order of a few KB (yes Kilobytes).
Most applications (possibly Photoshop is one of the rare exceptions) do not need to be 100% loaded into RAM while working. Only the amount of real data "pages" need to be accessed at any one time. The amount will obviously dependon what the application is doing , other processes etc etc.
For example in the power point example as above the data has to be transferred to a Video display -- whilst this is being done the next "slice" of data can be read from the "paging" disk.
Applications which wait a lot on input from the User (such as word processing) can use actually a very small amount of RAM since the keyboard input is far far slower than any DISK I/O required to get data from paging into real RAM.
So before you go "buying huge amounts of RAM" think what you actually need.
For a lot of people better graphics, faster CPU and above all FASTER DISKS might make for a snappier system than increasing the amount of RAM once you've got a reasonable base amount installed.
An 8GB RAM system with very slow disks and poor graphics is often far more frustrating to use than a 3GB machine with lightning fast disks and a decent graphic card irrespective of the CPU installed .
I would hazard a bet here that the biggest bottleneck in 99.9% of home systems is not RAM or graphic card but poor DISKS.
Cheers
jimbo