How Much Memory For Vista 64

[DavidNJ]

I didn't need to be sold on a 64-bit version of Windows...all the internal buffers are larger than the 1988-1992 sized one in the 32-bit version (you may remember those days when the computer had a 16-bit OS, 16MB was a lot of RAM, and 110MB (yes MB) was a big hard drive. When NT came out I had to buy a CD drive and 2GB SCSI drive that cost $2000.

Well, the new computer currently has 4GB. 5-500gb disks provide 2TB of RAID5 for $500. 1,000 times the storage for 1/4 the price!

However, it seems to effortless run multiple Adobe products at the same time. Can I have everything open at once? Edit text in Word, tables in Excel, images in Photoshop, video in Premier, maybe Flash also, and just move between them? Maybe Lightwave at the same time for some 3D stuff? The memory issues in XP 32 has forced me to close applications I'm not using. Maybe no longer a problem?

In XP 2-3 Photoshop products seemed to be a problem. If they all run, is 4GB enough? If I want to run Apache, MyEclipse, and MySQL also (to run the web environment locally), maybe it should be bigger? The memory is cheap (the extra 2GB is under $100), but is it worthwhile?

[S.SubZero]

The size of the data you work with will be the deciding factor.

[GP-SE]

Vista x64 loves ram I would suggest 4GB since memory is so cheap, I'm running 4GB in Vista x64 and loving it.

[DavidNJ]

The answer is 4GB MINIMUM...any combination of programs will put you above 3GB quickly. I have had over 6GB in use , system has 8GB

[XJ.]

Depends on how much swapping you want going on. I think you will be doing well at 4GB. So long as you've done that, you should still have two ram slots open if you start bogging down.

[S.SubZero]

Originally Posted by DavidNJ

The answer is 4GB MINIMUM...any combination of programs will put you above 3GB quickly. I have had over 6GB in use , system has 8GB

Again, it depends on what you do.

I ran Vista x64 Ultimate for several months on 2GB. I could run a browser, Outlook, bittorrent, and tinker with a 512MB virtual machine in Virtualbox without coming close to my RAM limit.

The OS by itself uses about 700MB at idle, much of it caching. However this is rough, as it tends to float around as conditions allow. If you're pushing the amount of RAM in use, it starts unloading cache to free up RAM. On one occasion I did fire up couple of VM's, chewing up over a gig of RAM, and after a while I closed them and checked the task manager.. Vista offloaded enough cache to get the bare resource usage down to about 300MB. This did however start filling up again in a short time.

MS must be very confident in this mechanism, as even Server 2008 does it.

[ScuzziOne]

I'm running an 8GB system with 64-bit Vista and the OS seems to keep somewhere between 3 and 4 gigabytes of "stuff" cached up in memory. Assuming you want to take maximum advantage of this chaching scheme, then I'd have to agree with the 4 gigabyte minimum as recommended previously by others.

[Ninjin]

Fun fact, 64 bit operation systems can support up to 128 gigs of memory. To bad that there is probably no mobo that can support that much.

[chuckbam]

I have Vista 64 Ultimate. I have 8GBs of memory and the Vista reports it all. But, I have a feeling that it does not uses more than 4 Gbs in any situation. I have tested it every way I know how.

[Ninjin]

The thing is that you need to be pushing a lot of data to see the massive difference between 4 gigs and anything more. Really I don't suggest a 64 bit OS unless you are going to be moving a lot of data and can really utilize your full 8 gigs. Other than that I personally think it is a waste of money.

[chuckbam]

Originally Posted by Ninjin

The thing is that you need to be pushing a lot of data to see the massive difference between 4 gigs and anything more. Really I don't suggest a 64 bit OS unless you are going to be moving a lot of data and can really utilize your full 8 gigs. Other than that I personally think it is a waste of money.

I don't care about the money. I don't think I can get Vista 64 to address over 4GBs no matter what I do to test it. Now I am going to be honest. I am looking at Everest and a different Memory side bar utility to see if the memory is being used. I move some files, decode some vids, run Prime95 and a bunch of other stuff all at the same time and it looks like I am never using over 4GBs of memory. I have installed Vista many times on this system and that never changes.


.

[ATINUT]

Originally Posted by chuckbam

I don't care about the money. I don't think I can get Vista 64 to address over 4GBs no matter what I do to test it. Now I am going to be honest. I am looking at Everest and a different Memory side bar utility to see if the memory is being used. I move some files, decode some vids, run Prime95 and a bunch of other stuff all at the same time and it looks like I am never using over 4GBs of memory. I have installed Vista many times on this system and that never changes.


.

Here's the question, are you using Readyboost, with a 4GB or 8GB USB memory stick. I saw on another forum, if you are using Readyboost with a 4GB or 8GB USB memory stick with your 4GB's of ram, Windows Vista 64, will cache everything on the USB memory stick, and won't even use over 4GB's of ram.

Somebody on that forum reported since he started doing this, that for him Windows Vista 64 was a lot faster forum.

I forgot where that forum was.

[DavidNJ]

When I'm working I can have one of three configurations running:

Programming:

MyEclipse
MySQL
MySQL Administrator
MySQL Query Browser
Dreamweaver
MS Word
Apache
IIS
IE
Firefox
and maybe
Visual Studio
other utilities

When do graphics:

Photoshop (often reports 1.0-1.5GB in use)
MS Word
MS Excel
Bridge
Premier
Illustrator
Dreamweaver
Flash
Fireworks
IE
Firefox

Outlook, Indexer, security, etc are always running.

Both environments seem to go over 4GB. When they do they grind very slowly, often with huge lags. It has reported as much as 6.5GB in use. Over 4GB often.

If there was a gap between 4GB and 8GB then it might be an issue. However, in real life, it seems 8GB works better.

Note: 2 1600x1200 monitors on an NVidia 8800GT graphics card. System does 14,500 on 3DMark06 with Q6700 at 360x10 and video at 720/1890/2200

[chuckbam]

Originally Posted by ATINUT

Here's the question, are you using Readyboost, with a 4GB or 8GB USB memory stick. I saw on another forum, if you are using Readyboost with a 4GB or 8GB USB memory stick with your 4GB's of ram, Windows Vista 64, will cache everything on the USB memory stick, and won't even use over 4GB's of ram.

Somebody on that forum reported since he started doing this, that for him Windows Vista 64 was a lot faster forum.

I forgot where that forum was.

I am using 4Gb of Readyboost. I don't think Vista supports 8GB Readyboost Drive. Only up to 4 GBs. I will try disabling Readyboost. Thanks for the tip.

[polonyc2]

bought a Corsair 2 GB USB flash drive a few months back so I can flash my BIOS using the ASUS EZ Flash...havn't used the ReadyBoost Vista feature yet...I should try it out