HowTo: 1024mb of ram Win98/SE/ME

[Mikki]

And I can confirm it works much better than Win98's defrag...

[Cogar]

Originally posted by ThugsRook
ive finished my testing using 1024mb of ram.
here's my results in a nutshell:

~ using a normal swap file was better
~ limiting the vcache is needed to boot windows
~ vcache sweet spot was 262144k (256mb 25%)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

of course that leaves us with the real questions for Win9X~

is 1024mb faster then 512mb? no

is 1024mb better then 512mb? no

<game over>


as it turns out i started this thread, and i think i just ended it

thx to everyone for tuning in

Hehe. I appreciate your honesty, although I disagree with one of your conclusions. Being able to use 1024MB is better than using 512MB. It was not that long ago that people debated if anyone really needed more than 640K, and later it was 64MB. 512MB is just another stop along the road. I believe that this thread has been very helpful (potentially at least) for many people who are headed for the not too distant future where we will wonder, "can you really run a computer with only 4GB of RAM?"

[Mikki]

Cogar, without testing this, I'd agree that it's better, esp. for stuff like video editing, divx encoding, etc. But I wouldn't say faster...a lot of the tests I did on my P4B533 resulted to faster performance with 256mb than with 512mb...but of course that was with benchmarks...

Like I said, I haven't done this testing yet (been busy lately ), so this is just a guess....we'll have to wait to see what Thugsrook says...

[ThugsRook]

(on win98se)
even when working with huge files, the system is NOT faster. (w/ 1024mb ram over 512mb)

the only difference comes in the form of better multitasking while working with large files ~ but in no way is it faster in any way. (even a 2 hour divx benchmark was not faster)

[Kimbo]

ThugsRook:

on your system with 98se and 1gb ram, can you make a ramdrive of say 800mb ? try it .....
then copy data to it for further test.. as full as possible...


and as long as the system boots and is stable just like with 512mb THEN 1gb ram HAS to be better then 512mb. not faster but the same or in some cases better. i mean there must be games that will see and use >512mb surely ?

i'm sure C&C Generals runs better with 1gb ram then 512mb no ?

can you do some VISUAL gaming benchmarks ?

by that i mean load and play a game with 512mb and then 1gb and see if there is a speed (usually) improvement. for that i recommend a game that runs slow-ish with 512mb. nothing should be changed except add the new ram sticks...

[ThugsRook]

ive never tried a ramdrive.

there are limitations on how much "virtual memory" win98 can handle.
if a ramdrive adds to that virtual memory it wont run.
win98 can only access 2gb (of mem and swap file), within that it can only access 512mb of vcache (for the HD), beyond that it wont boot.

none of the games i play really cared about the extra 512mb of ram.
benchmarks and "feel" were the same.
im sure there are games that do care tho

for me the extra memory is for large file handling.
DivX testing didnt even show much of a difference either:
512mb = 24:49
1024mb = 24:27

im gonna rerun all my tests on a winxp machine to see if make any diff in that OS.

[Kimbo]

extracted from the unreal tournament 2003's readme file:


2.3 Memory
----------

Unreal Tournament 2003's performance is highly dependent on the amount
of RAM you have in your machine, and the amount of memory that is
available. Machines with less memory will access their hard disk more
frequently to load data, which causes sporadic pauses in gameplay. Thus,
if you have a 128 MByte (or less) machine, you should make sure that
you don't have other unnecessary programs loaded in memory when playing
Unreal Tournament 2003.

How the game will perform under different RAM conditions:

* 64 MByte or less: lots of swapping

* 128 MByte: minimal swapping with default settings

* 256 MByte: might swap in rare cases with highest texture detail

* 512 MByte or more: shouldn't swap



this is just ONE example. most new games have similar requirements and they will only get hungrier....

and i'm sure modern games CAN access the ram.. in fact why not email some game developers and aske them if their games can utilize 1gb ram ?? (i may just do that ..later)

i wish you could show some examples where you KNOW that a game used more then 512mb PHYSYCAL RAM!!

example:

boot win98se
nothing running except explorer and systray which would/should leave over 800mb physycal RAM. (more but i'm being generous to windows)

load a game that maybe keeps a log (many do) before during and after it is run.

then read said log and maybe see something like:

CPU: Intel Pentium IV 2.400GHz
Total physical memory: 1024MB
Available physical memory: 864MB
Video: GeForce 4 Ti4600
Loading textures......
Loading levels......
etc.................


the log will show that at least it knows how much ram you have
and that when it loads you still have around 800mb free physical memory that IT _could_ use.


and what about a forced test.

do this with 512mb ram 1st:

dissable virtual ram (no hdd use for swap file etc...)
that means that you will only be able to use your physical memory. so we work with 512/1024mb....

load photoshop or whatever and load a big file or movie.. keep going until you find a file that will NOT load because it will say not enough memory/resources whatever....

then redo the same test with 1gb ram..... if the program supports the ram it should load the file. (what i am trying to achieve here is to see if with no swap file and 1gb ram you can load a file that you could NOT with 512mb) (yes probbably with a swap file and 512mb you could but that's not the issue - that's proof that 1gb makes a difference)



another test:
==========

boot with only systray/explorer (nothing in taskbar but volume and clock, not even dissabled icons)

open a program (a bigger one, maybe microsoft word or whatever you have.)
keep opening it... you should have many open and after a while windows runs out of resources. keep track how many are open (is: 56 word instances open, all with no documents just the empty program)

do this one a few times after clean reboots to get an averge, aldo they _should_ be the same.

after a bit you can safely state that with 512mb ram and NO swapfile/virtaul memory you can open word 56 times before no more will open..

then redo with 1gb ram...
will you be able to open around 110 ?? ( i would say yes)


what do you think ?

[ThugsRook]

where were you last week?
excellent ideas

dont forget tho ~ that i must use the vcache limit tweak.
so right off the bat vcache will be limited to 512mb / system mem 512mb. that vcache limit may just stop us from ever seeing the serious improvement we are looking for under win98.

right now im in the middle of running tests on WinXP, but ill get to your suggestions as soon as i can ~ thx

[ThugsRook]

guess what guys?

winXP pro kicks Win98SE's **** in a big way

> DivX Encoding <
Win98 = 24:27
WinXP = 22:47

[The SIN Raven]

Soo broos, this is really a good thing...
I will never go again to XP....I going to ME/Mandrake 9.1 - dusl boot...
I have 512MB - CASL 2-2-2-5..
What exacly showld i doo to tweak windows ME to the max?
All recomendactions are welcome, the memory tweak and others that increase performance- multithasking, except the upgrade to XP thing
Thanks for the help in advance ...
Best to you all broos: the SIN Raven

[ThugsRook]

http://www.onecomputerguy.com/tips.htm

[The SIN Raven]

Thanks TugsRock.
Best: The SIN Raven

[Lucas_Maximus]

i will never use a 9x OS in my life ever again unless my life depended on it.

but however it still good to know this stuff when fixing other people computers that have 98 (who are usually female and their boyfriend has put in something in their computer in the hope he can play some game and it dont work then i am called upon, annoying when they cant remember what tehy done).

[The SIN Raven]

Lucas_Maximus, you are the man...
Some people are all about them...
Keep on going broo...
Best: The SIN Raven

[RoadStar]

Originally posted by ThugsRook
updated Ndis.vxd (98/SE/ME)
may be needed for OCing past 2.1ghz

updated MS disk defragger (98/SE)
faster defrags

updated MS TweakUI v1.33 (98/SE/ME/2K)
tweak out ALOT of hidden settings

updated MS fdisk (98/SE)
needed for HD larger then 64gb

MS mediaplayer v6.4 (98/SE/ME/2K)
doesnt phone home, doesnt suck

MS keyboard remapper (98/SE/ME)
remap some of your KB keys

TR, These links seem to be a dead end, is there an other?