fullpacirish

• Windows Xp Sweet 5.1 Fr Sp3 1
• Windows Xp Sp3 Free Download

If you can get 4GB for a slightly higher price than 2GB when buying RAM for an XP system, go for it. XP will recognize up 3.75GB of ram befor it starts to take it way to allocate to system resources. One of my machines has 4x1GB sticks. XP on that machine makes available 2.75GB of that RAM to be accessed by a single thread call. The rest of the 1.25GB is being used for system resources, such as 2x256mb video cards in sli. Yes, the available RAM does increase by 256mb if one card is removed. The other portions of 'missing' RAM is bein used by the motherboard and other devices in the system.The system is EXTREMELY happy with that 4GB of g.skillz ddr2-800.

On newegg.com, 4GB (2x2GB sticks) G.Skillz ddr2-1000 or ddr2-1066 can be bought for $115. That makes 4GB very affordable.ddr2-1000 link - http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N1145. 2 GB of RAM on Windows XP is considered the price versus performance sweet spot. Most reviewers do not feel that the added cost justifies the often undetectable gains that RAM beyond 2 GB affords you. There is not a diminishing return, however.Myself, I built a system with 2GB of RAM and had began a project involving encoding all of my CD's and DVD's into MP3's and AVI's, respectively. With the video content, at the settings I was using, I seen my encoding times cut in down one third when I moved from 2GB to 4GB of RAM.

Windows Xp Sweet 5.1 Fr Sp3 1

Windows Xp Sp3 Free Download

This was also when I had permanently disabled the page file as well, and discovered a issue with the Memory Manager but that is another story. The bottom line is that you can get gains from adding RAM beyond 2GB if your use of the PC is heavy enough to actually need it.

With Video renderings at aggressive settings, you are in a situation where you are doing work that is computationally intense and are also working with very large files. This was certainly a situation when you would feel the difference between 2GB and 4GB.If you just surf the net and check mail, you will not likely feel it at all because you are not working the PC hard enough to be in a position to notice.

The more the marrier still holds true for RAM, and 4GB is certainly enough to kill the page file and lighten the load (and wear and tear) on your hard drives (which will in turn increase their lifespan as well). But you could likely kill the page file without issue on 2GB of RAM as well for the same benifit on that level.Look at how you use your PC before deciding if the cost is worth it. For me it was. For most it won't be.Brian. If you can get 4GB for a slightly higher price than 2GB when buying RAM for an XP system, go for it. XP will recognize up 3.75GB of ram befor it starts to take it way to allocate to system resources. One of my machines has 4x1GB sticks.

XP on that machine makes available 2.75GB of that RAM to be accessed by a single thread call. The rest of the 1.25GB is being used for system resources, such as 2x256mb video cards in sli. Yes, the available RAM does increase by 256mb if one card is removed. The other portions of 'missing' RAM is bein used by the motherboard and other devices in the system.The system is EXTREMELY happy with that 4GB of g.skillz ddr2-800. On newegg.com, 4GB (2x2GB sticks) G.Skillz ddr2-1000 or ddr2-1066 can be bought for $115.

That makes 4GB very affordable.ddr2-1000 link - http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N1145. There are indeed dimnishing returns. Although XP will recognise up to 4Gb of RAM just about all benchmarking I've ever seen indicates that on many systems (partiularly higher spec ones) optimal perofmance is acheived with 1.5Gb of RAM for XP- any more and performance starts of drop off. Even 2Gb of RAM causes a (slight) decrease in performance compared to 1.5Gb! Java program for implementing sliding window protocol. I've yet to see a sensible explanation of this phenomenon, but it is a fact. I guess you have to take a synergystic view of comuter systmens and realise that each component affects each other component. It points to the possibility that other components in the PC are causing a bottleneck which no amount of extra RAM will improve.

EVen on VISTA most benchmarking indicates that 2GB gives optimal performance (despite the many, many systems being sold with 4GB) - any more and it drop off again.The rule 'more is better' simply does not apply nowadays (if it ever did?) - it is redundant. Such a rule had some meaning when RAM sticks were scarce and expensive. It's the case now that RAM is cheap and readily available. In fact most PC components are cheap in todays market. To jump from the fact that 32bit OS will recognise 4Gb of RAM to the conclusion that you'll get better performance from having 4GB of RAM is tantamount to saying your car will run better if you increase the amount of fuel being injected/pumped into the engine - it doesn't make sense logically and it is certainly not borne out in real world testing! What it is that has been briefly mentioned in this thread but that has not been given a detailed explaination is the limitation of 4gb of memory is that this is a system wide physical allocation limitation.What this means is that anything within your system that physically allocates memory within the system uses up some of that available 4gb limit. Such as mt.dew described above he has two 256mb vid cards which reduces the 4gb limit by 512mb to a memory limit of 3.5gb.

However his system only registers 2.75gb which inturn means there are other devices on his system which need to physically allocate memory.

Windows XP Sweet 6.2 Final Francais ISO -Arabic.Font.For.Microsoft.Windows.XP.Sweet.6.2.Service.Pack.3.Arabic.Font.For.Microsoft.Windows.XP.Sweet.6.2.(XP.SP3).windows.XP.Sweet.6.2.Final.iso.fr.