Best phone camera 2017
I have a four year old computer and would like to increase the RAM. At the moment I have 1GB made up from two 512 sticks. The board a Gigabyte Pentium 4 titan series GA-8IPE1000 Pro3 will take four sticks of ram DDR400/DDR333/DDR/266 DIMM.
I am running Windows XP home. Anybody any ideas on whether I will see a considerable improvement in speed by doing this.
Thanks for any replies in advance.
Hmmm - I tend to disagree. Of course it depends what you are using it for, but 1 gig is usually enough for Windows XP and whilst more RAM will help it probably won't transform the system.
If you only had 256MB to begin with it would be a different story !!
Get more RAM by all means, I suggest increase to 2GB total, but I wouldn't expect miracles.
Many thanks for your responses so far.
What I am seeing at the moment is that when I open a folder, say my pictures, something with a large file size, in my case around 4GB, it is taking a very long whle to open up. This can only become worse as time goes on.
The processor is an Intel P4 2.8Ghz and perhaps I need to go even further but at the moment this is not possible.
Any further comments please.
I agree with MarvintheAndroid. Get 2 more sticks of RAM each 512MB.
The RAM sticks need to be of same specs as the existing ones. Crucial is the place to go and the site will work out for you the correct RAM:
Finally a good bit of housekeeping, getting rid of all unnecessary junk will speed things up.
Also run a-squared free and maybe MalawareBytes Free to get rid of any rubbish.
Finally a defrag should do it.
Sorry if you have done above or are already aware.
If you need further explanation or advice just post back.
In my opinion,XP should run fine on 1gb memory.
I upgraded mine from 512Mb to 2Gb and not a lot of difference.Certainly a bit quicker but nothing startling.I am on a 6 year old computer,
I have a similar spec computer, - 2.8ghz -1gb ram - XP Pro, and I was having similar problems with long opening times for folders and files. I tried all the scans recommended with very little improvement. I finally 'bit the bullet' and wiped the hard drive and re-installed. It's not quite like having a new computer but the difference has been truly noticeable. I have now mirrored it to a spare hard drive should the 's l o w' computer return. I still do my back-ups as before but you don't notice the gradual slowdown that Windows itself develops so I will just have to change hard drive next time it slows down.
I just thought I would add my experience of a very recent memory upgrade.
My computer is a 3year old Intel Core2 Duo 2.8 running XP sp3, which has had 1gb ddr2 memory up until this Xmas. I multi-task a lot, mostly graphics, and also have a TV card.
I always felt it could do with more memory. I bought 2x1gb sticks, and replaced the original 2x512mb sticks, thinking they were half the speed of the new ones (turns out they are the same-why can't the manufacturers make this clearer for the non-techies?!).
The improvement with this configuration was considerable (mostly noticeable in preventing clog-ups/slow responding with multitasking), but I noticed that the swap-file was still used to more or less the same extent as before (I felt that swapfile usage would be best kept to an absolute minimum). I changed the swapfile to be managed by the system-to no apparent effect.
I then decided to put in the old 2x512 mb sticks making 3gb altoghether.
This made another quantum leap in the capabilty for multi-tasking. And now the swap file is not used at all-I check this often, just to make sure. This makes for a much more responsive, therefore speedier system-at least when multi-tasking, or heavy graphics/video usage, if not for normal single program usage.
Happy New Year to you all,
This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.