Is it better to have 2, 3, or 4GB on Vista 32-bit?

Hi, I use my laptop for lots of audio and visual production. I was on 2GB for a while but just upgraded to 4GB. Am wondering though, given what I have read if its a worthwhile investment. Perhaps upgrading to 3GB only would suffice, given Vista's limitations in using the 4GB?

Are there any tests I can run to benchmark my laptop's performance with the original 2 GB versus the new 3 or 4 GB?

Thanks in advance.

 

for all practical purposes the 32 bit supports only 3 gig. the rest overflowa into your graphic card memory. So i guess for a 32 bit 3 gig is good enough.

 

32bit supports 3.5GB.

I have 3GB and it is plenty but I think 2GB would be cutting it close for me because of all the multi tasking I do.

I would say get the 2GB or 1GB if it is an option and upgrade the ram yourself and save money and get all the ram you want.

 

OK, I may then keep a stick of 1GB PC6400 (800Mhz) and add to that a new 2GB stick of PC5300 (667Mhz) for a total of 3 GB. I was suprised when I opened my laptop that it had been configured with one stick of 800 Mhz and another of 667Mhz. Im guessing if I had to keep one, the 800Mhz is better?

Does anyone know of a freeware util I can run on Vista to test performance improvements? (this would give me an idea of whether or not there is performance improvement in having 3 or 4GB instead of 2).

 

In some cases it is cheaper to get 2x2GB of RAM anyway, so unless it is actually more cost effective to get a mismatched (1GB stick and 2GB stick) of RAM (which it rarely is), I'd just go ahead and get the 4GB, of which your computer will use 3.1-3.5 GB.

 

hi aladdin,

well, if you are in visual production, does that imply 2d-visual design like photoshop, illustrator... or is it more 3d design + some photoshop work?

if you want to work flawlessly i just can recommend 4 GB+ for 3d design and viz.
but to make use of all that ram you would need a 64 bit os. of course you can do a lot with a 32 bit os and 3 GB of ram, but if you do high quality images with high res you will soon get to the limits with 3 GB of ram.

if you have a 32 bit os now and don´t want to buy another one you should stick with it as long as it is possible.

to run vista smooth you would need 3 GB, especially if you do visual design.
2GB wo´t be enough.

but how about buying 4 GB, cause the ram sticks don´t come in 3GB sizes. you would not have access to around 1 GB of your ram, but that does not matter that much. and by the way the 2x2 GB ram stick are incredibly cheap nowadays.

 

The actual amount of RAM made available to you will be less than 4GB due to the need for 32-bit operating systems to map other things -- video card RAM, buffer space for PCI devices, etc -- below the 4GB boundary. But the amount should also be greater than 3GB. I'd expect the amount to be somewhere close to 3.5GB, but I can't verify that as I'm not running 32-bit Vista on my IFL90.

You already have the 4GB, so stick with it. Don't worry about the fact that your Windows Experience Index hasn't changed. WEI is useless anyway.

 

If your system supports DDR2-800 (PC6400), it is slightly faster than DDR2-667 (PC5300). Intel-based systems with the newest chipset (GM45/PM45) and AMD-based systems dating back to early 2007 both support DDR2-800.

If you had both a DDR2-667 and DDR2-800 module installed in your system, the 800 down-clocked to match the 667. Even if your system is capable of utilizing the 800, it can't do so unless all memory modules are DDR2-800.

The difference between 667MHz and 800MHz is negligible, in reality.

 

Which audio App you using?
If you using a lot of VST plugs or Soft synth or samples Nuendo and Cubase 32bit for example and almost all audio apps in 32bit cannot adress more than 1.7gb.
I am working On Nuendo 3 with 4Gb but it is still waste of 4Gb.
The point here it is not Vista or XP ,the point is that 32bit operating system cannot adress more than 4 gb but you will see only 3-3.5GB. And 32bit Audio applications inside 32 bit os cannot address more than 1.5-1.7GB of ram
You need 64 bit OS AND 64 bit Aplications.
But if you want to run 64 bit OS you will need more than 4Gb
Because Vista Ultimate 64 on idle use 1.8GB of RAM.
So if you want power
Vista 64 bit+64 bit Applications+ 16GB RAM.

 

Wow! great responses from everyone, and so quick- thank you all!

If a person has 4GB installed and using Vista 32 can only make use of 3.5, isnt the last 512MB still being used for something?
So then would this not mean that if I stuck to 3GB, that in reality I would only have 2.5 at my disposal (again based on fact that Vista allocates 512MB for something else)?

It seems my options are to either replace all my current RAM for 50$ to bring me up to 4GB from 2GB (which was my original plan):
2 x 2GB 667Mhz

OR to move up to 3GB from 2GB for 25$ by keeping one of my 1 GB sticks and adding only one 2GB stick. In other words, if the 4th GB wont be used, I will save myself twenty dollars and bring it back to the store.

1 x 2GB 667Mhz (25$)
1 x 1GB 667Mhz or 800Mhz (which I already own)

 

You can use 4GB, but it doesen't give you any benefit.
I dubt if you can use dual channel if you install one stick of 1GB and second stick of 2gb.
Because dual channel memory needs 2 modules with same speed and same amount of RAM.

 

thanks delta.... ill just keep it simple and use 2 identical sticks of 2GB and sell my 1GB sticks.

 

Nope. The O/S needs to "steal" that space so it can map the video card's RAM into the <4GB range. If you have a 512MB video card and 4GB of RAM, this means that you'll effectively "lose" 512MB of your system RAM when you run a 32-bit operating system.

Nope. If you have 3GB of system RAM then this leaves an additional 1GB of unallocated address space below the 4GB boundary. The video card's RAM can be mapped into this space, and you'll thus not "lose" any of your system RAM.

Of course none of these limitations apply if you run a 64-bit operating systems.

 

Good choice.

 

Great explanation skriefal!

Are there however any benchmark tools out there to measure how fast windows startup is? I thought I would see a big improvement in speed but doesnt seem like it... for now I guess I can time with a stopwatch... the sidebar with the widgets seems to take so long to appear!

 

I've never experimented with any of the startup timing tools, so I can't offer any suggestions. But I wouldn't expect an increase from 2GB to 4GB to have much impact on boot times.