Of course. Vista and 7 aren't like that dinossaur that XP was. The more hardware you put on a machine, the more the OS will use and manage it to make for a smoother user experience.
But who is saying that more than 4GB of ram is useless?? On 21 Fev, 15:58, "Jose Villegas (MADBEAST)" <[email protected]> wrote: > Check this theory about Random Acces Memory: > > I have been using this machine for almost 4 years with 2GB RAM > > Lets call STANDBY the state when the computer isnt running anything > except for OS and supporting programs in the background. > > since i have been using WIN7 its RAM usage was around 800-700MB only > OS and few background programs (STANDBY) > > The twaked OS was running with 400-600MB only OS and backgroud > programs. > > IT NEVER REACHED 1.0 GB RAM USAGE in Standby. > > Yesterday i installed 1 GB RAM so now it has 3GB RAM > > Now its ram consumption is over 1 GB RAM between 900MB and 1.1GB RAM, > when i expected to see the same consuption of 450-700MB it increased > the size of the used RAM. > > my theory is, when the system had 2GB ram it used to work under the > paramenters of that restriction, now it has a higher ammount of > available ram and the system changes those parameters to work with > another restriction, in both case with 2GB RAM and with 3GB ram the > system used between 25 to 35% available RAM to waork in the 1st case > was 500-700MB now its 900MB -1.1GB. > > Then that theory that over 4 GB ram are usless isnt so true. > > Becuase if the System has 8 GB ram available it will modify its > paramaters of restriction, my theory is the System adapts itself to > the available RAM, its consumes as much as RAM is available, there > must be a limit to this... let say 16GB RAM is more than enough > becuase there is no commercial OS that could reach those levels of > processing and loading requirements. -- 9xx SOLDIERS SANS FRONTIERS
