Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Sat, 27 Mar 1999 14:58:16 -0500 |
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" |
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Shhhh, don't tell my system. I have 256 Mb of RAM and have no problem. Never
heard of Win95 not dealing with >64 Mb of RAM . What you may be referring to
is a hardware situation, i.e. most mobos do not cache over 64 Mb. Since
Win95 loads itself from top down, it will be in the un-cached area if your
mobo can only cache 64 Mb and you add more than 64 Mb. This will result in a
10 ~ 15% real world performance hit, i.e. slower, for most applications.
Windows 95 can handle more than 64 Mb fine. You just get the performance
hit. Someone who is heavy into graphic, i.e. load 50 ~100 Mb graphics files
might still elect to go to the max on their mobo so when the file is loaded,
it can all be in memory and thereby be faster in this particular situation.
My mobo, Soyo 5EHM, on the other hand, will cache to 256 Mb. So no
performance hit.
Additionally, I am not sure about GDI resources, but I know for user and
system resources, adding RAM will not effect the availability of these
resource and I think it also applies to GDI.
Daniel Wysocki
Twin*.*Star Computers
770-498-2582 /800-816-0663
[log in to unmask]
Fast - Reliable - Wallet Friendly
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Wright <[log in to unmask]>
>You need lots of free GDI resources to run applications and make Windows
>responsive. Low levels of GDI resources will lead to "Out of memory"
>errors. The easiest way to solve these issues is to add more RAM memory.
>
>Remember that Win95 cannot deal with more than 64mgs of ram well.
>WindowsNT or WIndows98 does not have this limitation, recognizing and
>using large amounts of RAM memory successfully.
>
>
PCBUILD only works if you contribute. Send your messages
to be posted to: [log in to unmask]
|
|
|