Tip: Run a free scan for common Windows errors ad

re: which is better/necessary Wednesday, September 17, 2008 at 3:41 pm Posted by jaf (3312 messages posted) You didn't give enough information for a proper answer. Does your motherboard support DDR ram? Are you sure 512 is max? What is the model number of your computer? Lastly, this is strictly a hardware question, and off topic here ;) [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: which is better/necessary Wednesday, September 17, 2008 at 3:47 pm Posted by geek9pm (914 messages posted) You question is also about hardware. As to Windows XP, it does fine with just 128MB. But that will not allow you to have many programs running at the same time. The performance of XP on a single application at at time does not improve much beyond 512MB. Photo and Video editing are programs that take more memory and may benefit by memory up to about 2GB. Surfing the Internet takes very little. As you your hardware question, that depends a lot on which motherboard and RAM you have. Look in your documentation to see if there are warnings about using a single stick. I don't think that matters anymore on newer machines. By the way, the memory module is more often called Stick in a Desktop and Card in a laptop. Or is your computer so old that it really has a memory card.? When was that? Geek9pm [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: which is better/necessary Wednesday, September 17, 2008 at 4:18 pm Posted by Steve (19684 messages posted) I would go (2) 256 meg sticks. If your board has a 512 MB max, then probably each slot has a limit of a 256 meg stick. That is the way it is on 2 old Motherboards I still use anyway. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: which is better/necessary Wednesday, September 17, 2008 at 6:20 pm Posted by Ricer46 (20470 messages posted) Definitely 2 x 256 On Wednesday, September 17, 2008 at 3:28 pm, Anthony J. Thannisch wrote: >Hello and thanks to all. I have a question and I know that the vast experience herein >can help me with an answer. I looked at the Search options and could not find what >it is that I need. I recently replaced a bad RAM card with a much smaller one and >not the PC is WAAAAy slow. The other RAM card had lots of errors and I removed one >from another PC I had and placed it into my present Compaq Presario tower. No errors >as shown on MemTest after a 12000+% run. The tower has 2-128 MB cards and only one >was bad. Now, I get no BSODs at all. My question is, since my motherboard will take >up to 512MB RAM (I use XP, 256MB RAM, IE7 Sp3), would it be better to replace both >128MB cards with one 512MB or another 128MB? Is it necessary to have cards in both >slots? If so, then I will stick to another 128MB. This is new ground for me and I >am not sure about what to do. >Thank you again for your time and help. >Tony [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: which is better/necessary Wednesday, September 17, 2008 at 8:33 pm Posted by C K (6157 messages posted) 2x256 and it needs to be the double density RAM if you can find it, NOT high density or single sided RAM (sounds like old SD RAM, not DDR ram as those older motherboards and chipsets, Intel specifically, wouldn't support any more than 512 on SD RAM systems, VIA would however). The old SD RAM hasn't been produced in years so if you find it, it will be expensive and most likely used. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: which is better/necessary Wednesday, September 17, 2008 at 8:44 pm Posted by bob wells (1383 messages posted) Anthony, I'm assuming the computer in question is still running. If so check the Link below for definitive info on your System RAM, and how it is best configured. Run the System Scanner, hopefully your MainBoard is not too old. http://www.crucial.com/# Everything you need to know is available on Crucial website. Good idea to print out results to save configuration and part Numbers. You can use PN to crossreference other Brands of Memory. BW __________________________________________________________ There's nothing to learn from someone who already agrees with you. On Wednesday, September 17, 2008 at 3:28 pm, Anthony J. Thannisch wrote: >Hello and thanks to all. I have a question and I know that the vast experience herein >can help me with an answer. I looked at the Search options and could not find what >it is that I need. I recently replaced a bad RAM card with a much smaller one and >not the PC is WAAAAy slow. The other RAM card had lots of errors and I removed one >from another PC I had and placed it into my present Compaq Presario tower. No errors >as shown on MemTest after a 12000+% run. The tower has 2-128 MB cards and only one >was bad. Now, I get no BSODs at all. My question is, since my motherboard will take >up to 512MB RAM (I use XP, 256MB RAM, IE7 Sp3), would it be better to replace both >128MB cards with one 512MB or another 128MB? Is it necessary to have cards in both >slots? If so, then I will stick to another 128MB. This is new ground for me and I >am not sure about what to do. >Thank you again for your time and help. >Tony [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: which is better/necessary Wednesday, September 17, 2008 at 10:07 pm Posted by Anthony J. Thannisch (45 messages posted) Thank you for the information. I did not know that the topic was off topic. According to HP, they motherboard that is in the model 5822 is what it will support. Perhaps a better source for an answer is for me to contact HP. I will do that. Thank you again. Tony On Wednesday, September 17, 2008 at 3:41 pm, jaf wrote: >You didn't give enough information for a proper answer. Does your motherboard support >DDR ram? Are you sure 512 is max? What is the model number of your computer? Lastly, >this is strictly a hardware question, and off topic here ;) > > [Reply or follow-up to this message] Tip: Use one of the [Reply or follow-up to this message] links above to add a message to this thread Search this forum Start a new thread on a different subject Report abuse of the forum Return to the Windows XP Discussion Forum