How do I calculate the effect on Performance of my PC if I upgrade RAM?
My Computer
System One
-
- OS
- Windows 8.1
- Computer type
- Laptop
I agree, you cannot "calculate" what you will achieve "IF" you upgrade. You can only measure before and after. And for sure, any gains depend greatly on your starting point.towget said:How do I calculate the effect on Performance of my PC if I upgrade RAM?
I like that. But still, if only a dual-core processor, performance gains would be significant if you installed 8Gb.ContMike said:Some simple rules of thumb for windows.
Minimum: 1GB per processor core.
""Normal" maximum use: 2 GB per core for best results.
I don't understand what you mean. While not as popular as dual-channel, there are still triple-channel boards available and still MANY in use.Triple channel is not actual any more
Agreed. RAM quantity is MUCH MORE important than RAM speed.Not even RAM frequency matters too much, that's more important for OC.
How do I calculate the effect on Performance of my PC if I upgrade RAM?
Yes of course but depending on amount of memory it may be lowered to GB or two.And then remember to enable the PF again.
There is no reason to manually mess with your PF settings with a modern version of Windows like W7 or W8. They are not XP and should not be treated as such. In fact, what was common with XP is probably not good with W7 or W8 and that includes the PF. Windows knows how to manage it quite well and will adjust the size as needed. The only reason to set a small PF size is when you are critically low on disk space - but the fact is, reducing the PF size is the wrong answer. What should happen is unused programs need to be uninstalled to free up space, and/or more disk space needs to be purchased.Yes of course but depending on amount of memory it may be lowered to GB or two.
I may not be windows "expert" but settings like this serve me well ever since W7. During XP time I never had more than 4GB and that being XP was better left to manage it by itself. My only reason is to save some space on SSD without moving PF to other disk which was helpful in XP. Never had a problem or BSOD that could be attributed to it.If you have 8Gb of RAM and only 1Gb PF, the PF will not even hold a full dump file. If not low on disk space, it makes no difference if the PF is bigger than what you think you need.
But I don't want to drive this OT. I am just going to say again that W7, W8 and W10 are not XP and should not be treated as XP was. And unless you are true Windows expert, best to leave resource management settings alone.
I can't tell you how many times I have heard that and, frankly, it amazes me. Especially when the settings are changed almost automatically when they get a new system without even giving the defaults a chance. Since it is highly likely the hardware itself is much more capable than their previous systems, no doubt performance was still good.but settings like this serve me well
And that's fine. But by far, you are the exception as most people would know how to check, nor would they understand what they saw if they did check. So those who don't tweak and check consequences all the time, regardless the amount of RAM they have, they should just let Windows manage it. Because for sure, that will work just fine for them too. And if it doesn't then that is just a signal to them to free up, or buy more disk space.but I tune my windows up and check consequences all the time
As I said 1GB PF works just fine for me