I have the impression that 10 uses RAM in a fairly even way, as in more RAM=faster performance. My experience with XP was that it had a "sweet spot", I always ran it with 2GB of RAM. But I'm wondering if the more is faster depending on amount is really true for one thing, but also what about if you have odd amounts like 5 or 6GB?
Thanks!
Within reasonable limits more RAM will always provide better performance but there will always be a point of diminishing returns after which there will be little gain. That point is dependent primarily on the workload. More RAM will never be slower.
I believe odd RAM sizes could cause problems with very old versions of Windows but that is no more. Odd memory sizes are quite common when running an OS under a virtual machine. But to get 5 GB RAM you would need to use mismatched RAM modules and that can cause problems. For best results it is best to use matched memory modules.
In order to get good performance, you should have at least 4 gigs of ram
I reccomend that you have about 6-8 GB of RAM
Also, to get 5 GB RAM you would need to have mismatched RAM modules (like LMiller said) which is bad lol
It depends on what software you use. I do quite often work with big files in Photosho and the only way is to have 16GB. My HTPC have only 2gb but it works perfectly and it is a 7 years old PC with older hardware.
So then as an example, 6GB would be OK, and an improvement over 4GB, if it was installed as matched pairs of 1GB and 2 GB?
Quote