------------------
sig version 1.1

FIC SD11 (N16 Bios)
Athlon (K7) 1000
2 x 128 = 256 MB PC-100
13 GB Quantum Fireball KX
SB live Value
ASUS V6800 DDR Deluxe (Det 3)
Windows ME

If I remove one of the 128 SIMM's I get:

a) "NO" drop in frame rates
b) "NO" more HD thrashing
c) "NO" more stuttering

In the following sims:

CFS2
Falcon 4
Janes FA/18
etc., etc.

I am a "Systems Admin". I am 42 years old. I do alot of research. I believe what I research. And most importantly, I have NO reason to lie.

If you find that an increase in RAM from 128 to 256 improves your overall performance, than I am truly happy for you. Honest!

If you are running NT, than I am POSITIVE you are getting higher performance!

Thanks

------------------
-Warspite-

Being the aforementioned "guy claiming to be a systems admin" in Von Vampr's post, I will clarify. By the way, I am a NETWORK admin, not a systems admin Von Vampr. The more is better mentality is causing alot of people to spend money on components unnecessarily, and I'd like to reverse the trend. I use the system monitor when flying a sim to determine what amount of ram is actually being used by my system.

This can be found by following the path : START / PROGRAMS / ACCESSORIES / SYSTEM TOOLS / SYSTEM MONITOR. You go into EDIT, ADD ITEM, MEMORY MANAGER, and choose UNUSED PHYSICAL MEMORY. The program will then display a chart showing how much system ram is NOT being used at present. Now start any sim or any other game and ALT/TAB out of it while in flight and look at the figure.

I won't ask you guys to accept anything I say as gospel unless I can back it up. Do your own tests and decide for yourselves if you need more ram in your system than a network server running 35 computers. Sorry to disilusion some of you, but your wallet will thank me. I can get ram CHEAP and I don't have more than 128 in my machine. It simply isn't necessary unless you are doing 3d modeling on a grand scale, or working with HUGE databases.

For final clarification on Windows usage of ram and efficiency thereof. Windows 95/98 will efficiently use up to 64 mb of ram, after which you will get diminishing returns for added ram. Windows efficiently addresses the first 64 mb of ram because it is written into the code. After that performance will not increase as dramatically. This doesn't mean you shouldn't have more than 64 mb in your system. It just means that for doubling ram from 64 to 128 you will not see the doubling in performance you might expect.

NT will efficiently address up to, I believe the figure is one GIGABYTE of ram, so if you have NT you can put any amount of ram in it and it will efficiently address all of it. NT also uses considerably more ram for it's own processes, so more ram is a good idea. I am told windows ME has an NT kernel, which would put it into the NT category with regards to ram efficiency, if that is true. Windows 2000 is definitely an NT kernel and falls into this category as well.

Oh, by the way, even systems and network admins make mistakes, and the S key is right next to the D key so MaxxG's comment could either be a typo, which I consider likely, or a simple mistake, saying simm instead of dimm. It doesn't invalidate anything else he said. Nobody's perfect, so try not to knock others for making minor errors.

Yet another "expert" has come to the fore claiming windows is using 100 mb of ram just to run itself? I look at my system monitor even now and see that with 128 mb of ram in my machine, I have almost 50 mb unused. This with running Microsoft Personal Web Server, An FTP server program, Flashmanager, 3dfx tools, Wingman Profile Manager, ICQ, and the Netscape in which I am viewing this webpage, oops, I forgot Kali 1.68.

There are many factors to consider when testing a system for a particular attribute, many things that can affect the results or skew them. What kind of mouse are you using? Is it USB, Serial, or mini din? Is your mouse CLEAN? How many background programs are you running, etc.

I find that on MY system, running CFS2 at 1024 X 768 X 16, which you can get away with without image degradation using a V5, and with most everything cranked up all the way, I get more than acceptable frame rates, no lower than high twenties in a furball, and sometimes more than 50. This while running M$ Personal Web Server, My FTP server program, Wingman Profile Manager, and usually ICQ as well. I do find that, in the system monitor, that I am using almost ALL of my 128 mb of ram to run the simulator, but there is still some left over while running the game.

My system specs are as follows:
Windows 98 1st edition.
Asus K7V motherboard with Athlon 800 mhz.
128 mb PC133 ram.
Vodoo 5 5500 AGP.
2 6.4 gig WD hard drives. (scheduled for replacement with 30 gig 7200 rpm ATA 66 WD soon)
Sound Blaster Live Value.
Iomega SCSI Jaz drive (2GB).
Mitsumi 4 X 4 X 24X CD burner.
Acer 40X CDROM. (hey, it was free)

I don't know anyone else's background on here so I will give you my own. I have an Associate in Specialized Technology Degree, in Computer System Specialist. I went to school at Pittsburgh Technical Institute for two years, earning High Honors, and a 3.96 cumulative GPA. I graduated at the top of my class. Since then, I have worked for a year and a half as a Network Administrator for Flexon Inc. I have built more systems than I'd care to count, including Network Servers. I built an entire network at Flexon, including VPN to an affiliate in California so we could share the same database, running on a Sun Alpha server.

I am not going to claim demi-god status when it comes to computers but I do know my sh**. I know how the system addresses ram, how it utilizes it, and what the differing operating systems do with it. "I tried it and it did this", isn't enough to make blanket statements, gentlemen. There are MANY factors that can affect your results.

I am not going to get into a pissing contest about who knows what, I highly recommend using the system tools yourself and deciding for YOURSELF what you need rather than listening to "the gospel according to Joe Schmoe" That is to include anything _I_ say on here too. Test it for yourself, it takes but a minute.

JG51_GIJeff_<<+

Well Jv44~Siggi:

The fact that you, rather than providing facts backing up your stance, have simply attacked the effectiveness of the tool I suggest everyone use to verify for themselves what they need, lends itself toward my belief that you simply wish to inject doubt, without much in the way of proof.

I say A, you attack A, I say this is why A is true, you attack my proofs or explinations. This neverending cycle of bulls**t ends here, I am not going to dignify anything you post here with answers anymore since you have proven to me that you only wish to inject doubt. For what reason, I can't imagine, but I don't actually care very much.

I would hope that people claiming to have facts or proofs would be willing to back them up in SOME way. Anyone can bash something. Prove it doesn't work. I am sure there are third party utilities that can be used for the same things as the system monitor, just as there are third party utilities for defragging your harddrive. Might I suggest you try one of these if you distrust the M$ utility.

In the meantime, take your negative comments and stick them back into the same orifice from which they issued. (figure it out)

Reading your CV above I'm actually suprised you would recommend the native SysMon as a means of gauging one's system performance. Displays a rather naive trust in a very suspect utilty.

And the very hackneyed "I won't dignify anything you post here with answers anymore" is truly representitive of a sulky troller who can't handle the cut & thrust of vigorous debate. Lighten up. You post your take on the issue, I post mine. No need to resort to sticking stuff up orifices, is there?

Also, here's a link to a nice graphics controller utility- http://www.entechtaiwan.com/ it's called "powerstrip" and it allows you to change/tweak all manner of things including your agp aperature and it tell you exactly how much memory you are using both video and physical and allows for memory recovery when needed.

My measly .02!

Mudshark

<SHUDDER!>

Mk10 Maj=225th=

Mudshark, that config line sounds very interesting. I'm going to try it out, also get that powerstrip. I've heard about it but one gets snowed-under with utility reccs. You make it sound good.

Installing it over Win98 it ran ok with a few irritating bugs (occasional CTD's, re-start/shutdown would hang).

Playing Panzer Elite (probably the MOST resource hungry game currently available for the PC) I noticed no improvement.

I decided to re-format my sys and do a clean install of Win98 followed by WinME. Total disaster. NONE of the games I had previously had running ok would run properly anymore. WinME screwed my system bad. All the reports I've heard of it say it sucks, though the owner of my local PC bits-shop says it's great.

Hello Wolfar, I am neither bullheaded, nor angry that Siggi disagrees with me. I AM annoyed at the disinformation I see here by self proclaimed experts, and I simply will not be drawn into a pissing contest by someone who doesn't intend to argue using facts to back up their opinions. The fact that someone who has no qualifications ridicules me is secondary to my wish that everyone have CORRECT information on which to base their purchases. I have to wonder if Siggi has stock in Micron or some such.

Opinions are like buttholes, everyone has them, and they usually stink. I invite people to TEST and COMPARE DATA. The reason I suggest M$ utility for such is that I am absolutely certain they HAVE it. Siggi's attacks on just about everything I have put forth on this topic are not based on anything factual, he has cited no references, and has nothing other than his personal experience (whatever that is) to back his statements up.
I have no time to waste trying to change someone's mind if they choose not to listen to a differing opinion, or accept proofs that are put forth to back them up. If you can't argue intelligently about something, I will tell you what to go do with yourself, and get on with my life. Flame wars are for grade schoolers. An argument is supposed to have two sides, and both LISTEN to the other before replying. If one party chooses not to do this, then the whole thing becomes an exercise in futility for the other. No point in continuing. I don't make excuses nor apologies for anything I say, it was all considered and intentional. Don't like it? Don't read it, and more importantly don't reply to it.

I also don't approve of your bulking technical people together as "a righteous and bullheaded lot" I am sure there are examples that fit this description in all fields, but characterizing all people in that field would not only be erroneous, but very unkind. I also notice that you claim to be a techie yourself, do you count yourself among the group you describe? Calling for civility immediately following the lack of it, doesn't inspire much confidence in your sincerity. Enough said about that.

In addition, Siggi should have known better than to try to UPGRADE any M$ operating system. Those of us that work in the industry know that's a no no. It simply doesn't work right. You wipe the HDD and install the new OS while saving your data elsewhere, hence the 2gb Jazz drive on my system. So much for his touted "experience".

Good work Mudshark! Nice tips! I was unaware of that and will try it asap testing for ram usage afterwards to compare to previous data.

Tried Mudshark's suggested hack. Worked beautifully, two thumbs up! I also tested the performance of my ram with the new settings and while my system is using almost all of it's physical ram, with the new settings I get NO SWAPFILE USAGE whatsoever. All of which cries out to me that I don't need more physical ram to run CFS II.

For those of you that aren't familiar with swapfiles, they are virtual memory, which your operating system will assign, when needed, to make up for a lack of physical memory. Since, at my settings, my system is not using any virtual memory at all, I can only conclude that I have sufficient physical memory for the task at hand. Your performance may vary. Test it for yourself.

JG51_GIJeff_<<+

Mudshark