W98 RAM Limit

[Carnigan]

Does anyone Know if there is a Limit to the amount of RAM for a W98 System?

The mobo will limit the RAM but here there is a general concensus that anything above 190MB is not benefit to the system.

The CPU is an Athlon 1GHz and is currently running 128MB RAM, as a server networked on cable with a linksys router and a brother 5 in 1 printer.

Thanks:

[ktkendall]

I have seen it said here many times that win98 just doesn't do well with anything above 512MB RAM.

[Cricket]

Hi Carnigan,

Take a look at this MS Knowledge Base Article: 253912 - "Out Of Memory" Error Message with Large Amounts of RAM Installed.

I understand the sweet spot for Win98 is 384MB of RAM.

Add the line "ConservativeSwapfileUsage=1" to the [386Enh] section of system.ini to force Windows to use all the physical RAM before it goes to the swapfile.

Take a look at this thread.

Cricket

[galaxian]

If you are running applications that require large amounts or memory, windows can and will use it. Above 512, you need to install the vcache "fix" otherwise you get out of memory errors.

There really isn't a sweet spot. It depends completely on what you are running.

If you do basic word processing and surf a bit, 128 is probably suffice. (and at this point, if you had 512MBs installed, you would see a "substantial" amount of available memory. This does NOT mean Windows is not using it, or can't use it, it means it doesn't need it.

If you run multiple apps simultaneously and keep a lot of windows open while surfing, upping that will help.

If you get into multimedia, graphics editting or large databases these apps will love the extra ram you throw at them.

[Carnigan]

Thanks all

I found several quotes of the "NO Limits" but what happens as you pack on the memory.

[galaxian]

As you "pack on the memory" it will sit there idle (available) if it isn't required. And if it's needed, it will get used.

[Dan]

In my humble opinion, I have always seen the max amount of RAM giving the maximum performance for any configuration. I built two identicle machines, loaded one with 512mb and the other with 256mb. Same software loaded, same everything but memory. The one with 512mb ran much faster than the other, opened windows faster and ran apps faster.
Windows98 sometimes will not shutdown right with over 512...but I've never tweaked with the "vcache fix".

[galaxian]

As I said, it does depend on what you are running. If the apps and windows don't need more memory, having it available does nothing for performance.

I hope you aren't saying, that starting and running Word on the 512MB box, was faster than on the 256MB one!

[TwoRails]

Hi Carnigan,

The issue of how much RAM Win98 can take is almost as bad as "Intel versus AMD" or "PC versus the Mac" discussions.

Every benchmark I've seen in magazines and Web sites alike say that there is an improvement going from 128 to 256, and almost negligible improvement from 256 to 512. After that, it seems to be a box-by-box issue, with or without any "tricks or tips." The overall "sweet spot" by consensus of these benchmarks is around 256 - 384.

I run at 512 and edit both still images and the proverbial home movies. The bottleneck is still the 1800+ processor I run.
If you'd like to run more than that, give it a try. I truly doubt that you gain any real performance levels. If the system chokes on more memory, then you'll need to experiment and try different adjustments and the like. I would also suggest running your own benchmarks and the like before and after, so you will see if there are any gains. I never found any, so I stick with 512.

HTH

TwoRails

[Carnigan]

Thanks TWO Rails

I have moved on past W98 and now run a P4 2.4 and 512 DDR the prob was with a friends system and altjough they bought their new PC with WXP Home they ndidnt like it and reverted to W98 GO Figure

Thanks all Carnigan