max memory

[grandizer74]

I'm about to get a new computer built to my specifications. I'm going to put win98 on it because I refuse to use xp and have heard that me has tons of problems. but, I also keep hearing that win98 has a max amount of ram it can handle, and that anything over that is pointless since it won't address it, and may actually cause the system to slow down.
once and for all, is this true? if so, what is the max amount? I was going to go for broke and put in 1gb of ram. would 98 be able to handle that and perform without problems?

[wonderinguy34]

If you won't be using it for with intense graphics programs like Photoshop ,Paintshop ,3D Studio Max etc.. ,then anything over 256MB is wasted,even gaming won't see an improvement over 256MB.I have seen people with over 1Gig of RAM ,running Win98 without probs,I use 384MB and haven't had any probs.

[Ridgerunr]

Controversy may arise,, but the limit for Win9x will be about 512MB's . Anything over that "may" cause probs. With 512 Megs of Crucial DDR2100,my Asus A7V266-E mobo,running Win98FE, it zips along as fast as "any" needs i may have... And that's with the AMD Athlon T-Bird 1.4Gig CPU...

I do a lot of burning/MP3 stuff and some,but not hard,graphics work and have no probs...

Welcome to the best dang place on the web for concerned help from GOOD peoples...

[DrMDJ]

Windows 98 will handle and use memory (if needed) up to just under 1gig without much problem. The only proviso is that if you go above 512mb you need to restrict the vcache that can be used (simple setting in system.ini). Beyond that however some problems/issues start cropping up that probably relate more to applications and hardware than to windows itself.

You're gonna have to be doing some pretty intense stuff to use and benefit from 1gig of ram.

[Buffalo]

These are a few repeats from a Win98 NG concerning max ram in Win98.

"The fact is that for many users with Windows 98 there is often very little
benefit in going beyond 128 mb of RAM. Not because Windows cannot use the
added memory (there are users running Windows 98 with 1.5 gb of RAM and
making full and effective use of every bit of it) but because the way they
use their computers is such that Windows will rarely if ever require more
than 128 mb of RAM.

Adding more memory will improve performance if, and only if, the added
memory results in reduced usage of the virtual memory swap file.
Therefore if the swap file is not being used to any significant extent
then adding more memory will not provide a significant improvement.

Use the System Monitor utility that comes with Windows and set it to track
"Memory manager: Swap file in use" for several days of normal to heavy
usage. If "Swap file in use" regularly shows as 20 mb or more then the
swap file is being used extensively and more memory would result in
improved performance.

This applies regardless of how much or how little RAM is currently
installed in the computer.
Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada"

Windows was designed for 2 gig. (many systems can't handle more than 1.5 gig.) With over 512 meg you may need a [vcache] statement in System.ini. and there are possible hardware related problems that can occur with more than 1 gb of RAM.

Vcache settings only affect how much memory is used to cache files, it has nothing to do with how much RAM is available.

It has a couple of bugs, but they both can be avoided by judicious
limiting of the vcache. Limit it to 70% of your RAM, or 524288
kilobytes (512 megabytes), whichever is less. The easy way to do this
is multiply the number of megabytes of RAM you have by 716 (which is 70%
of a kilobyte).



With regards to adding a MaxFileCache=524288 or lower under the [vcache] header in System.ini :

"The vcache limit does not restrict the total memory usage by Windows -
only the amount of that memory that can be used for disk cache. This is
needed because if the disk cache gets larger than 512 mb it can cause
false "out of memory" errors because of a virtual address usage problem.

However that limit does not prevent Windows from using the full amount of
the installed memory for program code and/or data files."

Plenty of copying and pasting here.

[Train]

Buffalo
Very good. You have a link possibly?
Just a note also, I have found that going from 384 to 512 actually caused a 2 seconds slow down in a couple graphics rendering programs. Could be the programs, but does happen.

[Buffalo]

Hi Train,
When you stated that some programs slowed down when you went to 512MB, did you try it with a MaxFileCache=367001 (which is 70% of 512MB)? Some believe that whenever you go above 192MB of Ram you should use that 70% value.

I got most of the info in my previous post from microsoft.public.win98.performance and here.


Following is a good list of references for anyone interested in Memory, Vcache,etc.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"for 640 meg set
[vcache]
MaxFileCache=448000

for 768 meg or more use 512000

Windows was designed for 2 gig. (many systems can't handle
more than 1.5 gig.) With over 512 meg you need a [vcache]
statement in System.ini.

http://support.microsoft.com/default...;EN-US;q304943
Computer May Reboot Continuously with More Than 1.5 GB of RAM
More than 1 gig RAM - 98 - 98SE - ME and [vcache] in System.ini

http://tinyurl.com/ll6 <-- explains 2 gig limit
Link to Technet article on Windows 98 Architecture - for memory see
"Memory Paging" section of Virtual Machine Manager.
http://www.microsoft.com/TechNet/win...rt5/wrkc26.asp
Performance Tuning - VCache - Swap File - Role Stand-a-lone or Server
[vcache]
MaxFileCache=512000
http://support.microsoft.com/default...;EN-US;q192607
Doc on Vcache
http://support.microsoft.com/default...;EN-US;q253912
"Out of Memory" Error Messages with Large Amounts of RAM
95/98/98SE/ME MinFileCache and MaxFileCache

http://support.microsoft.com/default...;EN-US;q181862
Specifying Amount of RAM Available to Windows Using MaxPhysPage

http://support.microsoft.com/default...;EN-US;q223294
INFO: The Windows 98 PageFile_Call_Async_Manager Service
System.ini
[386enh]
Paging=on
ConservativeSwapfileUsage=1
http://support.microsoft.com/default...;EN-US;q184447
Error Message: Insufficient Memory to Initialize Windows

http://support.microsoft.com/default...;EN-US;q311871
PRB: Blue Screen Appears When You Start Computer with 1 GB or More of RAM
(Note : This specifically applies to systems with Shared Video Memory ONLY!)

http://support.microsoft.com/default...;EN-US;q259184
How to Increase the Memory Capability of Your Computer

http://support.microsoft.com/default...;EN-US;q146912
Reported Memory Does Not Match Amount of Installed Memory

--
Rob
Supporting Member, Cascade Bicycle Club
http://www.cascade.org

"Mr XXX> wrote in message
> I recently aded 512Mb of memory to my PC (total of 640),
> and it appears to have slowed it down. Some people I have
> talked to suggested that there is a limit of 384 Mb in the
> 98SE operting sytem. Is this true - can anyone confirm, or
> offer other advice.
>
> I have played with the Vcache (reduced max memory used)
> and it seems to have helped but I hate to lose the memory
> if I don't have to...

[Train]

Ahh the newsgroup.
That expalains the copy/paste business real well.
Yes we did just out of curiosity. No help. Finally gave up and dropped back 128MB to 382MB. End of problem.
Rendering 3D graphics is a slammer for a system .
Forgot about that site. Thanks for the reminder.

[anarchyreigns]

You're building a new computer and you're going to load in 98 instead of XP?

[grandizer74]

yup. no xp for me, ever. unless they come out with a service pack for it that includes an actress of my choice coming to my house every day for... uhh... bible study.... then I'm not getting xp. winme I've heard nothing but complaints about from people who've had it, so 98 is good enough for me.

[WhitPhil]

Just as an FYI, XP is not based on the Win95/98/Me operating system, but rather on the NT one which is substantially more robust.

So any Me complaints have no relation to how XP runs.

[DrMDJ]

As Whitphil said, XP is based on the NT kernel so you're dealing with a whole different breed of cat.

Now about the version that comes with the actress... Please provide a link when you find it.

[Buffalo]

Originally posted by Train
Buffalo
Very good. You have a link possibly?
Just a note also, I have found that going from 384 to 512 actually caused a 2 seconds slow down in a couple graphics rendering programs. Could be the programs, but does happen.

May be the reason: Many graphics programs have their own private swap file, and this may
find itself in a different situation with more RAM, as well.
You may find this strange (I did) but I just read this (yes, in that same NG):

Contrary to popular opinion, you
often need a larger swapfile, when you have more RAM, for full
performance. Caching more files in RAM requires more swap space.

but still

[Train]

Originally posted by Buffalo


May be the reason: Many graphics programs have their own private swap file, and this may
find itself in a different situation with more RAM, as well.
You may find this strange (I did) but I just read this (yes, in that same NG):

None that we could change. And yes I knew about that business.

[grandizer74]

I know xp is different than the others. the things I don't like about it have to do with privacy issues more than performance. I don't like for any company to be keeping track of what I put on my computer. so if ms comes out with another o/s in a couple of years that has that same feature, I'll still be staying with 98.

btw, thanks to everyone for their replies/advice. I'm going to go with 512 for now and if I ever need it later I can add more.