2GB is fine, i am running it and i have no problems (photoshop, premiere pro, etc.) I did try 4G, but as pointed already Vista only saw 2.75GB in my system. I think the whole 4G cap of Vista includes GPU ram, i think i read it somewhere.
Not really, if you're into heavy gaming or multitasking stick with 2GB. In fact, I still run 2GB of DDR2 and that's with gaming and stuff, works ok for me, for now at least. My mobo supports DDR2 and DDR3, so I wait for the price of DDR3 to come down a bit, then me get 2 x 2GB DDR3, Corsair low latency kickass ram![]()
tested 3gb (2x1gb) +(2x512mb) both in dual channel with vista, didnt notice a differance at all with the 2 extra 512mb
I also want to add another 2GB. I'm interested to see what 4GB will be like. If it doesn't make a huge difference I'll just sell the extra 2GB.
You running 64-bit? Otherwise the last 1.25GB of RAM will just go to waste as 32-bit Vista won't be able to 'see' it.
64-bit can 'see' 128GB of RAM![]()
Then I'll rather upgrade my machine to Vista 64bit than going back to XP.
AFAIK the 64-bit distro still seems to have some driver and compatibility issues.
That depends on how old the hardware is. I had no issues getting any of my hardware to run under x64. The only software program which runs under x86 but won't under x64 for me is acquamark. Everything else runs fine.
Disable some of the non essential apps (Aero for one) and 2Gigs should be ample to run Vista. 4 Gigs is obviously better.
32 bit doesn't support 4 Gigs but I believe some Intel platforms allow the system to see 4 Gigs if the /PAE switch is enabled in the boot .ini file.
I haven't tried it yet 'cos I don't have 4 gigs of ram so I have no idea if it works.