[Sussex] Microsoft Windows minimum system's

[John Crowhurst]

On Mon, August 7, 2006 15:30, Mike Diack wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Much though it pains me to say it, I think you are being a bit harsh on
> Microsoft here.
> I for ages ran XP very nicely on a 600MHz P3 with 768 MB RAM. It didn't
> fly
> but it was
> certainly very rarely laggy either. What I have come to realise with XP is
> that RAM on a low end
> system makes a HUGE difference, much more visibly so than a faster CPU. I
> guess it's down to all
> the caching.

XP works better with more memory. In fact the more physical memory it has,
the less virtual it allocates. With 768MB RAM, it uses 256MB as swap. Take
the system above 1GB and you will use very little swap.

In fact, the same applies to Linux. The more memory you have, the less
swap you use. Some systems with GB's of RAM run better without a swapfile.

--
John