Why isn't 2GB RAM enough for my W8.1 laptop?

Stoke

Just my opinion but 2GB is probably fine with something other than Windows. Ubuntu for example with a half decent processor and 2GB RAM will be more usable. Linux Mint is a bit more of a resource hog, but if you want your 'favourite OS', then you kind of need to abide by its rules and Windows 8, or even Windows 7 tend to hog resources quite a bit. I've not had a machine running Windows with just 2GB of RAM for almost 10 years. 4GB Is the minimum these days. You might find without any software that the OS works okay, but once you start installing this and that, you'll struggle.

If you're willing to experiment, Linux... honestly.

Kernel_Sanders

AndyPix wrote: »

That will probly be a ribbon cable possibly for the keyboard, be careful, I have ripped those in the past

Well you shouldn't keep running with scissors then, should you.

GunJack wrote: »

to the OP:- check out blackviper's W7 configurations, and see how much unneeded startup crap you can disable, makes a LOT of difference, you do this via Services, found in Control Panel . Administrative Tools....

Did you mean W8.1?
There, they say to go via Programs and Features. I don't have to go through all that antiquated typing to get to the Control Panel, do I?

Hmm...probably not a good idea to antagonize those who rue the fact that millions use computers without even knowing what a command line is, let alone how to use one

A.Penny.Saved

lmao at 2GB, my Firefox memory usage gets to 12GB at times and now after recently starting was using 1.6GB. My other PC has 4GB and I struggle with that.

Moo0 Window menu plus has reduced it a bit down to about 1.1GB.

ZX81, I had one of those with the power plug that wobbled in the socket if you pressed the "touch" sensitive keyboard, resetting it until I soldered the wire directly to the circuit board, followed by a Spectrum, Enterprise 128KB and Amiga 500.

GunJack

Kernel_Sanders wrote: »

Well you shouldn't keep running with scissors then, should you.

Did you mean W8.1?
There, they say to go via Programs and Features. I don't have to go through all that antiquated typing to get to the Control Panel, do I?

Hmm...probably not a good idea to antagonize those who rue the fact that millions use computers without even knowing what a command line is, let alone how to use one

Yes, the W8.1 config in your case.... you should get to the point where there's less than 40 processes running when your machine is idle, and only using half or less of your RAM...

However you get to Services is entirely up to you, you could just Run services.msc....I'm deffo Old-School

Johnmcl7

Tarambor wrote: »

Utter codswallop. Why do people continue to trot out this rubbish? 64 bit versions of Windows ALLOW YOU TO USE MORE RAM than 32 bit versions, due to the fact the maximum addressable memory with 32 bits is 4GB, they don't require more. With two equivalent installations of Windows, one 32 bit and one 64bit, you'll see maybe at most 100MB difference in memory usage..

People 'trot out this rubbish' because they clearly know a lot more about 64-bit software than you do. While it is true that a 64-bit operating system allows more ram to be used, 64-bit applications and operating systems require more memory than an equivalent 32-bit application:

https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/maoni/2007/05/15/64-bit-vs-32-bit/

Or more simply, check the requirements for Windows 8:

https://support.microsoft.com/en-gb/help/12660/windows-8-system-requirements

Although 64-bit doesn't necessarily need twice as much memory, it does need more which is why Microsoft have higher requirements for the 64-bit version. With 2GB of ram on a 64-bit OS, the machine is barely meeting the minimum requirements but if it was running the 32-bit version of the OS then the 2GB ram gives it more headroom.

I've come across a variety of OEM builds that use the 64-bit OS on a low spec laptop with 2GB ram and struggling for memory, if upgrading the ram isn't an option then I've found rebuilding it with a 32-bit OS does benefit it particularly when as you do agree, there's no benefit to the 64-bit OS when the PC doesn't have a larger amount of memory.