No, they use at least 16Mb, and if you have more it will use 50% of it.
(I'vetested to get this numbers, not guessing or secondhand info. Brutal "remove
a chipp, reboot, look and see" )

"Jon A. Cruz" wrote:
> 
> Ron Parker wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 26 May 1999 08:51:05 -0700, Jon A. Cruz wrote:
> > >Argh!
> > >One year ago I had checked it out on a system with only 32MB (pretty decent at
the
> > >time). Just opening Word (not any docs, just Word) caused it to begin almost
> > >constant disk-thrashing. I had hoped they had corrected that. Guess not. Good to
> > >know what practical requirements are (remember Win95 saying '8MB'??? Yeah, right)
> >
> > If I shut down all my optional services (apache, rc5des) and everything else,
> > the base system takes up somewhere around 75M, according to Task Manager.
> > Kernel memory alone is about half that.  So it looks like 96M is a minimal
> > system for this version of NT.  Disclaimers: I'm not running the official
> > beta 3, but I'm only about 15 builds behind.  I'm also running some under-
> > development dlls and drivers that will push the total up a bit.  But, as
> > you say, we're way off topic here.
> 
> One of the things I've heard about MS OS's is that they use whatever physical memory
> you have. That is, if you have the memory, the OS will go ahead and utilize it
untill
> some apps need it, then get paged out. The real test seems to be what is the point
> that it starts excessive swapping.

-- 
//Spider    --  [ spi### [at] bahnhofse ]-[ http://www.bahnhof.se/~spider/ ]
And the meek'll inherit what they damn well please
	Get ahead, go figure, go ahead and pull the trigger
		Everything under the gun
			--"Sisters Of Mercy" -- "Under The Gun"

Post a reply to this message