"Marc Schimmler" <sch### [at] icauni-stuttgartde> wrote in message
news:38734EFA.2E4DB1E3@ica.uni-stuttgart.de...
> Ken wrote:
> >
> > Well I never really said you can't use a machine equiped with less
memory
> > but is sure seems like it is becoming more difficult to do so. I would
be
> > very happy to have a machine equipped with about 512 megs of memory and
> > would consider it my dream machine.
> >
>
> Well why not 1024 megs? What would you like to do with it?
> I have, as you might know, access to a machine with one GB RAM. It
> doesn't change the world too much. I found the 48 megs of my PC at home
> in 90% of the cases sufficient. Sometimes it makes me even more creative
> when I develop something that can be rendered on my PC.
>
> Marc
>
> --
> Marc Schimmler

Right, and I never need anymore than 128MBytes for nearly ever file I ever
rendered with the exception of one or two.  That's just overkill to have
more than 256MB for me anyway.  Although obviously you could get pretty
limited with super massive (well, I'd call them super massive) scenes
calling upon millions of objects for certain uses (loops, meshes, etc.) with
only that much memory regardless of the disk space available to thrash
around in.
Some people are just going to use a large amount.  But I notice that 32MB
would do fine for most of my renders.

Bob

Post a reply to this message