2G RAM on XP Home?


I'm getting ready to buy a new desktop. I like XP Home as an OS and am currently using it on several companies/machines for ease of data/hardware portability. But on my personal machine used for site-building I need some number-crunching horsepower as I generate static pages from databases locally...

Will XP Home handle 2G of Ram? More?


Had XP home running on 1.5 gig. It flew!

When I was building a server I instaled XP home just to see how it would perform. Lets just say I was impressed. The first difference you will see is the lack of boot up time. The system also becomes instaintly usable. No more typical waiting about for the egg timer to go away.

With 2 gig I can only imagne good things.


2 GB is fine. If you want to

2 GB is fine. If you want to go above that...

You may be restricted by A) How many RAM sockets are on the motherboard and B) the maximum size module you can get. If you're looking for 2 GB DDR2 modules then you could be a while.

Above 2 GB I don't believe you'll see any noticeable performance difference so, personally, I wouldn't bother.

Pro with 1 gig RAM

I run XP Pro with one gig of RAM (I doubled it about a year ago), and it's frankly not fast enough for me. I can't do anything with it for about 2 minutes after I log in while I wait for the AV to load, and running apps like Photoshop clearly slow it down.

I'd say if you can get 2 gig in there, do it.

OK, I ordered pentium dual

OK, I ordered pentium dual core and hyperthreading. 3.2 ghz cpu clock. 2G sdram at 667mhz on 2 dimms. Supposedly, XP (no specific flavors were mentioned) is able to take advantage of this dual core stuff. We'll see.

Get the 2 gig and upgrade to XP Pro

XP home is just not stable.

I have just ordered

a couple of the new Gateway tablet machines with 2GB of of memory. I am hoping they will be very fast. Should arrive this week - I'll let you know if you haven't got yours by then.

XP Home didn't have enough

XP Home didn't have enough network control for me

thankfully, no network

thankfully, no network control needed. i work alone, hhh.

seriously, i strip the identifiable junk out of xp home and it's worked great (in several different business enviroments but none networked) for a couple of years now.

I'm with the general

I'm with the general consensus that Pro is the way forwards, but on the RAM issue I would definitely go for it. CPU power is a non-issue for a workstation, but when I upgraded my machine from 512mb to 1gb of faster-than-light memory, the results were phenomenal but it still crunches the disk from time to time. I'm firmly of the belief that more RAM is probably the single most effective upgrade you can make to a computer.


Three things make windows fly:

1. ram
2. smp
3. scsi
4. raid

You have #1, and #2, sorta.

For db work you should definitely consider a caching scsi raid controller with the right drives. I've bought high end previous generation Compaq controllers for as little as $10USD.

2 gb... MAJOR difference!

If you're like me, and you have a lot of apps running at the same time plus perhaps a disk indexer in the background, you will notice a *huge* difference in the speed of your system when you go from 1 to 2gb; I should know: I just did this last week! :)

re: xp home vs. pro -- I respectfully disagree with the earlier poster who suggested a difference in stability. I don't think this is true. It's my pretty certain understanding that both systems work off the same main kernal and same file system (NTFS), and the main advantages with Pro are:
- Ability to work with dual processor
- Better / more security features, encryption, etc.
- Can use remote desktop in both directions (client, server)

I'm sure there are other advantages, but I'm pretty sure that stability isn't one of them.

XP home

I found home faster because of the reduced overhead and less running services. I dont see a difference in stability. I only use Pro because I need IIS/SMTP services and the workaround for home didn't work for me. 1gb is enough, 2gb and it will be nippy.


I built my 3GHz P4 with 2GB over a year ago... yes you do need it and yes you will appreciate it. I went paired extreme from Crucial. In that machine I also went with dual SATA drives in a raid array (more important than the second gig of ram for MOST work, but not all).

That said XP still suffers numerous other issues that continue to get in the way of performance. Video drivers especially. Update XP, update video, update XP to Sp2, wait for stable video drivers, etc etc etc. I doubt I have ever had a real memory issue but I have run memchck numerous times to debug video drivers.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.