RAM question - Ubuntu

This is a discussion on RAM question - Ubuntu ; How much RAM is good for snappy performance in an Ubuntu machine? I only plan to use it for Internet, email, and such. No gaming....

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: RAM question

  1. RAM question

    How much RAM is good for snappy performance in an Ubuntu machine? I only
    plan to use it for Internet, email, and such. No gaming.


  2. Re: RAM question

    Pete wrote:
    > How much RAM is good for snappy performance in an Ubuntu machine? I only
    > plan to use it for Internet, email, and such. No gaming.


    RAM is so cheap at the moment I'd go for a minimum of 2GB

    --
    Annie.......... (ISP:Be* Un Limited - OS:Vista Ultimate 32bit)
    http://find-out-more.brion.me.uk - http://email-me.brion.me.uk

  3. Re: RAM question


    "Annie Brion" <"albasani_net"@brion.co.uk> wrote in message
    news:gdfe67$2q6$1@news.albasani.net...
    > Pete wrote:
    >> How much RAM is good for snappy performance in an Ubuntu machine? I only
    >> plan to use it for Internet, email, and such. No gaming.

    >
    > RAM is so cheap at the moment I'd go for a minimum of 2GB
    >
    > --
    > Annie.......... (ISP:Be* Un Limited - OS:Vista Ultimate 32bit)
    > http://find-out-more.brion.me.uk - http://email-me.brion.me.uk


    But I'm looking at refurbished machines. The Linux machine will be a second
    machine for me to experiment with. Vista is on the main machine.
    -Pete


  4. Re: RAM question

    On Sun, 19 Oct 2008 09:37:39 -0400, Pete wrote:
    > How much RAM is good for snappy performance in an Ubuntu machine? I only
    > plan to use it for Internet, email, and such. No gaming.


    I'd say 256 MB would probably be a reasonable minimum for those
    activities. You might be able to get away with a little less.

    --
    Travis Evans
    [Obtain email address by removing all Q's.]

  5. Re: RAM question

    Pete schrieb:
    > How much RAM is good for snappy performance in an Ubuntu machine? I only
    > plan to use it for Internet, email, and such. No gaming.
    >

    Pete,

    the resources are not needed for the linux system itself, but for the
    gnome (ubuntu) or KDE (kubuntu) desktops.

    For those RAM > 512 MB. But if you want to use some applications with
    those - RAM > 1 GB.

    If you have to use an old machine, go for xubuntu. RAM > 128 MB should
    be OK.

    KH

  6. Re: RAM question

    On 2008-10-19, Pete wrote:
    > How much RAM is good for snappy performance in an Ubuntu machine? I only
    > plan to use it for Internet, email, and such. No gaming.
    >


    512 MB is not so bad. 1 GB is perfectly enough. 2 GB will help with
    ome extra apps, like when you compile big files, etc.

    I have a laptop with 256 MB and it works acceptably, though I would
    not be bragging.
    --
    Due to extreme spam originating from Google Groups, and their inattention
    to spammers, I and many others block all articles originating
    from Google Groups. If you want your postings to be seen by
    more readers you will need to find a different means of
    posting on Usenet.
    http://improve-usenet.org/

  7. Re: RAM question

    On Sun, 19 Oct 2008 09:37:39 -0400, Pete wrote:

    > How much RAM is good for snappy performance in an Ubuntu machine? I only
    > plan to use it for Internet, email, and such. No gaming.


    512mb should be adequate. The Ubuntu Live CD will not, practically,
    install on less - you would need the alternative CD.

  8. Re: RAM question



    "Pete" wrote in message
    news:mKGKk.5268$be.1134@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com...
    > How much RAM is good for snappy performance in an Ubuntu machine? I only
    > plan to use it for Internet, email, and such. No gaming.
    >


    Depends on what you mean by snappy.
    It will run fine in 512M but it will probably start up faster with 1G.
    In theory it will be OK with 256M but I think you would need to reduce some
    of the startup stuff for it to be snappy.


  9. Re: RAM question

    ray wrote:
    > On Sun, 19 Oct 2008 09:37:39 -0400, Pete wrote:
    >
    >> How much RAM is good for snappy performance in an Ubuntu machine? I only
    >> plan to use it for Internet, email, and such. No gaming.

    >
    > 512mb should be adequate. The Ubuntu Live CD will not, practically,
    > install on less - you would need the alternative CD.


    I've installed an Ubuntu LiveCD with 192mb.

    --
    Norman
    Registered Linux user #461062

  10. Re: RAM question

    Norman Peelman wrote:
    > ray wrote:
    >> On Sun, 19 Oct 2008 09:37:39 -0400, Pete wrote:
    >>
    >>> How much RAM is good for snappy performance in an Ubuntu machine? I
    >>> only
    >>> plan to use it for Internet, email, and such. No gaming.

    >>
    >> 512mb should be adequate. The Ubuntu Live CD will not, practically,
    >> install on less - you would need the alternative CD.

    >
    > I've installed an Ubuntu LiveCD with 192mb.



    And I've done it with 128 MB of RAM.

    --
    John

    No Microsoft, Apple, AT&T, Intel, Novell, Trend Micro, nor Ford products were used in the preparation or transmission of this message.

    The EULA sounds like it was written by a team of lawyers who want to tell me what I can't do. The GPL sounds like it was written by a human being, who wants me to know what I can do.

  11. Re: RAM question

    John F. Morse wrote:
    > Norman Peelman wrote:
    >> ray wrote:
    >>> On Sun, 19 Oct 2008 09:37:39 -0400, Pete wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> How much RAM is good for snappy performance in an Ubuntu machine? I
    >>>> only
    >>>> plan to use it for Internet, email, and such. No gaming.
    >>>
    >>> 512mb should be adequate. The Ubuntu Live CD will not, practically,
    >>> install on less - you would need the alternative CD.

    >>
    >> I've installed an Ubuntu LiveCD with 192mb.

    >
    >
    > And I've done it with 128 MB of RAM.
    >


    I really tried... it just insisted to do nothing until I slipped that
    extra 64mb in.


    --
    Norman
    Registered Linux user #461062

  12. Re: RAM question

    Norman Peelman wrote:
    > John F. Morse wrote:
    >> Norman Peelman wrote:
    >>> ray wrote:
    >>>> On Sun, 19 Oct 2008 09:37:39 -0400, Pete wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> How much RAM is good for snappy performance in an Ubuntu machine?
    >>>>> I only
    >>>>> plan to use it for Internet, email, and such. No gaming.
    >>>>
    >>>> 512mb should be adequate. The Ubuntu Live CD will not, practically,
    >>>> install on less - you would need the alternative CD.
    >>>
    >>> I've installed an Ubuntu LiveCD with 192mb.

    >>
    >>
    >> And I've done it with 128 MB of RAM.
    >>

    >
    > I really tried... it just insisted to do nothing until I slipped
    > that extra 64mb in.



    Some distros are stubborn, or refuse to install. That I believe is a
    short sight by the developer, possibly to protect their distro from
    appearing to be sluggish.

    I have managed to install Etch on a 16 MB system, but it's like building
    a ship in a bottle: You ain't gonna take a scenic trip on it! ;-)

    I don't believe I have Ubuntu 8.04 LTS installed on a 128 MB box, but I
    do have one or two Ubuntu 8.04 Server Editions installed. Plus an older
    Ubuntu 5.04.

    Other old 128 MB PCs are running Fedora Core 3, Lindows 4.5.316,
    Mandrake 8.0 and 10.1, and Slackware 10.1.

    There are a couple of Debian Etch, and several Debian Sarge boxen, one
    with only 64 MB of RAM. It is running BIND9, Fetchmail, ntpd, and
    Stunnel, as well as many default services (Exim4, etc.). On November 12,
    the uptime will be two years on that box!

    These old junkers make fine servers, but you wouldn't want to run one as
    your only PC -- for Web surfing. ;-)

    --
    John

    No Microsoft, Apple, AT&T, Intel, Novell, Trend Micro, nor Ford products were used in the preparation or transmission of this message.

    The EULA sounds like it was written by a team of lawyers who want to tell me what I can't do. The GPL sounds like it was written by a human being, who wants me to know what I can do.

  13. Re: RAM question

    On 2008-10-19, Pete wrote:
    > How much RAM is good for snappy performance in an Ubuntu machine? I only
    > plan to use it for Internet, email, and such. No gaming.
    >


    512MB is probably more than adequate for most people. I keep a lot
    running on this machine, and it rarely goes over 800MB in use at any
    given time. That includes ktorrent always running, along with a
    MediaTomb server, and whatever apps I am using at that particular
    time.

    My laptop has a much more limited use, and it has never been over 500M
    used...


    --
    Joe - Linux User #449481/Ubuntu User #19733
    joe at hits - buffalo dot com
    "Hate is baggage, life is too short to go around pissed off all the
    time..." - Danny, American History X

  14. Re: RAM question

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    Pete pravi:
    > How much RAM is good for snappy performance in an Ubuntu machine? I only
    > plan to use it for Internet, email, and such. No gaming.


    512 MB should work out great.

    But as you know Linux is Linux, so even if you add more RAM than you'll
    ever need, it will still use the free RAM to optimize it's performance.
    So more will always help.
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
    Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

    iD8DBQFJBMjfB6mNZXe93qgRAjJtAKCjDZJUjThblDKI44TkLi hx2j5oAwCfSqaN
    +t4tbTR3k/NSrlMa5wIC5Ys=
    =v4hw
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  15. Re: RAM question

    Jure Sah wrote:
    > Pete pravi:
    >> How much RAM is good for snappy performance in an Ubuntu machine? I only
    >> plan to use it for Internet, email, and such. No gaming.

    >
    > 512 MB should work out great.
    >
    > But as you know Linux is Linux, so even if you add more RAM than you'll
    > ever need, it will still use the free RAM to optimize it's performance.
    > So more will always help.


    More ram is better and it is damn well cheap enough these days at about
    $20 per GB (for DDR and DDR2), so unless you are really broke, RAM
    should be a non-issue.

    One other thing that I do with 2GB is to **not** make a swap partition
    and Linux happily uses the RAM and is very snappy on my machine.

    Go to pricewatch.com to find the best deals. I usually buy from
    newegg.com and they ship almost as fast as they get you credit card, or
    in my case a debit card for online use.

    I only ran out of RAM once, in windows, converting about 500 MP3's.
    No gaming here so I don't need 'snappy' performance, just reliability.
    Bill Baka

  16. Re: RAM question

    Bill Baka wrote in news:ge2jjc$27b$1@aioe.org:

    > I only ran out of RAM once, in windows, converting about 500 MP3's.
    > No gaming here so I don't need 'snappy' performance, just reliability.
    > Bill Baka


    I think one of the most RAM intensive applications that I have ever used is
    multiple instances of 7z file compressing set to "ultra".

    A few multiple instances of that will use up all the RAM on just about any
    typical machine.

  17. Re: RAM question

    ShadowTek wrote:
    > Bill Baka wrote in news:ge2jjc$27b$1@aioe.org:
    >
    >> I only ran out of RAM once, in windows, converting about 500 MP3's.
    >> No gaming here so I don't need 'snappy' performance, just reliability.
    >> Bill Baka

    >
    > I think one of the most RAM intensive applications that I have ever used is
    > multiple instances of 7z file compressing set to "ultra".
    >
    > A few multiple instances of that will use up all the RAM on just about any
    > typical machine.


    Mine will go to 3GB (another stick) but that is the limit for my old AMD
    socket 754. Upgrade time. Maybe an AMD AM2 with 16GB is due.
    Anyway, I hold to the more RAM is better. When I run DOS (really) it
    only sees 256MB but I can make as many ram-disks at 16MB each as I want
    and it is absurdly fast.
    Bill Baka

  18. Re: RAM question

    "Bill Baka" wrote in message
    news:ge2s49$4tt$1@aioe.org...
    > ShadowTek wrote:
    >> Bill Baka wrote in news:ge2jjc$27b$1@aioe.org:
    >>
    >>> I only ran out of RAM once, in windows, converting about 500 MP3's.
    >>> No gaming here so I don't need 'snappy' performance, just reliability.
    >>> Bill Baka

    >>
    >> I think one of the most RAM intensive applications that I have ever used
    >> is multiple instances of 7z file compressing set to "ultra".
    >>
    >> A few multiple instances of that will use up all the RAM on just about
    >> any typical machine.

    >
    > Mine will go to 3GB (another stick) but that is the limit for my old AMD
    > socket 754. Upgrade time. Maybe an AMD AM2 with 16GB is due.
    > Anyway, I hold to the more RAM is better. When I run DOS (really) it only
    > sees 256MB but I can make as many ram-disks at 16MB each as I want and it
    > is absurdly fast.
    > Bill Baka



    No way !
    Wanna fight ?
    I'll punch you in the mouth.
    That's right !
    I'm bad !

    Moron.
    Bill Baka is a little squirrel in the road you wanna hit.

    --
    Ens causa sui
    Fit caedes omnibus locis


  19. Re: RAM question

    On Sun, 26 Oct 2008 22:40:47 +0000 (UTC), ShadowTek wrote:
    > Bill Baka wrote in news:ge2jjc$27b$1@aioe.org:
    >
    >> I only ran out of RAM once, in windows, converting about 500 MP3's.
    >> No gaming here so I don't need 'snappy' performance, just reliability.
    >> Bill Baka

    >
    > I think one of the most RAM intensive applications that I have ever used is
    > multiple instances of 7z file compressing set to "ultra".
    >
    > A few multiple instances of that will use up all the RAM on just about any
    > typical machine.


    The only times I ever remember running out of RAM in Linux was when
    running some *extremely* inefficient (memory usage-wise) programs or
    programs with bugs that caused them to go into crazy runaway allocation
    loops.

    --
    Travis Evans
    [Obtain email address by removing all Q's.]

  20. Re: RAM question

    Travis Evans wrote in
    news:ge3h5o$6fg$1@aioe.org:

    >> I think one of the most RAM intensive applications that I have ever
    >> used is multiple instances of 7z file compressing set to "ultra".
    >>
    >> A few multiple instances of that will use up all the RAM on just
    >> about any typical machine.

    >
    > The only times I ever remember running out of RAM in Linux was when
    > running some *extremely* inefficient (memory usage-wise) programs or
    > programs with bugs that caused them to go into crazy runaway
    > allocation loops.


    I just took a look in the documentation for 7zip v4.57 (for WinXP), and
    "7z" format compression using "LZMA" set to "ultra" uses 709MBs for
    compression and 66MBs for decompression.

+ Reply to Thread