We are a tech shop so I just stumbled across a bunch of 16MB SIMMS, from when who knows when. I want to have two working SE/30's. How much RAM before its pointless to add more? I know more is always better. But running MS word and some sort of network browser and Ethernet, I'm assuming I will probably NEVER use all 128MB? I was thinking 64MB, but is that even too much? Thanks
-
Hello MLAers! We've re-enabled auto-approval for accounts. If you are still waiting on account approval, please check this thread for more information.
SE/30 How much RAM is enough?
- Thread starter tbohen
- Start date
So 32MB is more than enough, and 64 - 128MB if you are made of money, or can get the modules free (like you!)
There is never a thing as too much RAM, and a 128MB SE/30 has always been considered the Cadillac of Compact Macs. Since you can obtain enough for this configuration, I recommend you go for it. Even if your programs don't consume more than 16MB, think of the multitasking you can accomplish with additional RAM. It's also nice if you want to push the computer's limits (running AppleWorks 5, surfing the web, development, etc).
Actually, in one set of Intel-based machines (early pentiums?), going over a certain amount can actually make a system slower. I know that's not the case with macs, but is ONE instance where I can safely say that over a certain amount is too much. But then again, we aren't discussing Intel machines
As someone who has tested most RAM configs in the SE/30 -- all the way to 128MB -- in conjunction with Systems 6, 7 and 8, I would advise 32MB. That will give you enough RAM to run Photoshop and browse the web. It will also boot fast too. And if you use a IIsi or IIfx ROM, 32MB of RAM will let you run OS 8 just fine too.
If you put in 64MB, the cold boot time will noticeably lengthen. And when you use 128MB, you better find something else to do while waiting for the machine to boot to the desktop.
Since you probably won't be browsing the web "all day" or running hefty color files through Photoshop on your B&W SE/30, 32MB is definitely "enough RAM." But if you like to impress your friends, by all means, throw the full 128MB on there!
If you put in 64MB, the cold boot time will noticeably lengthen. And when you use 128MB, you better find something else to do while waiting for the machine to boot to the desktop.
Since you probably won't be browsing the web "all day" or running hefty color files through Photoshop on your B&W SE/30, 32MB is definitely "enough RAM." But if you like to impress your friends, by all means, throw the full 128MB on there!
32MB is perfect for OS 7.1 with OT and ethernet. Both of my SE/30's are setup like that and I do have spare 16MB 30 pin SIMMs to use if I needed to. 32MB is also perfect for big box Mac II's.
Having max RAM is cool and all (I have a Q950 stuffed with 256MB of expensive RAM), but overall it doesn't do much for you other then turning off VM.
Somebody mentioned old PCs that ran slow with more then 64MB of RAM etc, that was because of the cache and cache controller being limited to caching up to xxx RAM and anything after that is uncached and much slower. Since none of the 68K macs came equipped with motherboard cache from the factory it doesn't matter.
Having max RAM is cool and all (I have a Q950 stuffed with 256MB of expensive RAM), but overall it doesn't do much for you other then turning off VM.
Somebody mentioned old PCs that ran slow with more then 64MB of RAM etc, that was because of the cache and cache controller being limited to caching up to xxx RAM and anything after that is uncached and much slower. Since none of the 68K macs came equipped with motherboard cache from the factory it doesn't matter.
To be specific, most of of the very common Intel 430 PCIset Pentium chipset variants had this limitation. Some of the older models like the HX could support up to 512MB fully cached when equipped with the proper tag RAMs but the HX was expensive and became rare once Intel started really pushing the Pentium Pro/Pentium II for high-end applications. In general Intel's "cheap" products from the mid-late 90's era suffered from a really bad case of "Macintosh Performa-itis" because of the drive to create market segmentation. Survivors from that time might remember other kneecapped wonders like the secondary-cacheless original Celeron and the AGP-slotless Intel 810 motherboard chipset. Bleah.
Of course, I have 128MB in my 430VX equipped Dolch lunchbox because taking a 20% hit in memory bandwidth beats the many-thousand-percent hit you'll take going to swap running a semi-modern OS on such an old dog.
My family had an Intel 430TX chipset sitting under a Pentium 100MHz and four 16MB SIMMs (64MB). It flew like greased lightning, and I was the envy of my peers for several years.
While it could only cache 64MB, you have to keep in mind how obscenely expensive RAM was in the early to mid 90s. Plus the fact that 64MB was almost ridiculous outside of servers and high-end workstations. People restoring 68k Macs are almost spoiled by comparison.
When we bought that PC (custom build with SIMMs by father scored from work), the best Apple could muster was the very first PPCs with significantly less RAM (i.e. the 6100 with it's on-board 8MB).
While it could only cache 64MB, you have to keep in mind how obscenely expensive RAM was in the early to mid 90s. Plus the fact that 64MB was almost ridiculous outside of servers and high-end workstations. People restoring 68k Macs are almost spoiled by comparison.
When we bought that PC (custom build with SIMMs by father scored from work), the best Apple could muster was the very first PPCs with significantly less RAM (i.e. the 6100 with it's on-board 8MB).
