[-n7-]

enaberif has a very skewed bias against Vista for unknown [& unfounded no doubt] reasons, so there's not much point in arguing with him.

I run 8 GB, & i wouldn't go back to 4 GB actually.

Contrary to the nonsense he spouts, i've found it actually does improve things, & since i actually use Vista, & have used it with 1, 2, 4, & 8 GB, i actually can speak on this accurately.

There is no question Vista loves RAM.

It's not really at all like XP in how it manages things.

In XP, if you are only actively using 900 MB of RAM, you will see no benefit from going from 1 GB to 2 GB.

In Vista, you will not only see a benefit in having more RAM, you will actually see the amount of RAM Vista actively utilizes increase.

Superfetch does help speed things up; in general, everything just seems snappier.

But as i mentioned, the other benefit is actively utilized memory actually increases in Vista when you have more...
If you check task manager on an indentical 2 GB vs. 4 GB vs. 8 GB system, you'll see idle usage just for the OS alone is higher the more RAM you have.

I find myself easily running 3-4 GB actively a lot, especially with games & stuff running in the background.

I will say that 2x2 GB is likely the sweet spot for Vista x64, no doubt.
I won't say going to 8 GB is going to help a basic user much; it likely won't.

But for multitasking gamers, you'll not regret 6 or 8 GB.

I don't really think you can have too much RAM with Vista; it will proactively utilize as best it can, though obviously the higher you get, there will be diminishing returns eventually if you cannot utilize it all.