通过

Software Performance & Hardware configurations

  • 项目

The minimum hardware requirements for Visual Studio 2002 and 2003 are a machine with a 600MHz CPU and 128M RAM. 

A few months ago I picked up a new HTPC for cheap. Dell 2.4GHz, 128M RAM for $324. I see the deal reappear about once / month. I just added 1G RAM for only $120. I don't know why that machine needs 1G RAM, but it was cheap.

Plenty of users can't make that step. High school computer labs seem to have restricted budgets. Some companies need to have uniform, closely managed configurations: insurance companies, airplane manufacturers, etc. 

My take on the matter is that if you have the minimum configuration machine, you should set your expectations accordingly. “Hello World” applications should be fine. A high school student should be able to learn how to implement a red-black tree. If you try to use it to develop a very large application, you should expect performance to be pretty bad.

Similarly, if you have a monster machine, you should expect that VS should scale well. A dual-proc, 3.06GHz w/ Hyperthreading, 2G RAM and RAID SATA 15,000RM drives should pay off. Buy the biggest hardware and you should be able to develop the biggest application.

After we release Whidbey, there will be some time until the next VS is released. In that time you may have the opportunity to buy an 10GHz machine w/ 16G RAM, and 2T of disk space. When you do that, I want to be sure that Whidbey will actually scale to a very big app on that machine.

Edit: made the title somewhat less bland.

Comments