newbie question- max number of graphs in a workbook?

Several versions ago, Excel had some issues when I tried to put 35-40 graphs
in a workbook. If I turned off the autosize text on all graph text objects I
could get a few more than if I left autotext on. I used to run into
out-of-memory errors, even on fast machines with more RAM and HD space than
Excel could possibly have needed.

I'm not sure where to look to see whether this has been "fixed" or at least
improved, and how much improvement might be available in each version of
Excel. I'm about to start a new project that may end up with 100's of
graphs, and it would be a lot easier to develop with excel's limitations in
mind, vs. trying to do it all in one workbook then having to go back and do
rework until I hit the right limit.

Can anyone tell me, or provide a link to, the graph limitations for each
version of Excel?

Thanks!
Keith

If you search Excel help using the following heading (sans quotes) "Excel
specifications and limits " it will give a full list of all application
limits. In Excel 2003 the limit is determined by the amount of available
memory. So there is no fixed number of charts allowed.
--
Kevin Backmann


"KR" wrote:

> Several versions ago, Excel had some issues when I tried to put 35-40 graphs
> in a workbook. If I turned off the autosize text on all graph text objects I
> could get a few more than if I left autotext on. I used to run into
> out-of-memory errors, even on fast machines with more RAM and HD space than
> Excel could possibly have needed.
>
> I'm not sure where to look to see whether this has been "fixed" or at least
> improved, and how much improvement might be available in each version of
> Excel. I'm about to start a new project that may end up with 100's of
> graphs, and it would be a lot easier to develop with excel's limitations in
> mind, vs. trying to do it all in one workbook then having to go back and do
> rework until I hit the right limit.
>
> Can anyone tell me, or provide a link to, the graph limitations for each
> version of Excel?
>
> Thanks!
> Keith
>
>
>

The Excel specifications section of the help file indicates that the number
of graphs is only limited by available memory, but it also said that in
Excel97, which had a significant problem (workbook crashing) with more than
40 graphs, regardless of the amount of RAM or HD available.

Does anyone know if the memory bug that limited graphs per workbook has been
fixed in more recent versions of Excel? Or if it has been improved but not
fixed, what I should consider to be the functional limit in Office 2000 or
2003? Again, I'm trying to determine the best way to implement hundreds of
graphs from the data in one workbook.

Thanks,
Keith


"Kevin B" <kbackmann@sbcglobal.net.spamBgone> wrote in message
news:2FE21A62-52E4-402D-B346-07ABB66D988F@microsoft.com...
> If you search Excel help using the following heading (sans quotes) "Excel
> specifications and limits " it will give a full list of all application
> limits. In Excel 2003 the limit is determined by the amount of available
> memory. So there is no fixed number of charts allowed.
> --
> Kevin Backmann
>
>
> "KR" wrote:
>
> > Several versions ago, Excel had some issues when I tried to put 35-40
graphs
> > in a workbook. If I turned off the autosize text on all graph text
objects I
> > could get a few more than if I left autotext on. I used to run into
> > out-of-memory errors, even on fast machines with more RAM and HD space
than
> > Excel could possibly have needed.
> >
> > I'm not sure where to look to see whether this has been "fixed" or at
least
> > improved, and how much improvement might be available in each version of
> > Excel. I'm about to start a new project that may end up with 100's of
> > graphs, and it would be a lot easier to develop with excel's limitations
in
> > mind, vs. trying to do it all in one workbook then having to go back and
do
> > rework until I hit the right limit.
> >
> > Can anyone tell me, or provide a link to, the graph limitations for each
> > version of Excel?
> >
> > Thanks!
> > Keith
> >
> >
> >

I checked this help file entry in both Excel 97 and 2003 (since I have
access to both) and they both say that the number of charts are determined
by the available memory. Since this was not actually true in Excel 97, I'd
still like to get any input on user's experience with 2003 and if anyone has
hit any maximum or cap on how many graphs that can be in a workbook in
XL2003 before getting out of memory errors or erratic workbook behavior.

Thanks,
Keith

"Kevin B" <kbackmann@sbcglobal.net.spamBgone> wrote in message
news:2FE21A62-52E4-402D-B346-07ABB66D988F@microsoft.com...
> If you search Excel help using the following heading (sans quotes) "Excel
> specifications and limits " it will give a full list of all application
> limits. In Excel 2003 the limit is determined by the amount of available
> memory. So there is no fixed number of charts allowed.
> --
> Kevin Backmann
>
>
> "KR" wrote:
>
> > Several versions ago, Excel had some issues when I tried to put 35-40
graphs
> > in a workbook. If I turned off the autosize text on all graph text
objects I
> > could get a few more than if I left autotext on. I used to run into
> > out-of-memory errors, even on fast machines with more RAM and HD space
than
> > Excel could possibly have needed.
> >
> > I'm not sure where to look to see whether this has been "fixed" or at
least
> > improved, and how much improvement might be available in each version of
> > Excel. I'm about to start a new project that may end up with 100's of
> > graphs, and it would be a lot easier to develop with excel's limitations
in
> > mind, vs. trying to do it all in one workbook then having to go back and
do
> > rework until I hit the right limit.
> >
> > Can anyone tell me, or provide a link to, the graph limitations for each
> > version of Excel?
> >
> > Thanks!
> > Keith
> >
> >
> >