Yes I did mean to write MB rather than GB; thanks for the correction.
On that note, I found this 1995 newspaper article (linked from Wikipedia) on the subject. Conclusion was that W95 ran on 4MB, but slowly:
https://archive.seattletimes.com/archive/?date=19950924&slug...
Funny that the writer remarks on having a bunch of Windows open and still having "73% resources free". I think I remember reading in one of the contemporary books (maybe Andrew Schulman's Unauthorized Windows 95) that the dialog that shows the % resources free inflates the number significantly.