Do You Really Need More Than 6 GB Of RAM?

Do You Really Need More Than 6 GB Of RAM? : Is “Too Much” Really Just Enough?​

The notion that bigger is better has taken a beating lately in all aspects of society.

Once the pride of the so-called upper middle class in the United States, McMansions and SUVs have now become symbols of excess and waste--at least the reminders of an era past. Green movement proponents should certainly be happy that so many “earth abusers” are beginning to see the light, but what about performance-computing fanatics? With memory prices near record lows, is there any good reason not to fill every slot with low-cost 2 GB DIMMs?

Environmentalists could point out that IC and PCB production turns a large quantity of natural resources into post-production waste, while most of the end-product is not recyclable and the additional components add to the system’s energy consumption. Power users could easily counter energy concerns by pointing out that a better-performing computer allows them to get their work done in less time. But neither argument is sufficient to answer the question we’ve asked so many times before: How much RAM do you really need?

Our 2004 article pointed out weaknesses in the once-popular single-gigabyte configurations. But 512 MB and smaller modules are now a distant memory. It wasnt long after that 2 GB became the performance standard, and by 2007, 4 GB kits could be found in all but the lowest-cost systems. Is it time to take the next step, to 8 GB or more? More importantly, were 4 GB modules ever really needed for games and everyday applications? And with the 32-bit addressing limit of 4 GB making only 3 GB available to many users, should everyone switch to a 64-bit operating system simply to support higher capacities?

Read more at: Do You Really Need More Than 6 GB Of RAM? : Is "Too Much" Really Just Enough? - Review Tom's Hardware

 

[jeffoncom]

I saw a guy who was bragging about having 12G of RAM in his system. I should link him this article. :D

On a side note, many people are saying it's common for them to run photo editing, web pages, 2 games, etc. at the same time. I don't know what games you are playing, but if they're so bad that you actually have to switch to another game and photo edit/web browse in between, I think you should expand your software library.

 

[RonS WIN TEAM]

Do I want it? Heck yeah. Do I need it, most-likely not.

Cheers,

 

[JimJoe]

I saw a guy who was bragging about having 12G of RAM in his system. I should link him this article. :D

On a side note, many people are saying it's common for them to run photo editing, web pages, 2 games, etc. at the same time. I don't know what games you are playing, but if they're so bad that you actually have to switch to another game and photo edit/web browse in between, I think you should expand your software library.

Yeah, unless I was just hanging out in one of the no combat zones in Everquest, going back and forth between games would get my character taken down rather often.

 

[ripbox]

Having 8Gig my self, im not one to argue with the fact that its not needed or any other debate however My system is currently utilising 2Gig as we speak so i think I made a wise choice in my self to go bigger, but this dose not mean my system is gonna run any better however on a positive side of things the 4 sticks of 2Gig ram does play a part in performance but this has no regards to the total amount, wher i get the performance is where i have 4 sticks, so even if i only had 4Gig on 1gig sticks i will still get the same amount of performance since its the individual sticks being able to work indipendantly that give the overal performance

I could put my self in a possition of only having 1 stick, 8gig in size but i will have less performance since the ram would bottle neck under strain
however singe i have 8gig split over 4 sticks there will be less bottle necking since stick 1 can hold the info needed while stick 3 can prosses other info while the other 2 stick can do whatever they like

So is bigger better? well i will only say yes if its spread over several sticks but a big no if its 1 stick on its own?.

 

[K1K1D33]

I went ahead and maxed by motherboard to 8GB since it was so cheap and I run Virtual PC quite a bit.

---O---M---G---and I, little pathetic me, only have 1 measly GB?---("alms for the poor")---but then I only use my pc for online games and net-surfing; NOT like some mondo-mega-advanced super-intelligent alien here called Mr. Brink.---

*hide in corner*

 

[K1K1D33]

Hi Fmjc001,

Most laptops will only have two RAM slots with support for 1GB or 2 GB per stick, but sure some of them can support 4GB sticks for a total of 8GB. An example.

---wink wink---put that on MY wish list for SANTA, mmmk?---

 

[z3r010]

Its better to have too much than not enough.


12GB FTW

 

[K1K1D33]

Its better to have too much than not enough.


12GB FTW

---as quoted by Minnie-me?---

 

[ripbox]

Its better to have too much than not enough.


12GB FTW

I 3rd that haha hmmmm any1 care to give me another 4gig? haha

 

[Thealien]

I used to have 4gb (2X2GB) and every once in a while while using comskip on a 2 hour show/movie my RAM use would max out and I would have to wait until it finished or everything was extremely slow. I recently added another 2X2GB for a total of 8. I rarely see over 4GB usage but when I am using the 4 I can still do other things?

 

[K1K1D33]

Its better to have too much than not enough.


12GB FTW

I 3rd that haha hmmmm any1 care to give me another 4gig? haha

---"just plug it all straight into my brain please"---(the not so far future of pc-cafes)

peace

 

[TomW]

Thanks for this post... very interesting in that they only tested 2 gb. I have 6gb, but benchmark at 7.9 (highest) in Windows 7 on Window W.E.I., but at 12gb, I benched lower. AT 12gb, I also had all slots full, and assumed the issue could've partly been because of the 'full slots' performance it issue, but also because it seems things get 'lost' in more RAM than the system has any software written to utilize. Make sense? I mean, I know the 'all slots full' thing is real, but what about going above a RAM amt. 'sweet spot' ?
Any thoughts?

 

[Night Hawk]

When you are pounding ram with large programs like CAD and other development softwares, graphics design, working with video, and other memory chewers that little bit of extra ram will come in handy. For the typical web browsing, occasional toss a game disk you won't see any larger performance boost on the typical desktop with 16gb to 32gb capacities now seen. Too much simply goes to waste.

With a pair of 2gb dimms here I capture video, run various softwares, games included as well as testing compatibility on a variety of items and haven't noticed any big performance boost from recently upgrading from 2gb! In both Vista and the Windows 7 RCs that would have still been adequate while someone running Cad or more would run out requiring the larger amount of 4gb+ at times.

 

[rasmasyean]

If you want to do an experiment to see what overhead RAM does, do this…

1) restart your computer
2) log in
3) open task manager and wait until the “Free” is the lowest it can get and doesn’t really change much.
4) open an application you normally use (it should launch and be ready in like a second of so…a bit more for big apps)
​

That’s because it’s cached in RAM (vs. the hard drive).

Now if you use a lot of different programs and files, etc. you can take advantage of this more as you have more RAM. As you open up programs, you will fill up your RAM and less will be available for SuperFetch and more will be put into the page file (that’s where the HD is used in place of RAM). HD is slow. RAM is fast. Simple.

The caveat is that it will take a longer time during startup / login to fill up your cache so it might appear a bit more sluggish during these couple of minutes. But if you don’t really shut down (sleep mode is fine) and change user too often, you won’t experience this lag.

Here’s some details on what happens....

Understanding how SuperFetch uses RAM to enhance system performance…
http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/window-on-windows/?p=735

Windows Vista - SuperFetch & ReadyBoost
http://blogs.technet.com/askperf/archive/2007/03/29/windows-vista-superfetch-readyboost.aspx

Consider that many workers like to have, say 20 windows open and do not shut down in order to save time in the morning (even Monday morning), they can now leave 40 windows (or more) open. Also, the more RAM they have, the more stuff can be SuperFetched and Auto Disk Defragmenter and whatever can run more efficiently in the background when AFK too.

For the above scenario, workers will probably “lock” Vista with the S3 sleep more because they can resume in 5 seconds anyway, or it will just auto-sleep after a period…translating to a huge savings on energy consumption.

All these are big bonuses from having a large amount of RAM (which is dirt cheap these days as well as cheaper going forward). Costs associated with driver/equipment upgrade for 64-bit compatibility may be more than made up for in productivity savings by having more RAM.

(July 30, 2008) There appears to be a shift taking place in the PC industry: the move from 32-bit to 64-bit PCs.
We've been tracking the change by looking at the percentage of 64-bit PCs connecting to Windows Update, and have seen a dramatic increase in recent months. The installed base of 64-bit Windows Vista PCs, as a percentage of all Windows Vista systems, has more than tripled in the U.S. in the last three months, while worldwide adoption has more than doubled during the same period. Another view shows that 20% of new Windows Vista PCs in the U.S. connecting to Windows Update in June were 64-bit PCs, up from just 3% in March. Put more simply, usage of 64-bit Windows Vista is growing much more rapidly than 32-bit. Based on current trends, this growth will accelerate as the retail channel shifts to supplying a rapidly increasing assortment of 64-bit desktops and laptops… PC Accelerators built into Windows Vista, such as Windows SuperFetch, improve performance by keeping commonly used programs in memory, even when the program is closed. More memory capacity on 64-bit PCs allows SuperFetch to do its job more efficiently.
http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2008/07/30/windows-vista-64-bit-today.aspx
​

What are the advantages of 64-bit computing?
In early testing of 64-bit support in Photoshop for Windows®, overall performance gains ranged from 8% to 12%. Those who work with extremely large files may realize noticeably greater gains in performance, in some cases as dramatic as ten times the previous speed. This is because 64-bit applications can address larger amounts of memory and thus result in less file swapping — one of the biggest factors that can affect data processing speed.
http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/photoshop/faq/?promoid=DRHXB
​

 

[Raphs]

Methinks for lower ram capacities like 512 mb and 1 Gb, the hard drives or whatever storage you have plays a big role in performance. When i yanked out one of the 512 ram modules leaving only 512mb left there was hardly a noticeable difference in performance when doing everyday non-extreme tasks, like word processing,browsing,playing multimedia while the antivirus does routine scans.I even managed to run an XP virtual machine(with 1Gb Ram) without too much of a load on Vista. Because of the lower memory, there is a larger reliance on a pagefile. Considering that you are not an extreme user,would i be right to conclude that you will get a faster start-up or app. launch time just by getting a faster drive as opposed to getting an extra 1Gb of ram ? Lastly in the high performance category(about which i'm not familiar),how much of a factor is the speed of a hdd ?

 

[Night Hawk]

It's actually a combination of things rather then one item alone that will see any increase in overall performance especially for a lower end system. Many elect to run WD Raptor model hard drives due to the faster 10,000rpm speeds seen with those over the typical 7,200rpm for your standard desktop internal drive. Some drives also provide a larger cache like 16mb over 8mb or 32mb over 16mb caches for seeing faster access times to data stored on the drives themselves.

With memory and running multiple programs you then have to look at the percentage of free ram once you have everything running. If the percentage is low then you would consider some increase based on actual need.

If you are running Cad or some other insentive softwares you would also start taking a look at the 64bit operating system since the 32bit drawback of 4gb limits Cad projects that can easily climb over that amount. Yet at the same time you can still run the 64bit editions of Windows with quite a bit less then 4gb for the basics up to occasional loads that tax ram.

 

[rasso]

Iam very happy with my 4 gb ram,lol,,,I just need more display card..i have nvidia 8600M GS

 

[Night Hawk]

Iam very happy with my 4 gb ram,lol,,,I just need more display card..i have nvidia 8600M GS

It depends on what type of build you have there since that was one of the mid range models. For seeing more punch for the dollar for gaming then you start looking over the reviews seen for the high end models. Lately many are looking at ATI 4800s for that as well as some NVidia models.

 

[corei7]

I got 6GB DDR3 Ram and I must say it is defenitley worth getting it, I ran COD:4 AND Flight simulator x simultaneously and it only used 54%ram. I guess having more ram is for gaming and video/photo editing purpose.

 

[Night Hawk]

That's because you were likely booted into Vista and not 7 while seeing that. 7 actually sees quite a bit less of a demand when running more then one thing.

Recently someone mentioned seeing 5gb taken up for a Cad project. That's when it helps to be running the 64bit 7 where you can actually see more ram put to use when the need is there.

Besides having far more free memory available then you will ever use you also have to look at what type of program is being run. If your video card or cpu lacks while you have 6gb, 8gb, 16gb even installed you won't get far. That may actually see the opposite effect.