How much RAM is too much, then?

M

Mr.Cheap

Weaksauce
Joined
Feb 16, 2012
Messages
75
Apparently ,32Gb;

http://www.guru3d.com/article/gskill-ripjawsx-32gb-2133mhz-ddr3-review/1

According to this test on Guru3d (testing the 2133Mhz Ripjaws), the 4x8Gb kit was outperformed by the same RAM in 2x8 configuration, possibly due to "the memory controller having to read much more data".
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------






<- noob; if i made a mistake in posting pls let me know.
 
For 85% (probably more) of the people here, anything over 8gb is a waste other than bragging rights. I laugh every time I hear of a gamer buying 16 and 32gb of ram (and all they do is play games). /facepalm

Interesting article though, thanks
 
Mr.Cheap said:
Apparently ,32Gb;

http://www.guru3d.com/article/gskill-ripjawsx-32gb-2133mhz-ddr3-review/1

According to this test on Guru3d (testing the 2133Mhz Ripjaws), the 4x8Gb kit was outperformed by the same RAM in 2x8 configuration, possibly due to "the memory controller having to read much more data".
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<- noob; if i made a mistake in posting pls let me know.
Click to expand...

I noticed that yesterday too. I would agree that having more than 8gb at this time is a waste unless you are a server or some kind of graphics/video guru. Like anything else though, people generally think more=better. It's the American way ;P
 
Yeah the world changes once you are running a server. Even for just test purposes. RAM is the new disk, disk is the new tape and the databases are architected this way. I really want a 48-64GB rig in my closet :)
 
I like how nobody here has realized the glory of installing games to a ramdisk.

You need lots of ram to do that ;).
 
They skew the graphs to make the differences seem bigger than they are...basically your talking about 10ths of a second difference in some of those benchmarks between 16GB and 32GB...not really even worth discussing. Also, the point wasn't about running certain server/databases, which we all know would benefit but more everyday or workstation pc's.
 
fps4ever said:
They skew the graphs to make the differences seem bigger than they are...basically your talking about 10ths of a second difference in some of those benchmarks between 16GB and 32GB...not really even worth discussing. Also, the point wasn't about running certain server/databases, which we all know would benefit but more everyday or workstation pc's.
Click to expand...

I think we all know how to read a chart. And 10ths of a second is a difference no matter how minute.
 
Last edited:
Condition said:
I think we all know how to read a chart. And 10ths of a second is a difference no matter how minute.
Click to expand...
Well unless you're running a database server that caches frequently accessed records in RAM, and unless you are using a spindle-based HDD, it probably won't be so much that you'll lose out.

With DDR3, you are still getting at least 15 GB/s sustained reads and writes. To think of it, that is still an improvement over past technology. You're not losing anything.

However, I would agree there is no reason to have more memory than you should (as it puts a greater workload on the controller and bus), unless you have legit [industrial] reasons. i.e. Adobe Lightroom, Adobe Premier Pro/other video applications, video encoding, Adobe Photoshop, AutoCAD/SolidWorks, 3DSM/Blender/other
 
But on the flip side, DDR3 is so dirt cheap right now. 4x4GB will run in the range of $70-80 shipped all day long. When doing a full overhaul/build, that's a pretty negligible cost addition for most DIY'ers.

I clearly remember when 1MB SIMMS were selling for $35 apiece USED in the early to mid '90's. :/

I'm loving the price of RAM right now. Get it while it's hot! Because, hey, you never know when another one of those "accidental" fires will break out driving memory prices through the roof! :p
 
thesecond said:
I like how nobody here has realized the glory of installing games to a ramdisk.

You need lots of ram to do that ;).
Click to expand...

It's pointless for me, I already load in WAY before the 5 second timer in BF3 and before the majority of people.

Spending $250+ on Ram for slower performing ram (you can find faster timing/etc on 4gb sticks vs 8gb) for a Ramdisk that will do nothing but increase my epeen? No thanks.
 
crawlgsx said:
It's pointless for me, I already load in WAY before the 5 second timer in BF3 and before the majority of people.

Spending $250+ on Ram for slower performing ram (you can find faster timing/etc on 4gb sticks vs 8gb) for a Ramdisk that will do nothing but increase my epeen? No thanks.
Click to expand...

Yup, give me 8GB of 1600MHz C7 ram, plus a fast SSD and I'm good to go!
 
fps4ever said:
Yup, give me 8GB of 1600MHz C7 ram, plus a fast SSD and I'm good to go!
Click to expand...

SSD, yes, absolutely.

But, for the $60-80 for 8GB of that memory, I'd rather double it to 16GB of "slower", higher latency RAM at the same price. Just my opinion, based on the reviews all over the internet.
 
DejaWiz said:
SSD, yes, absolutely.

But, for the $60-80 for 8GB of that memory, I'd rather double it to 16GB of "slower", higher latency RAM at the same price. Just my opinion, based on the reviews all over the internet.
Click to expand...

I agree if your going to use it...me I won't so more-slower ram won't bring me any benefit. An everyday gaming, home or small office machine just doesn't need it...heck 4GB is till under utilized by a lot of machines. I'd rather spend that $60-$80 and add it to getting a better video card that will show immediate improvement.
 
8 is plenty; 16 may be plenty 3 years from now after Windows 8 (plus whatever SP M$ tacks on) is standard.

I got 16 because it was cheap and I can now ride this rig into the sunset
 
DejaWiz said:
SSD, yes, absolutely.

But, for the $60-80 for 8GB of that memory, I'd rather double it to 16GB of "slower", higher latency RAM at the same price. Just my opinion, based on the reviews all over the internet.
Click to expand...

Your choice, but you gain 0 (and lose latency) by going to 8GB of wasted memory for the same price. Unless you use Photoshop or something that actually takes advantage of the memory.

Gaming and Most things done in windows wilL NEVER use over 8GB. (well on win7/current gen I mean). Couple years from now who knows.
 
crawlgsx said:
Your choice, but you gain 0 (and lose latency) by going to 8GB of wasted memory for the same price. Unless you use Photoshop or something that actually takes advantage of the memory.

Gaming and Most things done in windows wilL NEVER use over 8GB. (well on win7/current gen I mean). Couple years from now who knows.
Click to expand...

I'm aware of this, but I'd rather have 16GB of dirt cheap memory now and not need it, than risk wanting/needing that much in a couple/few years if it truly may be needed, but maybe the price will be much higher. Unlikely, I know, but screw it...so cheap right now.
 
8 is more then enough, I run 12GB, and have never seen it over 6GB usage once ever. As for BF3 load times, SSD makes the difference, has nothing to do with RAM amounts/speeds.
 
DejaWiz said:
I'm aware of this, but I'd rather have 16GB of dirt cheap memory now and not need it, than risk wanting/needing that much in a couple/few years if it truly may be needed, but maybe the price will be much higher. Unlikely, I know, but screw it...so cheap right now.
Click to expand...

In a few years chances are you'll be using DDR4, but whatever...we start needing 16GB for everyday use in 2-3 years and a LOT of us will be in trouble.
 
fps4ever said:
In a few years chances are you'll be using DDR4, but whatever...we start needing 16GB for everyday use in 2-3 years and a LOT of us will be in trouble.
Click to expand...

Possibly. I've read so many variances on DDR4 release/adoption timeframes ranging from 2012 to 2017, who knows for sure when it will become mainstream? My guess is that it'll be quite a ways off for DDR4 to become mainstream, probably closer to 2016-17. Much in the same manner that took DDR3 a long time to become the norm for every new system out there..it took quite a while for DDR3 to surpass DDR2 in low pricing and widespread availability after it was released, afterall.

Again, I know that 16GB is overkill right now, but it's dirt cheap at present and no one can predict the future. Maybe some awesome games will emerge over the next couple years that will utilize the extra RAM and maybe even HyperThreading. *shrug*
 
DejaWiz said:
Possibly. I've read so many variances on DDR4 release/adoption timeframes ranging from 2012 to 2017, who knows for sure when it will become mainstream? My guess is that it'll be quite a ways off for DDR4 to become mainstream, probably closer to 2016-17. Much in the same manner that took DDR3 a long time to become the norm for every new system out there..it took quite a while for DDR3 to surpass DDR2 in low pricing and widespread availability after it was released, afterall.

Again, I know that 16GB is overkill right now, but it's dirt cheap at present and no one can predict the future. Maybe some awesome games will emerge over the next couple years that will utilize the extra RAM and maybe even HyperThreading. *shrug*
Click to expand...

I don't object to more memory "per say" for future use (especially when it's so cheap), I'm just not a fan of having to fill up 4 memory slots to do it. I've had a couple different rigs that just won't OC as well with 4 sticks vs 2 sticks. Reason could be I don't like to throw large amounts of voltage at my OC's but still...Give me 8GB sticks x 2 with low CAS and reasonable prices, then we'll talk!
 
Last edited:
I agree with you. But until 8GB modules significantly lower in price, I'll stick with a 4x4GB config.
 
I got 4x2gb in my machine, and I use nearly all of it running virtual machines on 2 GB each. I could easily use 16 in the next few years.
 
DejaWiz said:
Possibly. I've read so many variances on DDR4 release/adoption timeframes ranging from 2012 to 2017, who knows for sure when it will become mainstream? My guess is that it'll be quite a ways off for DDR4 to become mainstream, probably closer to 2016-17.
Click to expand...

Even though RAM manufacturers have plans to start cranking out DDR4 dimms in Q4, I doubt this will make it into a PC any time soon. The main reason (after lack of enough performance make the switch useful) is motherboard compatibility. DDR4 will be 1 dimm per channel, instead of the 2 dimms per channel we have with DDR3 and it will certianly require new quad or octal channel motherboards with new sockets and new IMCs. With Intel having a new socket at haswell if that does use DDR4 it may be on the second generation 16nm platform. AMD may however have this sooner but it will not be on FM2+ but AM4 (if that becomes a socket).
 
I personally have 16gb.

4x4 setup. For as cheap as ram is, i bought it. Overkill? maybe, seemed to help photoshop a good bit.

I also have a ram drive. Which is 8gb, I run what ever game I am currently playing on it. I also have a SSD and let me tell you the Ram drive puts the SSD to shame.

ram drive 6,000+ mb/s vs 500 mb/s in the SSD Ram drive for the win.
 
DejaWiz said:
Possibly. I've read so many variances on DDR4 release/adoption timeframes ranging from 2012 to 2017, who knows for sure when it will become mainstream? My guess is that it'll be quite a ways off for DDR4 to become mainstream, probably closer to 2016-17. Much in the same manner that took DDR3 a long time to become the norm for every new system out there..it took quite a while for DDR3 to surpass DDR2 in low pricing and widespread availability after it was released, afterall.

Again, I know that 16GB is overkill right now, but it's dirt cheap at present and no one can predict the future. Maybe some awesome games will emerge over the next couple years that will utilize the extra RAM and maybe even HyperThreading. *shrug*
Click to expand...
While DDR became effective around year 2000, and DDR2 not earlier than late 2004 and DDR3 was released around late 2008, but it didn't outsell DDR2 prior to mid 2010, so my bet is that DDR4 will become mainstream around 2017-2018
 
i upgraded from 2x2GB DDR3 to 2x4GB only because it was so cheap ($25) during a sale... however i have never seen my usage go over 50% in any scenario
 
crawlgsx said:
For 85% (probably more) of the people here, anything over 8gb is a waste other than bragging rights. I laugh every time I hear of a gamer buying 16 and 32gb of ram (and all they do is play games). /facepalm

Interesting article though, thanks
Click to expand...

Agreed
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top