8GB vs 4GB

[hclarkjr]

The general consensus to my understanding is 8GB isn't necessary. I'd like to get an understanding on whether or not I will see benefits for my particular use.

Typical use would be multiple browser tabs + ventrilo + game (easy 4GB decision). I'm wondering if I did go to 8 GB instead of 4 if I would be able to have two games open without much issue. I.e. I could have HoN and SC2 open at the same time. Playing one while keeping the other one open to monitor who is online. Is this something 4 might struggle with? What if it's with two games that come out 2 years from now?

I've also read 8GB + disable page file is a good way to go. Is that for non SSD setups? Is that even a good idea in general?

go with 16gb if board supports it, newegg is having 15% off sale next 3 days!!! http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2138102

 

[pjkenned]

if you're gonna open 2 games at once go with 8. i open 2 everquest 2 instances all the time on my comp and easily go over 6.5GB used, i'd think that newer games might impact this even more. the 2GB of video memory might help as well but since eq2 is older i dont see this impacting it as much as the extra system ram does. im starting with 2x4 on my sandy bridge build, but i may hop to 16gb if the price is right

I decided I was just going to have a H67 Sandy Bridge setup for my i7-2600K with 4x2GB. Right now I am running a X58 setup with 12GB of Dominator GT on the main rig.

All the sudden I ended up ordering 24GB of DDR3 today... 16GB for the new Sandy Bridge setup and 8GB as spare.

12-16GB is going to be too much for many users. If your workflow involves lots of open programs, more RAM is good. Even MS Access/ Excel can use tons of RAM in the 2010 versions. Plus, $100/ 8GB these days makes it inexpensive to go that route. I have a few huge spreadsheets and ~2GB access databases where pivot table performance is greatly enhanced with 64-bit program versions and more RAM (Excel 2010 can use more than 2GB in the 64-bit version). My only point is that there are a lot of things one can do that require greater than 4GB of total RAM these days if you subscribe to the thought that you should be able to switch between open programs at will.

 

[ochadd]

Go with 8GB. It's inexpensive and memory has been known to make huge swings in price. With 8GB you will likely be ok for several years to come.

 

[djnsmith7]

I have 8 now & wouldn't hesitate to add more when my future MB supports it.

 

[sticks435]

Anyway, I have an 80GB Intel X25-M SSD and I have an 8GB swap partition. It is always a good idea to have as much swap as you have RAM so that you can suspend to disk. Otherwise, there is no designated place on the disk to store the data in memory.

Ummmm WTf? If you have 8 gigs of ram and an SSD, you should not be using an 8 gig swap file. Use S3 (suspend to RAM) sleep mode instead of the outdated suspend to disk. With an SSD and S3 mode, it should resume instantly.

 

[wfriction]

Go with 8GB.
I have 4GB, looking to get another 4GB soon.

 

[frostedflakes]

4gig is the sweet spot. 8gig is cheap enough to not be a hugh cost burden but I doubt you will notice any differance.

If you want to run dual games I would think having 2 gig of video memory would help more in that area?

Basically this, for a gaming system you can easily get by with 4GB. But memory is cheap enough that as long as you aren't on a tight budget, you might as well go with 8GB IMO. Will make your system more future proof and thanks to Superfetch in newer versions of Windows, it can be used for application caching and won't go to waste. And of course if you plan to do memory intensive stuff like editing large photos, video editing, rendering, running VMs, etc. then you can make a good argument for getting 8GB.