How much RAM is too much? 32gb? 64gb?

[paperwastage]

if you're running everything stock (i.e. 1155 sandy bridge, you're running stock clocks, RAM 1333 @ 1.5V), I don't see why you;d run into any reliability issues

if you want to overclock, then filling all the DIMMs up might give you a lower headroom

 

[tweakboy]

I've never really pushed the envelope on RAM in the past. In fact, I didn't even know that win 7 automagically created a RAMdisk until after I bought my most recent rig, so I only have 8gb in it. I plan to correct this travesty in my next build, but this does beg the question: how much ram can I use? Is 16gb going to be enough for any game that I play? 32gb? 64gb?

I mainly play games (civ5, nwn2, skyrim, BF3, DAO and TQIT are all on my rig right now) and surf the web, but like exdeath I hate latency with a passion and I don't mind spending a lot of money to get rid of it. I almost never have more than 10 pages open at a time.

I use Sonar X2, and it would be nice to have 64GB ram to load all my samples and templates,, Hanns Simmer the famous music maker use MAC box with xeon processor special made for him

I need 64GB RAM ,,,,, along with a SSD sighs.

 

[poohbear]

Most games are still 32-bit so won't use any more than 4GB. I have 8GB but don't see any point in going higher at the moment.

erm, no i think the newer games with the ultra res textures are very much 64bit. For me BF3 was ALWAYS stuttering with 4gb, once i upgraded to 8gb it became smooth as silk with no more stuttering. I was quite shocked.

 

[nine9s]

if you're running everything stock (i.e. 1155 sandy bridge, you're running stock clocks, RAM 1333 @ 1.5V), I don't see why you;d run into any reliability issues

if you want to overclock, then filling all the DIMMs up might give you a lower headroom

I have always stayed away from using all banks.

I am fixing to build a new system. If I do not plan to over-clock (maybe add a multiplier via the "k" chip possibly but nothing more), is it safe to use all memory banks? As cheap as memory is, I will if no problems from doing so?

 

[bryanW1995]

I'm planning an Ivb upgrade on BF. Hopefully win 8 won't require pro to get 32+ gb, though I have no problem if I must get that.

 

[TemjinGold]

Ram is cheap, so load up!

 

[FAUguy]

I do production, and it would be nice to have 128GB ram to load all my samples and templates,, Hanns Simmer the famous music maker uses 128GB ram MAC box with xeon processor special made for him I think.. cuz 64GB is the limit I think,,, For me right now 8GB isnt doing it, sad I cant upgrade that.

I need 64GB ,,,,, along with a SSD and a bigger hard drive for storage.. gl

I think you mean Hans Zimmer.
On my PC, I use Sony Vegas for video editing, so that's why I went with 16GB (for now). The highest I've seen in use is 12-14GB of RAM.

 

[Mr. Pedantic]

16GB is good. Enough for everything you need plus maybe a RAMdrive on the side, but not too expensive.

 

[Dadofamunky]

I'm planning an Ivb upgrade on BF. Hopefully win 8 won't require pro to get 32+ gb, though I have no problem if I must get that.

I'd hold off on Win 8 for awhile. I'm starting to see negative reviews.

I think 16GB is the new 8. Especially if you want to run a couple VMs and do other demanding stuff. Otherwise for most things 8 is probably fine. Under most circumstances though I don't see a reason to avoid maxing out now that the memory controllers are more sophisticated and don't barf if you add two more DIMMs.

 

[Veliko]

erm, no i think the newer games with the ultra res textures are very much 64bit. For me BF3 was ALWAYS stuttering with 4gb, once i upgraded to 8gb it became smooth as silk with no more stuttering. I was quite shocked.

BF3 installs into the x86 Program Files folder.

 

[Stayfr0sty]

Id say anything over 16 gb for gaming is pointless.

BF3 seems to be hogging the most atm, uses about 90% of my 8 gigz on maps like caspian with 64 players

 

[anikhtos]

yeah, but limited at 3.0 gbps SATA 2 unless you raid-0 as you'd said, and only DDR2, and backup only via CF card

i want PCIe x16 + DDR3 for no limitations ...

well ddr2 because this was an old devise
it was build to add it an a hard drive with no bios and thinks like that to work
iops ara great was better than an intel first genration extreme edition.
yes it is that old design.

well cause this devise you can use it in raid0 300mb from a single devise is not bad.
16gb max memory start to hurt realy bad nowdays though.
the company has not update thsi product why :-(
i would love a new model with ddr3 and support for 64gb or more

 

[Coup27]

I think you mean Hans Zimmer.

No, its the famous Hanns Simmer. He does music production so he should know.

 

[FAUguy]

No, its the famous Hanns Simmer. He does music production so he should know.

Oh, I was thinking it was some auto correct spelling error.

 

[bryanW1995]

Oh, I was thinking it was some auto correct spelling error.

He was speaking tongue-in-cheek.

 

[paperwastage]

I have always stayed away from using all banks.

I am fixing to build a new system. If I do not plan to over-clock (maybe add a multiplier via the "k" chip possibly but nothing more), is it safe to use all memory banks? As cheap as memory is, I will if no problems from doing so?

as long as you stick within specs (i.e. 1.5V DDR3 1333), you'll be fine... Intel has strict tolerances for a reason to make sure everything that fits within the tolerances will play nice with each other

been running 4x4GB DDR3 1333 on my DP67DE 2500k with a slight OC (3.6ghz ish), don't have any stability issues

 

[KingFatty]

Is there a downside to having very large amounts of RAM? For example, could performance suffer if the memory controller spends more time correcting errors that wouldn't happen with less RAM?

As an analogy, I'm thinking about how there is a sweet spot when overclocking video card RAM, where going faster than the sweet spot will result in lower performance even though it doesn't produce errors, because the memory controller is doing error correction.

Could the same be true for large amounts of system RAM, where you expose yourself to greater risk of errors due to the sheer bulk of RAM being accessed all the time?

And, as another point, there are other downsides like more difficulty overclocking the RAM, generating more heat and forcing you to decrease the overclock on your CPU due to heat issues, etc.?

So my point being, shouldn't you weight the benefits against the drawbacks, and instead of thinking to add as much as you can afford, instead think how much you need for the benefit you desire and weight that against the other drawbacks in addition to the added cost?

 

[NP Complete]

AFAIK, there is no "error correction" on non-ECC memory controllers. Of course, I haven't looked at the electrical & physical signaling spec of DDR3 memory interface, so perhaps there's some error correct somewhere (though, if it's at the signaling level, you essentially get it "for free" from a CPU/performance perspective).

The biggest down side to adding more memory is increasing the electrical load on the memory controller. Each DIMM you add increases the amount of current the memory controller has to drive, which in turn means longer switching times. Similarly, denser memory chips made on the same fabrication technology (e.g. 28 nm) also increase the load on the memory controller.

However, this slow down is minimal, as the memory controller is designed to a spec - which means that it should be able to drive the number of DIMMS specified at the speeds specified. However, out of spec, the loading may definitely play a roll in how fast you can overclock your memory controller - you'll more likely be able to overclock it most when you have the fewest, least dense DIMMS populating the memory sockets.

The bigger issues is that of mismatched DIMM performance. You can only push the memory controller as fast as the slowest DIMM, and the chance of you getting a "dud" DIMM goes up the more you use.

However, all these performance considerations are moot considering the large performance boost you'll get from being able to hold extra data in memory vs disk. To that end, there really isn't a downside to adding more memory - the only question is if adding more will increase the performance enough to justify it's price. Past 8 GB, for most typical home use scenarios, the money is better spent getting other, faster components before getting more memory.

 

[exar333]

32GB works great for me. I run 1-2 VMs with 8-12GB dedicated to each. That leaves me 8-16GB for normal usage. With the bandwidth I have, I can simultaneously run 2 VMs plus play almost any game and keep the performance solid.

 

[deimos3428]

Unless you have a particular reason to install more, I'd suggest 4GB per slot is a good maximum.

 

[GammaLaser]

Aren't there downsides to utilizing all your memory channels and banks? Doesn't it stress the memory controllers on CPUs and the CPU to use all the memory banks with full ram? Therefore not a good idea unless you must have the memory your adding for certain applications?

X79 mobos with 8 slots will drop the standard memory speed when 8 sticks are installed vs. 4:

Memory is a big part of X79, as we are introduced to quad channel memory on a mainstream consumer level chipset, compared to the previous enthusiast chipset, X58, where the push was in tri-channel memory. Most X79 boards will cater for 8 DIMM slots (2 DIMMs per channel), though some will scale this back to 4 DIMM slots to save money and space on the board. Theoretically, a 4x2 configuration will cater up to 64 GB of memory when using 8 GB memory sticks, though users will perhaps be looking in the $1600 range for such a kit (for example, Corsair’s Dominator 4x8 GB DDR3-1866 C9 kit CMT32GX3M4X1866C9) which surpasses the cost of a motherboard+CPU in one swoop. By specification, population of 8 DIMMs should make a motherboard default to 1333 C9 speeds, while when only using 4 DIMMs should give 1600 C9.

http://www.anandtech.com/Show/Index...ndy-bridgee-and-x79-the-asus-p9x79-pro-review

In that case you could see a drop in performance if you don't require the additional memory above 4 sticks worth.

 

[tweakboy]

Yeah, i'm fighting the urge to go from 24gb to 48gb on my x58. Why? The only reason I can come up with so far is why not.....

LOL, your funny, so whats the deal with all that RAM ,, are you going to play 30 popcorn movies and launch 5 games at the same time and multitask ?


Me, I need the RAM I need 64GB ,,, to put all my samples in ram , making template.

Friend who is pro composer He has a 8 core G5 and he has 64GB of ram and actually he wanted to go 128GB of ram so he was lookin for a used MAC, new ones support this. Not even with video editing you need more then 8GB of ram ,,,,, only people like him and me need and will actually use all that RAM. Instead of sitting there lookin at taskman that I have 32GB ram ,, man you havent even used 8GB and wont LOL the 24GB is resting in hybrid mode LOL..

 

[Coup27]

LOL, your funny, so whats the deal with all that RAM ,, are you going to play 30 popcorn movies and launch 5 games at the same time and multitask ?


Me, I need the RAM I need 64GB ,,, to put all my samples in ram , making template.

Friend who is pro composer He has a 8 core G5 and he has 64GB of ram and actually he wanted to go 128GB of ram so he was lookin for a used MAC, new ones support this. Not even with video editing you need more then 8GB of ram ,,,,, only people like him and me need and will actually use all that RAM. Instead of sitting there lookin at taskman that I have 32GB ram ,, man you havent even used 8GB and wont LOL the 24GB is resting in hybrid mode LOL..

Nice offensive post there. You have absolutely no idea what Gillbot uses his computer for and I doubt very much he wants 48GB of RAM so he can marvel at it in task manager.

 

[exar333]

X79 mobos with 8 slots will drop the standard memory speed when 8 sticks are installed vs. 4:



http://www.anandtech.com/Show/Index...ndy-bridgee-and-x79-the-asus-p9x79-pro-review

In that case you could see a drop in performance if you don't require the additional memory above 4 sticks worth.

Doesn't mean it will not work with all DIMMS populated. I know some folks who are running 8x4GB 2000mhz without any issues. It really depends on your memory controller and MB.

 

[GammaLaser]

Doesn't mean it will not work with all DIMMS populated. I know some folks who are running 8x4GB 2000mhz without any issues. It really depends on your memory controller and MB.

Yeah, my main point was that the extra DIMMs did affect stock performance and not just potential overclockability of the RAM. Though, I'm not aware of other chipsets which change the stock RAM speeds based on # of populated slots. For X79 it's something to keep in mind if you add RAM but don't pay attention to the memory settings.