is 1Gig RAM really necessary?

[gobucks]

I'd say it depends on your system. If you don't have dual channel, then definitely go for it. If you do, then it gets more complicated. If, for example, you have 2x256MB right now in dual channel, then adding another 512MB and running it single channel won't help you much. On the other hand, if you have a single stick of 512MB, and add another to run in dual channel, the performance difference will be huge. I'd say, if you're stuck on single channel or need another stick to run dual channel, go for it, but if you would be losing dual channel, then wait until you can afford a 2x512MB or 2x1GB upgrade.

Anyways, the bottom line is that if you plan to keep your system for a while, 512MB won't cut it. It's already looking slow in Doom3 and other new games, and the gap will grow in the future. You're gonna have to get more ram eventually, when just depends on your situation (dual channel, number of slots available, price, and types of games played).

 

[DAPUNISHER]

<Last Samurai>Necessary? What could be more necessary?!?</>

 

[Subhuman25]

Games are beginning to list 1GB RAM memory as a requirement.
My current game, Star Wars Galaxies:Jump to Lightspeed, will make use of even more than that if you've got it.
Also keep in mind that many games have "memory leaks" and threfor,the more memory you have,the less your hard drive is being accessed for overflow,caching(results in game stuttering)
So the answer is YES,1GB is standard and slowly becoming sub-standard even.
On topic is an issue,as with my MSI K8N Neo2 MB,only supporting dual channel RAM in 2 slots @ JDEC timings(2-2-2-5-1t) &amp; DDR400 So if I wanted to upgrade from my current 1GB RAM,I'd have to forfeit my RAM' nice tight timings and bus speed to achieve it.On this MSI board using all 4 memory slots will reduce you to 333MHZ &amp; looser timings.There aren't many 1GB modules out yet and those that are have loose timing to begin with.So it pretty much sucks for us socket 939 owners at least.
I'm really angry for having chosen AMD once again after a long long absence from them(K6 days &amp; VIA crap chipsets)and not having stuck with Intel.I made a very bad choice and this time I have to say that AMD will forever be banished in my house!VIA already has been and forever will be!Never again will I be duped by "online reviews" and overclocker websites praising AMD.The performance differences are negligable IRL perception between the matching opponent CPU's and really only apparent in benchmarking graphs.In reality,my current AMD system runs ok,and I mean just ok.It was not some groundbreaking record jump from my prior Intel P4 2.26Mhz 1 GB PC3200 Ti4400 system.The biggest difference is really the graphics and that is mainly due to my new 6800GT video card.
In regular desktop applications,browsing the web etc. there is hardly any differnce at all.
And this current AMD system of mine came at a huge price in configuration time spent.I can't even sum up the hours/days wasted combing through endless threads on forums trying to find fixes for problems and advice on configuration and software fixes.And even after all that,there are still many many problems and fixes needed.A total waste of time and unneeded headaches.
All that is something I hardly ever needed to do with any Intel system I've ever built except maybe an update MB driver/bios etc. every great now and then.Otherwise they all ran right out of the box just like plug-n-ply and awarded me with greater stability and almost if not better performance.
In my eyes that's a far better bargain than dealing with all the time wasting and headaches an AMD system will definately create.
It's worth spending a little extra to get stability and reliablity at even or negligable performance drop.
One glance at any techie site' forums and you'll see the plethora of AMD postings and hard any Intel postings in comparison.
Sorry for all the rant here,but this topic kinda led me to all this.
Message me if you're interested in buying my MSI K8N Neo2 Platinum &amp; AMD 3500 with Zalman 7000A AlCu HSF.
I'm ready to go back to Intel like yesterday.

 

[NFS4]

2GB is even better

 

[Gothgar]

^^ cliffnotes?

 

[koshia]

This is my beef, but now a days most computer systems that have advance users running it are around 2 gigs... 1gig to me is a MUST!!!! just the fact that 512MB does not suffice my gaming needs... 2GIG is what i reccommend and anything higher than that is either server based, production based, or the person's just being a dumb-a$$ and wanting to waste money...

 

[lobadobadingdong]

Originally posted by: NFS4
2GB is even better

I like the way he thinks

 

[webmal]

According to Crucial (parent Micron is top 3 biggest memory mfr), it's not about how much RAM your system has, RAM speed is much more important: http://www.crucial.com/pdf/CrucialDoom3.pdf

Webmal

 

[dguy6789]

Originally posted by: webmal
According to Crucial (parent Micron is top 3 biggest memory mfr), it's not about how much RAM your system has, RAM speed is much more important: http://www.crucial.com/pdf/CrucialDoom3.pdf

Webmal

500% BS. More ram is better then faster ram PERIOD. Play ut2k4 with 256MB of pc4400 and then with a gig of even pc2100. I would bet a ferrari that the pc2100 system would be more then 5 times as fast in larger maps.


as for the Op. I used to have 512MB, and recently went to 1.5GB. I can tell you, going from 512 to a gig is a small jump in some things, a bit bigger then others. But what makes it better is, say your playing a game that takes a huge amount of ram(ut2k4) and you just remember you need to email someone right away. With a gig of ram, you can alt tab in a flash with no slowdown, while a 512MB system would be swapping on the harddrive and makin your system chuggy.

I recomend it.

 

[sharkeeper]

According to Crucial (parent Micron is top 3 biggest memory mfr), it's not about how much RAM your system has, RAM speed is much more important:

That's pure nonsense.

If you have 512MB of the fastest memory and 1024MB of the minimum speed your system will run guess which config will prevail when 650MB of RAM is requested?

You can never have enough ram. I have 4GB worksatans that are constantly swapping out and have put several 16GB systems under the heat. YOU CAN NEVER HAVE TOO MUCH MEMORY If you think you do, go back to an abacus because you are not using your computer!

When 64bit OS' become readily available, I want to see 64GB as a standard for desktop boars and 256GB+ (1TB better!) for worksatans.

Cheers!

 

[webmal]

Originally posted by: dguy6789

Originally posted by: webmal
According to Crucial (parent Micron is top 3 biggest memory mfr), it's not about how much RAM your system has, RAM speed is much more important: http://www.crucial.com/pdf/CrucialDoom3.pdf

Webmal

500% BS. More ram is better then faster ram PERIOD. Play ut2k4 with 256MB of pc4400 and then with a gig of even pc2100. I would bet a ferrari that the pc2100 system would be more then 5 times as fast in larger maps.

Why would one of the biggest memory manufacturers BS? I thought their main purpose was to make money (sell more RAM)? They tested 512MB fast RAM vs 1.5 gig slow RAM - it has nothing to do with 256MB of RAM!

Webmal

 

[webmal]

Originally posted by: sharkeeper

According to Crucial (parent Micron is top 3 biggest memory mfr), it's not about how much RAM your system has, RAM speed is much more important:

That's pure nonsense.

If you have 512MB of the fastest memory and 1024MB of the minimum speed your system will run guess which config will prevail when 650MB of RAM is requested?

You can never have enough ram. I have 4GB worksatans that are constantly swapping out and have put several 16GB systems under the heat. YOU CAN NEVER HAVE TOO MUCH MEMORY If you think you do, go back to an abacus because you are not using your computer!

You seem to know more than the memory manufacturers themselves, what are your qualifications and where are your test results?

Webmal

 

[dguy6789]

Originally posted by: webmal

Originally posted by: dguy6789

Originally posted by: webmal
According to Crucial (parent Micron is top 3 biggest memory mfr), it's not about how much RAM your system has, RAM speed is much more important: http://www.crucial.com/pdf/CrucialDoom3.pdf

Webmal

500% BS. More ram is better then faster ram PERIOD. Play ut2k4 with 256MB of pc4400 and then with a gig of even pc2100. I would bet a ferrari that the pc2100 system would be more then 5 times as fast in larger maps.

Why would one of the biggest memory manufacturers BS? I thought their main purpose was to make money (sell more RAM)? They tested 512MB fast RAM vs 1.5 gig slow RAM - it has nothing to do with 256MB of RAM!

Webmal

Their purpose is to make more money. You need to learn a thing or 2 about ram before you go believeing ADVERTISING as fact. Yea, if your doing something that wont fill up 256MB of ram, and it is running on faster ram, of course its gonna run faster. My old 500mhz k6 2 will run solitare just as fast as your high end pc, so more cpu power for anything else is also not needed
:roll:

If they actually believe what they are saying is true, then I DO know more about memory then they do.

I suppose we should also believe apple's claims of the g5 being by far the best pc out there.....

 

[sharkeeper]

You seem to know more than the memory manufacturers themselves, what are your qualifications and where are your test results?

Webmal

You seem to believe their propoganda so you make the perfect (brainwashed-senseless) customer.

Their tests are based on Doom3 benchmarks and are totally useless. It's pure marketing. Sorry that you cannot understand this and believe it to be purely scientific. :roll:

My qualifications? A subcontractor with millions of dollars of contracts with NASA, OSSA, NOAA under my belt and thousands of satisfied clients that are real contributors to society and not a bunch of gaming geeks so...

Cheers!

 

[Thermalrock]

1gb is enough for almost any typcial desktop owner. 512mb is kinda few. at the moment. in ten years all gonna have 32gb+ if not more.

 

[Teuton]

For me, going to 1G helped alot in dealing with photos. Depends on what you use your PC for.

 

[madthumbs]

1GB is becoming not enough for me. I've been using 1GB for a couple years now, soon time to upgrade.

 

[Jeff7]

Easy way to find out if you'll need more is to check Task Manager sometimes. In its Performance tab, look at Physical Memory and Commit Charge. Physical memory shows how much RAM is available, and how much is available. If the available RAM keeps getting low, like maybe below 32MB, then more RAM might do you good.

Also look at Commit Charge - this is the total memory available, which includes both RAM and the pagefile. If the peak is getting close to the limit, you can either get more RAM, or increase the size of the pagefile. Of course, as the pagefile is on the hard drive, RAM is preferable.

I like having 1GB available, and I wish I actually had more, but not often enough - sometimes I work with large WAV files, or really big image files. For that stuff, 1GB of RAM is filled as fast as the hard drive can fill it, which really doesn't take too long. But I'm not willing to buy RAM in 1GB sticks just for the occasional use. 1GB will suffice for now.

 

[Tarrant64]

Originally posted by: dguy6789

Originally posted by: webmal

Originally posted by: dguy6789

Originally posted by: webmal
According to Crucial (parent Micron is top 3 biggest memory mfr), it's not about how much RAM your system has, RAM speed is much more important: http://www.crucial.com/pdf/CrucialDoom3.pdf

Webmal

500% BS. More ram is better then faster ram PERIOD. Play ut2k4 with 256MB of pc4400 and then with a gig of even pc2100. I would bet a ferrari that the pc2100 system would be more then 5 times as fast in larger maps.

Why would one of the biggest memory manufacturers BS? I thought their main purpose was to make money (sell more RAM)? They tested 512MB fast RAM vs 1.5 gig slow RAM - it has nothing to do with 256MB of RAM!

Webmal

Their purpose is to make more money. You need to learn a thing or 2 about ram before you go believeing ADVERTISING as fact. Yea, if your doing something that wont fill up 256MB of ram, and it is running on faster ram, of course its gonna run faster. My old 500mhz k6 2 will run solitare just as fast as your high end pc, so more cpu power for anything else is also not needed
:roll:

If they actually believe what they are saying is true, then I DO know more about memory then they do.

I suppose we should also believe apple's claims of the g5 being by far the best pc out there.....

I agree

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

Granted I didn't read the Crucial article so I'm unsure of the context, but I find the arguments from both sides quite ridiculous. There are situations where faster RAM is more important and there are situations where more RAM is more important.

With the amount of intelligent people on this forum, I would think we'd have less ignorant bickering. Having 1 gig of RAM is only important when your computer actually needs 1 gig of RAM - otherwise in any other benchmark the lesser, faster RAM will come out on top. There are countless video card reviews that show 256MB models being equally fast, or slower in cases where the RAM is lesser clocked, than the cheaper 128MB models in most scenarios.

Again, I didn't read the Crucial article so I might have been ranting about nothing, so...

 

[CraigRT]

If you are on a gaming rig, then 1 GIG is sweet.

you can exit from a game without having to wait even 1 second before your desktop is there for use

with 512, you gotta wait as it refreshes and swaps with the hdd for half an hour

 

[PingSpike]

Originally posted by: gobucks
I'd say it depends on your system. If you don't have dual channel, then definitely go for it. If you do, then it gets more complicated. If, for example, you have 2x256MB right now in dual channel, then adding another 512MB and running it single channel won't help you much. On the other hand, if you have a single stick of 512MB, and add another to run in dual channel, the performance difference will be huge. I'd say, if you're stuck on single channel or need another stick to run dual channel, go for it, but if you would be losing dual channel, then wait until you can afford a 2x512MB or 2x1GB upgrade.

2x256 + 1x512 can be run in dual channel. Nforce2 motherboards have 2 slots that are alloted to one channel, and a single slot for the second channel.

You put the 256 pieces in one channel, the 512 in the other...and there you go...dual channel 1gig with 3 sticks. I've had some people say dual channel works with uneven amounts as well, however I doubt it.