RAM for gaming

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

ImpulsE69

Lifer
Jan 8, 2010
14,946
1,077
126
Also, Arkham Knights issues are it's a badly badly optimized port...not because of ram. Also, one game of....thousands.


Disagree with the last comment regarding length of time because you are just simply wrong based on your example. DX12 is going to have a rough time taking off because of the hoops required for it. Most games will continue to be able to be used with DX11 for a few years at least. VRAM...that is completely a different topic.
 

DAPUNISHER

Super Moderator CPU Forum Mod and Elite Member
Super Moderator
Aug 22, 2001
29,563
24,428
146
Again, you can get by on 8GB for now, if all you do is game. And you avoid a couple titles or settings. But opinions differ, and mine certainly does on a few points.

Console limitations as a basis for why we need less ram, confuses me. I concede it makes sense as a minimum target. However, rarely is a port over anywhere near as optimized for hardware as it is on consoles. We also have more system overhead to contend with. Additionally, Ultra settings on PC, can require more ram. Quantum Break recommends 16GB on Ultra for a reason. Arkham Knight simply could not be fixed adequately to offer a good gameplay experience with less than 12GB on PC.

Larry made a good point too. Ram is still the fastest storage in your system. Thus, the replies about when a game uses more than 8GB of ram, it is a matter of using it but not needing it, falls flat for me. I'd much rather have it cached there than ssd or hdd.

Ranulf made another good point. Some of you young cats may have never heard or read about the following. And have been too young to remember it. But some of us were buying memory in the era when it turned out memory manufacturers where price colluding. They were finally busted for it. Then there was that time the factory in Kobe, that made PCBs for something like 40 percent of ram manufactures, was heavily damaged in the earthquake. Perhaps that is why I acquire ram when it is cheap, fear of scarcity and opportunistic price gouging.

But do your thing. If you are happy with 8GB, party on. My systems have had more than that for so long, for other tasks, I cannot even address how modern games run on 8GB.
 

Ranulf

Platinum Member
Jul 18, 2001
2,523
1,593
136
I still refer to them as the ram cartels. $40 to $80 and back to $40 again for 2gb of ddr2 (iirc).
 

DAPUNISHER

Super Moderator CPU Forum Mod and Elite Member
Super Moderator
Aug 22, 2001
29,563
24,428
146
I still refer to them as the ram cartels. $40 to $80 and back to $40 again for 2gb of ddr2 (iirc).
I am going off of memory too. No pun intended. But wasn't that because of the Kobe earthquake? The price fixing was before that, though the last company to plead guilty was around '06 I think?
 

kalrith

Diamond Member
Aug 22, 2005
6,628
7
81
OP, what are your system specs? I also have 8GB of RAM and am planning to upgrade to 16GB. I'm still on DDR3 but plan to keep my system for another 4ish years. 16GB will probably be beneficial before that 4 years is up, and DDR3 will probably skyrocket in price in the next year or two if they stop making it. I'm actually surprised that DDR3 is still as cheap as it is.
 

Ranulf

Platinum Member
Jul 18, 2001
2,523
1,593
136
I am going off of memory too. No pun intended. But wasn't that because of the Kobe earthquake? The price fixing was before that, though the last company to plead guilty was around '06 I think?

I honestly don't remember.
 

ImpulsE69

Lifer
Jan 8, 2010
14,946
1,077
126
Again, you can get by on 8GB for now, if all you do is game. And you avoid a couple titles or settings. But opinions differ, and mine certainly does on a few points.

Console limitations as a basis for why we need less ram, confuses me. I concede it makes sense as a minimum target. However, rarely is a port over anywhere near as optimized for hardware as it is on consoles. We also have more system overhead to contend with. Additionally, Ultra settings on PC, can require more ram. Quantum Break recommends 16GB on Ultra for a reason. Arkham Knight simply could not be fixed adequately to offer a good gameplay experience with less than 12GB on PC.

Larry made a good point too. Ram is still the fastest storage in your system. Thus, the replies about when a game uses more than 8GB of ram, it is a matter of using it but not needing it, falls flat for me. I'd much rather have it cached there than ssd or hdd.

Ranulf made another good point. Some of you young cats may have never heard or read about the following. And have been too young to remember it. But some of us were buying memory in the era when it turned out memory manufacturers where price colluding. They were finally busted for it. Then there was that time the factory in Kobe, that made PCBs for something like 40 percent of ram manufactures, was heavily damaged in the earthquake. Perhaps that is why I acquire ram when it is cheap, fear of scarcity and opportunistic price gouging.

But do your thing. If you are happy with 8GB, party on. My systems have had more than that for so long, for other tasks, I cannot even address how modern games run on 8GB.

Yea just talking about gaming. I realize there are other things that would make additional RAM beneficial, and yes I realize even in gaming it isn't 100%, but it is a pretty small number that benefit.
 

DaveSimmons

Elite Member
Aug 12, 2001
40,730
670
126
8 GB is still fine and 8 GB + SSD is better than 16 GB + platter drive for now.

If you're planning to upgrade to a new CPU in another year or two you can probably save the $50 now and wait to get 16 GB for that new build.
 

showb1z

Senior member
Dec 30, 2010
462
53
91
I just went from 8GB to 16GB, because it's cheap, because I'm not upgrading until Icelake and because I got around to playing Arkham Knight. And AK isn't the only game that benefits from >8GB, so I'm sure I'll get my "investment" out of it.
 

MongGrel

Lifer
Dec 3, 2013
38,466
3,067
121
I've been running with about 12 GB of low latenency GSkill Ripjaws a long time on the main rig, but haven't even been gaming a lot in ahile.

I guess it the ancient triple memory with the X5680.
 

runzwithsizorz

Diamond Member
Jan 24, 2002
3,497
14
76
OP, what are your system specs? I also have 8GB of RAM and am planning to upgrade to 16GB. I'm still on DDR3 but plan to keep my system for another 4ish years. 16GB will probably be beneficial before that 4 years is up, and DDR3 will probably skyrocket in price in the next year or two if they stop making it. I'm actually surprised that DDR3 is still as cheap as it is.

win 7 64, 1080p, video 1 970, 1 SSD (250), and a 1 T hard disk (WD Black), DDR 3 ram, core i5 Ivy. Not ready to "upgrade" to win 10 as of now.
Only games I want to buy 2017 are ME Andromeda, Cyberpunk 2077 and Deus Ex MD.
 

sweenish

Diamond Member
May 21, 2013
3,656
60
91
Also, Arkham Knights issues are it's a badly badly optimized port...not because of ram. Also, one game of....thousands.


Disagree with the last comment regarding length of time because you are just simply wrong based on your example. DX12 is going to have a rough time taking off because of the hoops required for it. Most games will continue to be able to be used with DX11 for a few years at least. VRAM...that is completely a different topic.

A few things.
1. Arkham Knight runs great with at least 12 GB of RAM. Blame the port all you want, but people with at least 12 GB of RAM simply don't have as many issues. And saying it's a bad port doesn't negate the RAM requirement.
2. I mentioned more games, as did other posters. You only used one (poorly) and pretended all the others didn't exist in your counter. Ignoring them doesn't make them not exist, and it makes your argument weaker.
3. Citing "thousands" of OLDER games doesn't negate what I said about the RAM requirements moving forward.
4. Logic dictates that an absolute statement only requires one exception to be shown false. Maybe if people learned to present arguments properly, we could all move on to the real discussion at hand. The person I replied to TWICE insisted on using absolutes. Simply put, they are not right, and Arkham Knight is the most visible example, currently. I can almost guarantee that BF1 will gladly take all the RAM you can give it, and that it will perform better if you have more than 8 GB.
5. DX12 is what the Xbox One uses. It's already taking off very quickly. I don't know what rock you're hiding in.

8 GB is still fine and 8 GB + SSD is better than 16 GB + platter drive for now.

If you're planning to upgrade to a new CPU in another year or two you can probably save the $50 now and wait to get 16 GB for that new build.
Oh look. A made up and completely unrealistic comparison.
 

ImpulsE69

Lifer
Jan 8, 2010
14,946
1,077
126
A few things.
1. Arkham Knight runs great with at least 12 GB of RAM. Blame the port all you want, but people with at least 12 GB of RAM simply don't have as many issues. And saying it's a bad port doesn't negate the RAM requirement.
2. I mentioned more games, as did other posters. You only used one (poorly) and pretended all the others didn't exist in your counter. Ignoring them doesn't make them not exist, and it makes your argument weaker.
3. Citing "thousands" of OLDER games doesn't negate what I said about the RAM requirements moving forward.
4. Logic dictates that an absolute statement only requires one exception to be shown false. Maybe if people learned to present arguments properly, we could all move on to the real discussion at hand. The person I replied to TWICE insisted on using absolutes. Simply put, they are not right, and Arkham Knight is the most visible example, currently. I can almost guarantee that BF1 will gladly take all the RAM you can give it, and that it will perform better if you have more than 8 GB.
5. DX12 is what the Xbox One uses. It's already taking off very quickly. I don't know what rock you're hiding in.

I used a perfect example of why it isn't as important as some want to make it sound for most people. I'm guessing the CIV games can use quite a bit of RAM too, and if you decide you want to play those, then yea, you should probably get more RAM. Opinions about the quality of the 2-3 games mentioned aside, the OP can make their own opinion if they want to play said games now or not and purchase RAM based on that. 2 or 3 (and yes, it is really just a handful at best) does not make it a must have scenario). I'd be more inclined to say get more if you were doing video/photo/audio/3D work.

Logic dictates that unless you actually HAVE to play those said 2-3 games right now, then there is no need to upgrade said system RAM as it won't actually do much in the grand scheme of things, but let's not pretend the world will fall apart if you don't do it anyway.

As for your comment about old games....you are completely ignoring the 100;s of NEW games weekly that don't require anything near 8GB, even the higher tier games. Again many of you are spitting over a handful of games period. Even in 1 year, 8GB will be fine for 99% of the use cases, if not longer.

DX12 as a whole is being pushed by MS and MS alone for the most part, but as has already been shown, many of the DX12 games were already being developed for DX11. Sure, there will be more DX12 games, but I won't be in any hurry to play them due to the fiasco involved in doing it. (Different topic, no need for you to go on a tirade about how wonderful Windows 10 is). The point is millions agree and for the time being it will force the hands of devs if they want to make any money. This also has already been shown with at least 1 DX12 game already - granted may have more to do with UWP vs Steam.

Anyway, it's all opinion if you want it or not, but people have been towing that same line for 5 years about how you need 16GB to game...and it simply isn't true, yet.

Given OP's config, which is more or less identical to mine, I stand by not needing it at this time.
 
Last edited:

sweenish

Diamond Member
May 21, 2013
3,656
60
91
So, it's plenty more than 2-3 games, and MOVING FORWARD (don't know what's so difficult about these words), it will continue to increase. You cite weekly releases that don't need it. How many of those are worth playing? What about the big releases that do? Citing quantity over reality is a bogus claim. The thing with using the words "logic dictates" is the actual application of logic needs to be applied. You obviously don't get the context I'm using it that phrase in. The hint is: formal logic.

DX12 is happening. Are we seriously surprised that games that started planning more than a year ago use DX11? What are you trying to prove? You can pretend that adoption is somehow slower, but it's not. And what millions agree? Anyone that didn't install Windows 10 did NOT do it because they didn't want DX12. I mean, it's just sad. There are people in the OS board right now that are basically wishing they had at least locked in their copy. That's a bogus conflation. And you citing yourself as an example is anecdotal and carries no weight. People 5 years ago going on about 16 GB simply weren't right. Today, they are. That argument holds no weight.

But go ahead, keep citing "today" while continuing to ignore the OP's actual question and most of my points. And no, picking a point and going off on a tangent (like quantity somehow mattering and the fact that you don't like Windows 10) don't count as addressing my points.

EDIT: I keep using BF1 as an example, and you keep saying "sure if you happen to want to play one of those 2-3 games." So if I happen to want to play one of the year's biggest shooters? Okay.
 

ImpulsE69

Lifer
Jan 8, 2010
14,946
1,077
126
As you said, you citing your opinion on 1 game has no weight. (Since you went that route). The question isn't about you or I, it's the OP and what they want to play. Who cares if BF1 is the biggest game (in your opinion) and additionally dismissing 1000's of other new games is also a bit extreme. If OP doesn't want to play said game, your opinion is as moot as you are trying to make mine. Ratios are what I am looking at and the ratios state it isn't necessary at this time. Just like video cards, you base the decision on whats upcoming that YOU want to play on hardware choices.

In the short term, the cases described in this thread are corner cases, and poor ones at best, but again...they've been called out, it is up to OP to decide from there if it is worth it.

Also, let's not forget what this board is full of....most of you don't represent the masses, I am giving a bit of levity in the "OMG MAXX UR SYSTEM OUT OR UR A PLEB" attitude. I am in no way against adding anything, just offering an answer to the question which was "is 8gb enough to game". Time will tell where we go from here, and I may be wrong, but I believe we have some time before it becomes a necessity.
 
Last edited:

Oyeve

Lifer
Oct 18, 1999
21,995
854
126
I have 32gb and all SSD. I did not notice any speed or fps difference going from 8 to 32 on the ram. I did notice massive difference going from 7200rpm drives to SSD. I probably wasted money on the ram but I have a 4790K proc and don't plan on updating for at least 3-4 years. And the DDR3 ram was pretty cheap.
 

kalrith

Diamond Member
Aug 22, 2005
6,628
7
81
win 7 64, 1080p, video 1 970, 1 SSD (250), and a 1 T hard disk (WD Black), DDR 3 ram, core i5 Ivy. Not ready to "upgrade" to win 10 as of now.
Only games I want to buy 2017 are ME Andromeda, Cyberpunk 2077 and Deus Ex MD.
You have a similar system to mine. Honestly the only reason to upgrade to 16GB is because DDR3 is cheap now, and it might not be cheap in a year or two when you might need it. You have to weigh the cost versus the reward. Spend $35 now and risk wasting that money because you might not need 16GB, or wait and risk having to spend a lot more on the same thing in a year or two if you do need it.
 
Reactions: ImpulsE69

DAPUNISHER

Super Moderator CPU Forum Mod and Elite Member
Super Moderator
Aug 22, 2001
29,563
24,428
146
win 7 64, 1080p, video 1 970, 1 SSD (250), and a 1 T hard disk (WD Black), DDR 3 ram, core i5 Ivy. Not ready to "upgrade" to win 10 as of now.
Only games I want to buy 2017 are ME Andromeda, Cyberpunk 2077 and Deus Ex MD.
Since you are planning to play Deus Ex, read this - https://www.back2gaming.com/reviews...ind-divided-performance-image-quality-review/

Particularly this part
The VRAM and RAM usage behavior with the GeForce GTX 970 4GB is the main reason why we chose Prague City instead of the Dubai level for our benchmarks. When we first tested the game, our Intel Haswell test platform was only equipped with 8GB of RAM. The GeForce GTX 970 4GB had no problem in the game’s built-in benchmark tool and in the Dubai level when using Very High for Texture Quality. However, the game crashed after the loading screen for Prague City. We initially thought it is a bug but it repeatedly happened. The OSD (on-screen display) of MSI Afterburner showed the RAM usage slowly climbs to 8GB as the loading for Prague City nears completion. The solution was to either use High for Texture Quality or add more RAM. In our opinion, it’s better to add more RAM because there is a noticeable difference between High Texture Quality and Very High Texture Quality.
 
Reactions: VirtualLarry

PrincessFrosty

Platinum Member
Feb 13, 2008
2,300
68
91
www.frostyhacks.blogspot.com
*edit*

Actually I've changed my mind. I think with browsers and multi-tab habits as they are today and general RAM usage of modern OS's that usage can easily sit at 5-6Gb on desktop with not much running so 8Gb is probably too small for modern games unless you're prepared to close a lot of stuff first. Go 16Gb, it's fairly cheap anyway and will give you decent future proofing.
 

crazzy.heartz

Member
Sep 13, 2010
183
26
81
In case that 8GB RAM is DDR3, better get another 8GB stick/ 2x4GB sticks of matching RAM now before DDR3 goes EOL. That would shoot up it's prices and it can be had for dirt cheap right now. 8GB drops to $12-$15 on Amazon every now and then.

Furthermore, with Win7, you'll be better off having 16GB system RAM with a 8GB VRAM GFX card.
 

escrow4

Diamond Member
Feb 4, 2013
3,339
122
106
Mankind Divided and the Witcher III DLC used from over 4GB to near 6GB ALONE, not counting Win 10 usage. 8GB isn't enough anymore at all. You also have new phone flagships coming with 4GB RAM with 2GB coming close to being the new minimum.
 

Blue_Max

Diamond Member
Jul 7, 2011
4,223
153
106
I had two machines, one with a pair of 4's, one with a pair of 8's.

Intel handles mismatched pairs extremely well (as in little-to-no performance difference) so 8+4(12GB) for each machine worked out perfectly!

Would be a non-issue except Space Engineers goes over the magic 8GB mark with planets enabled.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,136
30,086
146
I have 16gb because I picked it up for ~$70 about 5 years ago...maybe 6. I think that was an upgrade from 4 gb...maybe 8gb. I forget. Not sure if I would still be getting by with that 8gb but I bet I would be.

My point: Buy it because it's cheap.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |