No need for more than 4GB ram.

[Mussels]

task manager doesnt show VRAM synced into system memory.

DX10 doesnt do this duplication, so (in theory) you should be able to run a game in DX9 and compare memory usage to DX10 - if task manager showed the difference, there would be lower ram usage, upto the amount of VRAM you have. Its transparent to the OS

[Flibolito]

So if i played using DX10 the system would actually act as having the whole 2.5GB (2gbRAM+512VRAM)? as it treats them separately huh.
Maybe ill dust of that Vista 64bit disk lol and give it another shot :P

[silkstone]

I have 4gb of use and on a daily basis is use 1.59Gg - With only IE open and 4 background tasks (CCC, kapersky, uTorrent and logitech setpoint) . if i open up Crysis it jusmps up to close to 4gb so i can see over 4gb being a real necessity within the next year.
Before, i only had 2gb, Crysis was unplayable. 4gb also helps a lot with image editing and i would put more in just for that.

[kiriakost]

Originally Posted by silkstone

if i open up Crysis it jumps up to close to 4gb so i can see over 4gb being a real necessity within the next year.

I need to see a screen shot to believe it .... or actually two
"performance Tab"
1) " Task manager " before gaming ....
2) " Task manager " after gaming ....

[InnocentCriminal]

You mean, whilst gaming.

[iamthewizard2]

How wrong your are...

i have 12gig DDR3 1850Mhz Ram and sometimes for massive largescale 25Megapixel graphic design works ALL OF IT is used....therefore the pc has to use virtual ram. Just because you just game doesnt mean everyone needs less than 4.

Also, i recently installed the latest crysis warhead patch which enables 64BIT SUPPORT....allowing massive amounts of ram to be utilised for graphics. i ran crysis with the new patch and i went from:

average 58fps at 1680x1050, full enthusiast settings, no AA

to

average of 64fps 1680x1050, full enthusiast settings, and a massive x4 AA!!!!!!

sure performance is no indicator of how much ram is used but ive heard countless people with 64bit vista with 4gig-8gig of ram having virtually no improvement in performance after the patch...but yet my 12 gig monster pc had a significant boost.

[DrPepper]

I'd say 4gb should be standard these days, its so incredibly cheap it would be a crime not to get 4gb. I personally want to move up to 8gb. What good is it that my motherboard supports it, so does my OS but I'm not using that capability.

[phanbuey]

Originally Posted by DrPepper

I'd say 4gb should be standard these days, its so incredibly cheap it would be a crime not to get 4gb. I personally want to move up to 8gb. What good is it that my motherboard supports it, so does my OS but I'm not using that capability.

well depending on your NB, 8 GB can distabilise an overclock - but on the other hand, i am thinking about going 8G as well.

[DrPepper]

Originally Posted by phanbuey

well depending on your NB, 8 GB can distabilise an overclock - but on the other hand, i am thinking about going 8G as well.

It wouldn't because I'd be using four sticks anyway like I am atm.

[Nick89]

Originally Posted by iamthewizard2

How wrong your are...

i have 12gig DDR3 1850Mhz Ram and sometimes for massive largescale 25Megapixel graphic design works ALL OF IT is used....therefore the pc has to use virtual ram. Just because you just game doesnt mean everyone needs less than 4.

Also, i recently installed the latest crysis warhead patch which enables 64BIT SUPPORT....allowing massive amounts of ram to be utilised for graphics. i ran crysis with the new patch and i went from:

average 58fps at 1680x1050, full enthusiast settings, no AA

to

average of 64fps 1680x1050, full enthusiast settings, and a massive x4 AA!!!!!!

sure performance is no indicator of how much ram is used but ive heard countless people with 64bit vista with 4gig-8gig of ram having virtually no improvement in performance after the patch...but yet my 12 gig monster pc had a significant boost.

I said more than 4GB is not required for PC gaming, I never said there were no other apps that used more than 4GB I just said I didnt know what they were. Re-read my post I think you misread it.

[FordGT90Concept]

Any 64-bit game with a memory leak could easily exceed 4 GiB. XD

Seriously, let's lay down the facts:
-32-bit games cannot address more than 2 GiB of virtual memory.
-Any request by 32-bit software for memory exceeding 2 GiB errors (app probably will crash).
-Most computers still run 32-bit operating systems.
-64-bit software is, for the most part, not backwards compatible with 32-bit operating systems.
-64-bit can address virtual memory exceeding 2 GiB.
-Memory requirements for games are usually pretty strictly limited (that is, there's only so much memory the game is required to use to fulfill all tasks).

So, to sum it up, you won't see many (any) games that use, let alone, exceed 2 GiB until the following conditions are met:
-The average target system must be running a 64-bit OS.
-The average target system must have at least 3 GiB system RAM (2 GiB for the game, 1 GiB for everything else).

I'll tell you right now, the possibility of that is not imminent for two reasons:
-Vista x86 is far more popular than Vista x64.
-DDR3, the successor to DDR2, is expensive.

My conclusion: 4+ GiB software won't be common until late into DDR3's lifespan or mid way into DDR4 (or whatever is DDR3's successor). By then, 64-bit operating systems should be common place.

[kiriakost]

Originally Posted by FordGT90Concept

By then, 64-bit operating systems should be common place.

Nop , you have to give away for free 64-bit CPUs

[PVTCaboose1337]

Well too bad I only use 2gb! O wait, thats ok, cause as long as I can run everything fast, (cause my ram is FAST!) then I am fine. I have only had one instance when I wish I had more ram, and that was in Vista. I use Server 2003. So I don't have that problem anymore.

For me, I won't upgrade my ram to 4gb till I get an i8 or Phenom III or whatever is coming out next. By then 16gb will be standard I bet.

[silkstone]

Originally Posted by kiriakost

I need to see a screen shot to believe it .... or actually two
"performance Tab"
1) " Task manager " before gaming ....
2) " Task manager " after gaming ....

Here is a screen shot of my usage at the moment 1.8gb (not too much crap running). With crysis it jumps up to around 3pointsomething if my memeory serves me correctly. I don;t have it installed at the moment so i can;t check. but i agree that over 4gb isn;t necessary for games atm, it will be soon tho

[kiriakost]

Originally Posted by PVTCaboose1337

For me, I won't upgrade my ram to 4gb till I get an i8 or Phenom III or whatever is coming out next. By then 16gb will be standard I bet.

you had bring me memories of the far past , when we had 486DX4 with just four megs of ram , and we was dreaming to had 16MB ... and a SCSI HDD 340MB ..
With this system the universe will be ours ...

Well this days we are more than good , about computing power , paying this days for a very extreme system , its more because of hobby , than need.

[KieranD]

running backgorund tasks and running software or games at the same time you may need 4gb, its pathetic you can get a really good set of ram dual channel 2x2gb for £40

there is no excuse people who have these speedy dual cores and quads and go "ach i dont need 4gb" like they are trying to skimp on ram when they buy expensive hardware

i have 4gb of ram vista takes up about 1gb and background tasks 400-600mb leaving about 2gb for my games to suck up

not to even mention ram can speed up boot times and system performance overall, sure you wont get better frames per second but you can run all you background task and have decreased loading time, you need at least 2gb free for modern games these days i think empires total war will use that much and gta 4 uses it and some other games

pro video editing and 3d modelling probably uses extensive amounts of ram

2gb of ram sure you can run on it but dont expect to run hundreds of background tasks and vista at the same time as a game, more than 4gb you can run practically anything you like but watch out for cpu usage, 6gb is a lot and i wouldn't go over that really a lot of ddr3 kits are 6gb

[KieranD]

i remember that i had to upgrade from 32mb or ram to 64mb of ram because settlers wouldnt run on my machine and lots of other stuff wouldnt run either

[rampage]

i have 8 gb of ram and i can sure tell when i drop it down to 4 or 2 gb, just because windows isnt using 100% of the ram dosnt mean its not being used. look at the ammount od ram that has been CACHED and with me every spare mb of ram is in use, this helps with load times off games and anyother software that im using at the time.... even simple things like in fall out 3 you can nitice a large difference in quick load times between using 8, 4 and 2 gb of ram

simply looking at the "performance Tab" and checking the % of ram used before during and after donst realy mean squat (this is the ram windows is activly using), as long as you are not using 100% you will be "OK" as it isnt strugeling for ram, just having more ram will enable the pc to cache things to ram that it uses often saving seek and load times off the HDD

so in theory the more ram the better, thats possibly why iamthewizzard2's pc has noticed gains with 12 gb of ram in a game such as crysis

but for any of this to even matter you will need

-64bit os
-decent cpu
-decent gfx
(a decent pc in general)


there is no point running uber ammounts of ram in a shit box running apps that are few years old

i cant wat for the day when 32bit OS's are no longer made and programers can take the full advantage of 64 bit programing, 64 bit cpu's and more then the average joe 2 gb of ram, think about it thats why we see decent games and graphics on xbox's and playstations, they can code here apps for particular hardware. none of this one million and one combinatios of pc's out there and trying to make games run on hadware that is 3+ years old because ppl cry that "my cant play this game, this game sux" (think of crysis when it come out and how many ppl winged cos it ran like crap, thats because most of there pc's were crap"



i could go on for ever here, but at the end of it all, yes more then 4 gig of ram in a gaming pc is more then often enough and it is what i recommend to people building a pc but there are bennifits in having more, even as suttle as they may be...


- - - END RANT - - -

[kiriakost]

Originally Posted by silkstone

Here is a screen shot of my usage at the moment 1.8gb (not too much crap running). With crysis it jumps up to around 3pointsomething if my memeory serves me correctly. I don;t have it installed at the moment so i can;t check. but i agree that over 4gb isn;t necessary for games atm, it will be soon tho

silkstone ... because of your story , i like to say few words ...

One fast gaming machine , must have running as less background process as possible.
By having this on mind , we save Ram and CPU cycles , and the Game runs more stable .

Nop , its not reasonable , to show applications running at 2D mode , that you close them out for 3D mode .

Vista its a memory hog , and still is the exception of the rule , as the XP machines are still on very large numbers.

Any way this is the facts , and i am not hot to start any debate about operating systems.

[kiriakost]

Originally Posted by rampage

then the average joe 2 gb of ram

- - - END RANT - - -

Ho ho ho , i love to be an average joe 2 gb

Ok people close down your umbrellas , the rant storm has passed .

[rampage]

Originally Posted by kiriakost

Ho ho ho , i love to be an average joe 2 gb

Ok people close down your umbrellas , the rant storm has passed .

yeah sorry, i just gets up my skirt when people cant understand that a 32 bit OS can only access 2GB of ram "PER APPLICATION" thats why many of the big games run like crap on some systems, i relaise this a little off topic and that the origonal post was about 4 gig in general and that he was running a 64 bit os


- - - end rant #2 - - -

[kiriakost]

Woohoo i love rants ...

Is that what kills you , 32bit vs 64bit for gaming ...

What kills me , its that we spend 2000$ US for a computer , that the gaming industry do not care to make games for it .

[silkstone]

Originally Posted by kiriakost

silkstone ... because of your story , i like to say few words ...

One fast gaming machine , must have running as less background process as possible.
By having this on mind , we save Ram and CPU cycles , and the Game runs more stable .

Nop , its not reasonable , to show applications running at 2D mode , that you close them out for 3D mode .

Vista its a memory hog , and still is the exception of the rule , as the XP machines are still on very large numbers.

Any way this is the facts , and i am not hot to start any debate about operating systems.

It was just an example of how much ram i am using at the moment and is a fair chunk for just browsing and having a 300mb video in the background.

I generally close everything down before i run a game, although i might keep ie or winamp open. Background tasks in general don't take up many cpu cycles and barely affect performance. Amount of ram ont the other hand will effect performance when having multiple background task s open.
I think a previous point was that having extra ram will allow you to multitask even when you have games running.

Vista is a memory hog, which is why 64-bit vista needs over 2gb. In my experience vista with 4gb of ram is much better than xp with 2gb. Considering the cost of ram i don't believe it is too decedant to run large amounts of ram if you do actually notice a difference in your computing experience. This in't soley a gaming issue and winxp will run games adequately with 2gb of ram however, i don;t really want to keep worrying about what is running in the background and closing absolubtly everything to make sure i have enough ram free for the game to run smoothly.

A fast gaming machine shouldn't have to close all it's background tasks to continue to run fast IMO

[Jizzler]

Ya'll can send your extra rams to me! I'll put them to good use.

[kiriakost]

Originally Posted by Jizzler

Ya'll can send your extra rams to me! I'll put them to good use.

Nop i do not trust you , you gona sell them