How much ram you need to max out the potenial of a 6 core AMD cpu?

[ChiefGunny]

Some guy on World of tanks was saying a 6 core CPU is a waste that you would need 1tb of ram to use it to its potential. This sounds like BS to me, but i could be wrong. I know that I used the 6 core AMD 1055t with 16gb ram it ran at 100% with a GTX 970 and bottle necked it and didn't come anywhere close to using 8 gb ram. Maybe hes talking about something else.

[Electronics Wizardy]

It depends on what your doing. I can max a 6 core with 64mb of ram if i want, I can also be ram limited with the max of 64gb of ram.

 

For vm's id probably go 64gb or 32, for desktop use, id go 8 or 16. For cpu computer, 2 or 4 is fine, depends on program.

[catzambia]

Uh, that makes no sense

[tlink]

its complete bullshit, probably a 10 year old trying to sound cool.

[Elerek]

wut... that doesn't even make sense.

 

Ram is just where your cpu stores things to keep them closer than your harddrive. It speeds up access. Technically, you could theoretically run a computer with 0 ram (no OS would let you of course though). Your cpu will have to wait to move things in and out of swap (virtual ram on your hhd) if you run out of ram space, but that's it. 

 

Normal usage of a computer (gaming/web browsing/etc) should never need more than 8 or 16gb of ram and it will in no way hold back your cpu.

[1Reshiram12]

10 minutes ago, ChiefGunny said:

Some guy on World of tanks was saying a 6 core CPU is a waste that you would need 1tb of ram to use it to its potential. This sounds like BS to me, but i could be wrong. I know that I used the 6 core AMD 1055t with 16gb ram it ran at 100% with a GTX 970 and bottle necked it and didn't come anywhere close to using 8 gb ram. Maybe hes talking about something else.

He was playing world of tanks, of course that was total BS. Any AMD CPU at this point has no potential for gaming . The single core performance of them is so abysmal it doesn't matter how much RAM you have lol. All AMD shots aside the way it works is basically RAM is just a large capacity L1/L2/L3 cache so your processor doesn't have to slow down to match your HDD or SSD. How processors processes information is by guessing what they have to do next, so they aren't slowed down by the users actions. They put what they think is next in the L1 cache. 90% of the time they are right, if they are wrong, the processor tries the L2 cache. 90% of the time the L2 cache has it. If neither caches have it, it tries the L3. It ends up being over a 99% chance that one of the caches already has the info, but if they don't the processor needs to grab the information from the RAM. It doesn't like to do that because RAM is far away(comparatively) and is slower than getting it from the caches. However, RAM is still faster than having to go to your HDD or SSD when all the caches miss, but I don't think even older AMD processors miss so much that they need 1 TB worth of last resort memory lol.

[ForsakenLive]

Doesn't work like that. Servers for example can have very low power CPUs (no computing needed) and have a huge amount of ram.

These two things are not related. You can have high and low RAM usage depending on the task, and you can have a high compute need, independently of ram 

[SCHISCHKA]

I would respond with you would need 1TB of L1 cache to reach the full potential of a 6 core CPU

[Himommies]

7 minutes ago, ForsakenLive said:

Doesn't work like that. Servers for example can have very low power CPUs (no computing needed) and have a huge amount of ram.

These two things are not related. You can have high and low RAM usage depending on the task, and you can have a high compute need, independently of ram 

Thats because like servers have 4 cpus per group of ram

[Mira Yurizaki]

> Has 2GB of RAM

> Fires up Prime95

> See all six cores capped at 100%

> Also sees a small fire coming from the PC

 

Welp.

 

In all seriousness, the guy is dumb.

[SpaceGhostC2C]

23 minutes ago, ChiefGunny said:

Some guy on World of tanks was saying a 6 core CPU is a waste that you would need 1tb of ram to use it to its potential. This sounds like BS to me, but i could be wrong. I know that I used the 6 core AMD 1055t with 16gb ram it ran at 100% with a GTX 970 and bottle necked it and didn't come anywhere close to using 8 gb ram. Maybe hes talking about something else.

CPU and amount of RAM are completely independent. You need enough ram for the applications you use, whatever the CPU. If RAM is not enough for a particular program, it won't be enough whether you use a 2 core, a 6 core, or a 12 core. If RAM is enough, it will be enough using a dual core, a 6 core, or a 12 core.

[vorticalbox]

21 minutes ago, 1Reshiram12 said:

He was playing world of tanks, of course that was total BS. Any AMD CPU at this point has no potential for gaming . The single core performance of them is so abysmal it doesn't matter how much RAM you have lol. All AMD shots aside the way it works is basically RAM is just a large capacity L1/L2/L3 cache so your processor doesn't have to slow down to match your HDD or SSD. How processors processes information is by guessing what they have to do next, so they aren't slowed down by the users actions. They put what they think is next in the L1 cache. 90% of the time they are right, if they are wrong, the processor tries the L2 cache. 90% of the time the L2 cache has it. If neither caches have it, it tries the L3. It ends up being over a 99% chance that one of the caches already has the info, but if they don't the processor needs to grab the information from the RAM. It doesn't like to do that because RAM is far away(comparatively) and is slower than getting it from the caches. However, RAM is still faster than having to go to your HDD or SSD when all the caches miss, but I don't think even older AMD processors miss so much that they need 1 TB worth of last resort memory lol.

missing is less about what architecture and more about the size of the cache.

[ChiefGunny]

I knew it was i was just wondering if he was taking about something else that i didn't know about cuz Ive tested many CPU's and GPU's and thought this guy is a dumbass but i could be wrong maybe hes talking about something else. Ive maxed out my 4790k many times and the 100s of CPU's Ive tested.