Is 8GB of RAM Enough In 2018?

[Razor512]

For me, sometimes I like to do some gaming while aftereffects is running the warp stabilizer on a video. Since adobe doesn't like when time consuming computationally intensive tasks use more than 1 CPU core, it often means that you can game without slowing down the stabilizer.

 

The game will also have almost no slowdown during this process.

[Misanthrope]

55 minutes ago, Mr. Smiley said:

Run the video in the background for noise or just something to glance at every once in a while.  Document open to take notes, 3d modeler to make models, coding to do who knows what, and then a web browser to search for answers on how to code or model something.  

 

I regularly have a game, microsoft word, opera, firefox, discord, HWmonitor, my minecraft server, matlab, random research papers, and who knows what else at the same time.  Doesn't matter if I can't see it all the time but it is still all there.  It is just easier to leave stuff open to quickly flip back to it when needed than to constantly open and close programs.  

Does it matters if you have most of this closed and just reopen them when you need them? Several of these open within 4 seconds, probably less on NVME so it seems to be a poor use of your money to put it towards RAM just because you're too disorganized or want to save negligible time of reopening closed apps.

 

 

[Windows7ge]

4 hours ago, Misanthrope said:

Yes I also have a long list of apps I can open but why would you ever need all of those simultaneously? That's just ridiculous and don't try to tell me you can 3D model, Code, write your documenting notes, watch a video and operate this while streaming it simultaneously because I just wouldn't believe you.

Challenge accepted.

[Misanthrope]

28 minutes ago, Windows7ge said:

Challenge accepted.

[AdmiralKird]

I finally have an answer to why my browser on my 12GB RAM PC would always crash at around 100 tabs or so, always wondered exactly why that happened. Well done.

[asus killer]

2 hours ago, kaiju_wars said:

I have dual monitors, that's why.  

I stream, so having the game on one monitor, and my Twitch up on the next also helps out a lot.  Helps me make sure that my stream is actually working and people aren't staring at a black screen.

8 is fine if you close down programs when you game and you only have one monitor.  It's not good enough if you multitask though, especially with streaming, or even looking up guides to help in games.  

 

Some games even love more RAM, such as Battlefield 1 and Wildlands.

i said average users. Dual monitors that's not even remotely average.

[NMS]

Hm, I remember the days where I had 8 gigs and when opening a project in Photoshop instantly running out of all 8 and quietly crying in the corner.

Have yet to finish my PC to try the new 16, but I bet I'll be crying too. Perhaps not weeping...

[Bananasplit_00]

is 8GB enough? yah you can survive just fine on 4GB still

[LAwLz]

I started posting about computers and computer hardware 8 years ago.

At that time, 2GB was considered mainstream and 4GB was midrange. 8GB was considered very high end to the point of almost being a waste of money (people usually went for 3x2GB because of triple channel for high end builds).

I think it is mind blowing that 16GB is considered "normal" these days.

 

I can't help but feel like something went wrong in the making of this video. Programs shouldn't crash when you run out of memory. It would have been interesting to see them use a more traditional list of websites rather than for example that PUBG map one, as well as a clean install of Chrome without addons or old data in it. Maybe even switch to Firefox and see how that works.

[Egg-Roll]

10 hours ago, Misanthrope said:

Yes I also have a long list of apps I can open but why would you ever need all of those simultaneously? That's just ridiculous and don't try to tell me you can 3D model, Code, write your documenting notes, watch a video and operate this while streaming it simultaneously because I just wouldn't believe you.

It's possible to require all, it depends on what they are exactly doing. When I do video editing as a hobby I'd usually find myself with 4+ vlc open sometimes simultaneously playing, with chrome open, with Premier... Plus plus plus...

[asus killer]

3 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Programs shouldn't crash when you run out of memory. 

linus explained that chrome did not crash wen it run out of RAM, but way after that on page file territory.

[Misanthrope]

1 hour ago, Egg-Roll said:

It's possible to require all, it depends on what they are exactly doing. When I do video editing as a hobby I'd usually find myself with 4+ vlc open sometimes simultaneously playing, with chrome open, with Premier... Plus plus plus...

Yes and that's covered in the video we're discussing, very specifically in fact. The user I was quoting was testing a very different use case of not typical use but just trying to run out of RAM intentionally due to not wanting to hit close on things no human can be using simultaneously anyway.

[Misanthrope]

4 hours ago, LAwLz said:

I started posting about computers and computer hardware 8 years ago.

At that time, 2GB was considered mainstream and 4GB was midrange. 8GB was considered very high end to the point of almost being a waste of money (people usually went for 3x2GB because of triple channel for high end builds).

I think it is mind blowing that 16GB is considered "normal" these days.

 

I can't help but feel like something went wrong in the making of this video. Programs shouldn't crash when you run out of memory. It would have been interesting to see them use a more traditional list of websites rather than for example that PUBG map one, as well as a clean install of Chrome without addons or old data in it. Maybe even switch to Firefox and see how that works.

They don't but they were made to by intentionally limiting the windows page file size. AFAIK and IIRC the pagefile size is dynamic by default but if you set it up and you run out then you start crashing things.

 

And I feel the same way: I have 16gb and I feel like a wasteful bourgeois considering when I started my interest in computers and computer gaming 128mb was budget and 256 was standard in the late 90s

[kaiju_wars]

6 hours ago, asus killer said:

i said average users. Dual monitors that's not even remotely average.

What, how is dual monitors not average at this point?  

There are plenty of people who do no more than play games on their computers and watch porn that have dual monitors.

Thats not exactly an enthusiast thing anymore, especially with how much more PC gaming has grown.

 

 

[Drak3]

17 minutes ago, kaiju_wars said:

What, how is dual monitors not average at this point?  

There are plenty of people who do no more than play games on their computers and watch porn that have dual monitors.

Thats not exactly an enthusiast thing anymore, especially with how much more PC gaming has grown.

 

 

Most people don't stream, and are happy to tab out for game guides.

Multimonitor setups as a whole are a decent bit away from being average.

[kaiju_wars]

1 hour ago, Drak3 said:

Most people don't stream, and are happy to tab out for game guides.

Multimonitor setups as a whole are a decent bit away from being average.

I still disagree.  Triple monitor, quadruple monitor setups sure.  But dual monitor setups?  No, they’re much much more common place now.

[Razor512]

For monitor setups, you have single monitor use as being common for laptop users (since many of then do not easily make dual monitor use convenient without a docking station.

 

For desktop users, you likely have the vast majority using 2 monitors, and then a small subset using 3 monitors, and a very small amount using 4+ monitors.

For most users, being stuck with just 1 monitor will be too frustrating.

 

 

In the case of RAM, price gouging and price fixing has largely lend to the situation where having small amounts like 8-16GB is still common, but really, the most common today should really be 32GB.

[ItsMitch]

12GB is the sweet spot for me. 

[Razor512]

5 hours ago, SC2Mitch said:

12GB is the sweet spot for me. 

You missed the number 8

 

128GB would be awesome to have.

 

[Guest]

19 hours ago, Razor512 said:

One issue is why aren't these companies pushing for higher density memory?

 

Why isn't anyone making non ECC memory that can hold 32-64GB per stick.

 

Assuming that prices become more sane, why can't they push to have standard Z270 and Z370 platforms using 64GB sticks of RAM in order to support a more comfortable 256GB of RAM if all slots are populated?

 

If we could get 256GB of RAM on a mainstream platform, we would have enough RAM to do things like run adobe premiere pro, davinci resolve, and photoshop at the same time, and possibly have some left over RAM to have reddit pulled up for some much needed cat, dog, and red panda pictures.

You might even be able to play PUBG

[minervx]

8GB is still enough in 2018 for most people. 

 

Most games still consume less than 4GB of RAM, and any benefit you would gain from an additional stick of RAM, you would gain far more benefit from spending the money on a better monitor or cooling setup.

 

If you do professional 4K video/photo/music editing, by all means, go to 16.  But I highly doubt someone who is just beginning creative work, learning the basic tools, doesn't have clients yet and hasn't even created a project yet is going to benefit from the workflow that more RAM would offer.

[Zodiark1593]

On 2/5/2018 at 4:00 PM, Razor512 said:

It depends on your use case.

 

If all you are doing is checking email, then yes, 1GB might work out for you, but for anything more intensive, and you will not have a smooth experience, especially over the course of a day of usage.

Fixed that for accuracy as my Intel Atom system is stuck (soldered) on 2 GB, and it works fine for browsing, video streaming and even older games.

[buyit1986]

I have 6gb in my laptop it's 5 years old and still does pretty well. I've considered maxing it out at 16gb to have it and get maximum performance but prices have skyrocket so I'm gonna stay where o am for now 

[ShredBird]

I work with a wide range of computers.  4 GB is still usable if you're willing to run lean and accept that you'll have some slowdown here and there.  As long as you aren't running huge projects things should be okay.  I have an XPS 13 and unfortunately it only has 4 GB of RAM.  It's lasted me over 2 years just fine through an engineering job and graduate school.

That being said I wouldn't be caught running huge simulations or data acquisition on a machine with only 4 GB of RAM.  I've filled up 32 GB easily with certain engineering applications.

I've always been pretty lean with the way I use a computer, I guess that just comes as habit from growing up with single core computers and dial-up.  I don't fill up my RAM very often with tasks like browsing.  I rarely exceed 10 tabs at a time, it's usually less than 5.  Firefox is sipping an easy 450 MB with two tabs open right now.  Other than that, Spotify and Steam are open.  My system isn't using more than 4 GB (I have 16 GB in my desktop).

[Razor512]

One thing I wish they can add for windows, is high memory mode for systems with fast NVMe storage where if you have128GB or more of RAM, the OS could offer an option to use 64GB of it as a cache for the entire OS and the remainder for frequently used applications/ files if the user is willing to add 18-25 seconds of additional loading in the background at startup, and then in an out of memory situation where all that remains is the 64GB cache, the system can then begin to unload things.