Windows 7 Forums
Welcome to Windows 7 Forums. Our forum is dedicated to helping you find support and solutions for any problems regarding your Windows 7 PC be it Dell, HP, Acer, Asus or a custom build. We also provide an extensive Windows 7 tutorial section that covers a wide range of tips and tricks.


Windows 7: Memory - Do we need more than 6 gig?

13 Aug 2010   #11
janno

windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by sygnus21 View Post
As a photographer I use photoshop all the time and I still can't see a need for more than 6gig of RAM. And I usually listen to iTunes while I'm working in photoshop.

Unless you are working with huge (500+meg) files or doing some heavy intensive stuff like layering which can make those files even larger, I still say 6gig is enough for most tasks in photoshop.

Quote:
Additionally, in Windows Vista 64-bit, processing very large images is much faster if your computer has large amounts of RAM (6-8 GB).
Optimize Photoshop performance | CS3 | XP, Vista
beeing the one who started the discussion (with plans to put 12 gb ram in my new rig) i still havent decided what to buy.

the 12 GB Corsair Dominator GT (1866Mhz) still sounds great, but someone told me (i think it was Sygnus) that this speeds are not reached by the MoBO, and therefor not neccesary. and with a cache of 8-8-8 it`s not neccesary better/faster than 6GB RAM with a cache of 7-7-7.

i`m using programs like Qbase, FL studio etc. with a lot of heavy plugins that use al lot of CPU and RAM, and of course live music recording (multiple tracks at a time, and all the above at the same time).

this is why my original idea was to put in 12GB, to never reach the limit of my rig`s RAM... (for comparison, i`m now working with 4 GB om 800Mhz, and that`s just not enough)

now my 2 questions are:

do i need the 12GB?

is the 6GB at 7-7-7 faster, and therefor the better choice?


My System SpecsSystem Spec
.
13 Aug 2010   #12
jhd17

windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit
 
 

i have 3gb for 64 bit and have never had a ram problem, however i don't have a powerful processor and so extreme multi tasking isn't possible anyway. The game that uses most ram for me that i can run smoothly is gothic three that uses just over a gig. Including windows 7 usage that leave 1 gig free, more than enogh for me
My System SpecsSystem Spec
13 Aug 2010   #13
fseal

Windows 7 x64 Ultimate
 
 

Quote:
the 12 GB Corsair Dominator GT (1866Mhz) still sounds great, but someone told me (i think it was Sygnus) that this speeds are not reached by the MoBO, and therefor not neccesary. and with a cache of 8-8-8 it`s not neccesary better/faster than 6GB RAM with a cache of 7-7-7.
It is true that your memory buss will never reach 1866 It'll be running at 1333 probably so there is no reason to splurge on memory that fast. If 1600 memory is 2/3 the price then that's what to get.

Also the speed of the memory has virtually ZERO effect on the speed of the computer. In a game with 250 fps you might lose 1-2 fps between the 888 and 777 memory speeds. Not hitting swap by never running out of memory no matter what you throw at your machine will have a tremendous impact.

If money is tight then 6 is probably just fine. But I would personally find 6 too tight for my work. The second Photoshop or a VM hits swap your computer feels like it has just died. I /never/ want that again
My System SpecsSystem Spec
.

13 Aug 2010   #14
Solarstarshines

Windows 10 Home Premium 64bit sp1
 
 

As a user of 8 gigs of ram there are some advantages and disadvantages if you running multiple displays useing multiple aplications that would help alot

I use a 22" and a 37" vizio to play downloaded movies while i use other aplications on the 22" such as burning movies media ect

so i would say just depends on what you are doing if you are recording and tranfering media like i do and switch back and fourth between games apps ect and useing sd's at one time you would need more ram and power just to not bog you're system down


so yes it is worth it but if your just going to be gaming and surfing the web your better off just doing 4 cause the internet is not useing up any resourse you have and games use about 2 gigs if anything unless it is a complicated make which is really not being done yet so i would stay stick with 4-6 or even 8 if you really have a need to do more then just your average user
My System SpecsSystem Spec
13 Aug 2010   #15
pparks1

Windows 7 Ultimate x64
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by janno View Post
but someone told me (i think it was Sygnus) that this speeds are not reached by the MoBO, and therefor not neccesary. and with a cache of 8-8-8 it`s not neccesary better/faster than 6GB RAM with a cache of 7-7-7.
That was me that told you that tidbit of information. It's not necessarily that your motherboard won't reach that speed....it's that your CPU is not designed by default to reach that kind of speed....overclocking would be necessary to get up to that area.

Let me try to explain and I'll use my computer as an example. I have an Intel Q9550 quad core CPU which runs natively at 2.83Ghz. The Q9550 has a front side bus speed of 1333Mhz.....and because the Intel chips's are quad pumped..if you take 1333 and divide by 4, you get the true speed of 333Mhz. Now, looking at the specs of an Intel Q9550 shows that it has an 8.5x multiplier...so when you multiply 333 x 8.5 = 2.830Ghz.

So, for my computer, my motherboard takes DDR2 RAM. And remember, DDR means double data rate RAM. So, if you take my Q9550 native bus speed of 333mhz and multiply that by 2 (for double data rate), you end up with an effective speed of 667mhz. So, with a 1,333Mhz FSB motherboard and a Q9550 at stock clock speeds (333Mhz x 8.5), the RAM will run at 667Mhz. Therefore, buying DDR2-800 or DDR2-1000, or DDR2-1200...means that while the RAM "could" run that fast, it's going to continue running at 667Mhz. Thus, unless you plan to overclock and manipulate the machine, being able to run at 800, 1000 or 1200 provides no benefit whatsoever....as the RAM speeds are determined by your FSB speeds.

So, when I built my machine DDR2-667 would have provided the maximum speed that my board and CPU would use by default. However, knowing I wanted to overclock my box a bit, I instead went with DDR2-800 to provide some room before my RAM couldn't handle it.

Now, I started to experiment a bit with overclocking of my CPU. First thing I did was increase the FSB speed to 360 (from 333). With an 8.5 multiplier, that means my overall speed became (360 x 8.5) 3.060Ghz of my CPU. And with the RAM, it went to (360 x 2) 720Mhz. And things were fine here and everything ran fine.

So, I wanted to push things a bit more, so I set my FSB speed to 400 and set my mutiplier from 8.5 simply to 8.0. Thererefore, my CPU was running at 400 x 8 = 3,200Mhz and my RAM was running at it's true native speed of 400 x 2 = 800Mhz.

So, had I done what lots of others did and bought DDR2-1066 simply because I thought it would be so much faster than DDR2-800...I would have had to have overclocked my CPU to 4.264Ghz to actually get the performance of 1066 out of it.
(1066 / 2 = 533). And 533 x 8.0 (lowest multiplier I could use) = 4,264Ghz

So, while DDR2 1066 seems faster than DDR2 800..it totally depends on other factors to determine how fast it would actually be.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
13 Aug 2010   #16
Petey7

Windows 7 Professional SP1 64-bit
 
 

I use 4 gigs and I don't recall exceeding 50% very often. Only when running Chrome, WLMM, WMP, WLPG, Ares (P2P program), and Audacity all at the same time. It probably hits 50% without all of them open, but when using WLMM, I usually have all of them going at the same time. Right now I have a few tabs open in Chrome and WMP going and it's at 31%. So I would say at the this point in time more than 6GB probably isn't necessary for the home user.

Just for fun I'm going to try opening every program I currently have installed and see what results are on ram usage

EDIT: 36 programs in use and 54% RAM usage. I'm guessing the programs built in to windows not using much would be the reason why.
Memory - Do we need more than 6 gig?-ram-test.png


My System SpecsSystem Spec
13 Aug 2010   #17
Internet Badass

Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit
 
 

2 is not enough. 4 is good. 6 would be perfect. 8 would be amazing! 12 is ridiculous. 16 is unmentionable. 32 is godly.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
13 Aug 2010   #18
pparks1

Windows 7 Ultimate x64
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Internet Badass View Post
2 is not enough. 4 is good. 6 would be perfect. 8 would be amazing! 12 is ridiculous. 16 is unmentionable. 32 is godly.
But unless you really have applications taking advantage of it, more than 4 is likely not going to result in performance benefits. More does not always equal better. Not to mention, the cost of 16, 24 or 32 is going to be extremely high and if you aren't going to actually use it, that would be a huge waste of money.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
13 Aug 2010   #19
Petey7

Windows 7 Professional SP1 64-bit
 
 

While actually using all the programs (switching back and forth, I even made a video) I got my RAM to 60% used. The computer didn't hardly slow down at all. The only significant slow down was when trying to upload the video to youtube (which failed) my internet got really slow. I know that if I was using programs like AutoCAD and Photoshop as well the results would be different, but the point remains, whats the point in having RAM that won't be used?
My System SpecsSystem Spec
13 Aug 2010   #20
Wishmaster

Windows 7 Home Premium 64bit
 
 

Mine seldom uses all of its 8GB.

only when running some HD encoding apps, and doing a few other things while its encoding I exceed the 4 or even 5GB mark.

For the most part, its rare it goes over 5GB. And never over the 4Gb mark when gaming.

After a couple hours of up time, it does seem 7 uses all of my 8GB of RAM.
Granted, thats all standyby, with an avg. of 2Gb in use at idle, but still using it all.

How much that helps in the overall scheme of things .. Probably not worth the price to upgrade to from 4.

Video encoding & multitasking during is my main reason for it.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
Reply

 Memory - Do we need more than 6 gig?




Thread Tools




Similar help and support threads
Thread Forum
chkdsk high memory usage / memory leak
Has anyone else noticed that chkdsk uses all available physical memory (if you let it run long enough)? I find that if I run chkdsk and watch the memory usage in task manager it jumps by about 50MB every 2 seconds or so until it either finishes or hits around 3.2GB at which point my physical...
Performance & Maintenance
4Gb memory (2.75 Gb usable) memory remapping in bios causes BSOD
I recently did a new install of Windows 7 64 bit. I noticed windows showed 4Gb of ram (2.75Gb usable). I read tons of articles after googling this and tried several options to free up some more ram. I have 2 options in bios to change memory remapping over 4GB. S/W and H/W. When I enable S/W...
BSOD Help and Support
General Win7 memory leak and Unknown memory usage?
So I've had this problem for a few months with my thinkpad x220, win7 home premium 64 bit. I used ccleaner, run memtest86 multiple times, chkdsk multiple times, sfc scan multiple times, none that helped. Sfc always detects errors but always cannot fix some of them. I have mse, avast, and...
Performance & Maintenance
Troubleshooting Excessive Memory Use (Memory Leak?) after playing vid.
HI; I am having a problem with my memory getting tied up / used up and not being able to access it again until I reboot. Machine: Dell xps studio 8100 OS: Win 7, Processor: i7 2.8 RAM: 16GB (max it will take) Video: ATI Radeon 5700 (running 3 monitors) Versions: As far as I know I am...
Performance & Maintenance
LOW Computer Memory- ONLY 90MB or less Free Memory? Soo Slow?
Hello, i have a Windows 7 64bit OS and i am running a Laptop. Ever since i had this virus (Win32 malware gen) which kept coming up with a notifications of the virus on avast every 2-5 minutes my computer was running slow and when i deleted the virus, by dragging it in to the recycle bin and...
Performance & Maintenance
'Racetrack' Magnetic Memory could make memory 100,000 times faster
Source ScienceDaily (Nov. 15, 2010)
News


Our Sites

Site Links

About Us

Find Us

Windows 7 Forums is an independent web site and has not been authorized, sponsored, or otherwise approved by Microsoft Corporation. "Windows 7" and related materials are trademarks of Microsoft Corp.

Designer Media Ltd

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:24.
Twitter Facebook Google+ Seven Forums iOS App Seven Forums Android App