Necessary RAM for gaming

Hello guys, not been on here for years but kinda back into the PC thing and loving it.

Not being in the scene for a few years and coming back seeing many many people and gamers buying 16 GB of RAM etc. Is that really necessary or does it even increase performance compared to 8 or 12 GB, really? I mean, the heaviest games that are coming out right now have a minimum requirement of either 4 or 6 GB and most recommend 8 GB.

I currently have 2GB and yeah, I cannot play new games anymore so I'm thinking about upgrading (complete new PC) but will I really have RAM issues in a few years if I only get 8..?

Kindest regards,

Baris

2x4gb 1866 MHz is fine, yep.

Wow I actually remember you from when I was posting in 2009 and 2010! Good to see you again and still helping me out like you used to. Thanks!

I know 8GB will be enough, but say I'd put 16 in the same system, would it improve anything (gamingwise & daily stuffwise)?

The only time you'd see improvement is if you're using more than 8GB of RAM

ATMINSIDE said:

The only time you'd see improvement is if you're using more than 8GB of RAM

Click to expand...

Exactly.

I use 8 gig now. On 4 monitors with a boat load of windows and programs open all running at the same time, I never have an issue. I even game sometimes while everything else is running in the background and still not problems.

in game, 8 gigs is plenty.
I am just now playing with ram, speed, timings and amounts and the only time i see an advantage to more or faster ram is when you open 20 or more browser pages, that needs more ram, the only thing i have seen to need faster ram is if you have 800 ram or you're benching.

Thanks mates.

What about brands? By my google searches it seems that really anything from Corsair, Crucial, G. Skill, Kingston, Transcend and Mushkin is good, or do you guys think one or two really stand out?

Well the sweet spot is or was 1600 MHz*, this is the standart for many years already and still sufficient, but with the coming Skylake generation i would step up to a 3200 MHz RAM, at that timeline it may become the new "sweet spot" RAM and even faster ones may be released after. Faster RAM than that is surely only needed for benching. Regarding 8 GB, well until today i would have said a 8 GB capacity is fully sufficient, but we have soon new games released that can make full use of 8 GB and there could be tons of background tasks and perhaps a online game opened in the background or other special scenarios. In such terms a 16 GB capacity may provide a safe net for all the eventuality that may only rarely appear but still possible. The issue with RAM is, as long as the capacity is not used they always run smooth, but as soon as capacity is exceeded... they run worse than any other part in a system, just the nature of stuff. A RAM should never run into the limit, not even occasionally, in worst case a software can totally be frozen.

*Nowadays the 1866 MHz kinda was replacing the old 1600 MHz-spot and it may be a small bonus in term a processor used stronger than "Ivy/Sandy-Bridge or Nehalem" but most AMD CPUs are barely stronger than that and just the current top end may truly benefit. More important than that is the use of low Volt memory (1.5 or lesser) i was never using any DDR3 RAM with higher Volt than that because the CPU controller can be sensitive and there is absolutely no need for high Volt RAM, not today and not even many years ago. Additionally it usually seems more suitable to have a good mix between MHz and timings and not only MHz. Some cheap 1866 RAM may be inferior compared to good timed 1600 RAM and it seems that most games benefit from both specs more or less. Same for 3200 RAM, a slower one but at faster timings could be of advantage.

So criteria for me is:
1. 1600/1866@ At least 9,9,9,24 (maybe even better for 1600 nowadays, probably 8,8,8,24 or so, setting 2T to 1T may roughly be comparable to 1 lesser timing value but stability can be difficult when RAM to fast, usually easy for 1600 MHz)
2. 16 GB
3. 1.5V or lower (guess pretty much standart nowadays)

Skylake:
DDR4 is still under development and may be improved a lot over the years, so i would not set a bed.
But i think 3200 may become the sweet spot someday, as always a good mix between timings and MHz and not to much Volt, not only raw speed.

Surely in near future most high end systems may run with 16 GB setup as a standart and the devs may use 8 GB requirement as a standart for almost every triple A game. Although "high end PCs" do not run at a "requirement spot", they run twice than that, else a performance user may lose a tear.

baris_ said:

Thanks mates.

What about brands? By my google searches it seems that really anything from Corsair, Crucial, G. Skill, Kingston, Transcend and Mushkin is good, or do you guys think one or two really stand out?

Click to expand...

None stand out. Unless you are running AMD to which the general public says stay away from Kingston.

Some boards are simply incompatible with certain brands or series*, i had such issues a lot in the past although i used a freaky "baby board" with high risk of incompatibility. But in general most reputable manufacturers are more or less face to face, some offer better sink so it can be a individual bonus but in general i would say simply use the best price for the current needs. *Not a problem, most good vendors offer a free exchange in term brand incompatible. As with every electronic, the hotter it runs the less stable, so it is not bad to get a "sink bonus" in term the price is only marginally higher but not every sink may fit.

DDR3 runs fine WITHOUT heatsinks, even when overclocking them. So ANY heatsink is what you seem to call a "sink bonus".

99% of the proper ram (meaning DDR3/1.5-1.65v/reasonable speeds) will work just fine. If the OP wants to make 100% sure, look at the QVL list and buy something off there.

I had a stack of Mushkin 1.5V RAM inside my SFF that was running at over 60 C or so, probably up to 70C during extended load, barely able to touch the sink and it even had a small sink added... so much about your so called "not hot at all". It totaly depends on the system and your call is surely toward huge tower systems with good ventilation it seems. I was using a infrared temp gun in order to make exact measurements, i dont trust my fingers only.

I was contacting Mushkin and they told me, although not cool it is not a problem at all. I still enjoy a bit lesser than that but i guess nowadays the modules got even lesser heat dissipation and may not reach such temperature levels anymore. Ultimately, the standart answer is not always possible, everyone have to pick the appropriate solution for themself.

Additionally i have my hardware right under the roof at my home and sometimes in the summer period it can become over 30 C room temp, not a problem to my body (i love it) but the PC will sweat a lot, every single part may have use for additional cooling. The advantage: I have almost no need for heating up my room in the winter, all it takes is a huge TV, HIFI, many PCs and stuff... so i have it very "energy efficient" by using "wastage" as space heater. Another advantage is the generally low humidity, so every kind of corrision of expensive elecronics is nearly impossible, but at the same time very few dust because i use a infrared heating panel as a additional space heater in term hardware wastage not sufficient. Just to say that we all have different situations and needs.

Ivy said:

I had a stack of Mushkin 1.5V RAM inside my SFF that was running at over 60 C or so, probably up to 70C during extended load, barely able to touch the sink and it even had a small sink added... so much about your so called "not hot at all". It totaly depends on the system and your call is surely toward huge tower systems with good ventilation it seems. I was using a infrared temp gun in order to make exact measurements, i dont trust my fingers only.

I was contacting Mushkin and they told me, although not cool it is not a problem at all. I still enjoy a bit lesser than that but i guess nowadays the modules got even lesser heat dissipation and may not reach such temperature levels anymore. Ultimately, the standart answer is not always possible, everyone have to pick the appropriate solution for themself.

Click to expand...

If RAM without heatsinks is such a problem, why does most DDR3 server RAM come as bare sticks???
That's the epitome of stability, if it was a problem they would need heatsinks.

The heatsink is a marketing tool more than anything, it makes the RAM "look cool". It has a bling factor.
It makes people go "I want this because it's prettyyyyyyyyy".

Until you get into at least the 1.8V range, assuming you have any semblance of airflow, you don't need heatsinks.
And even if you had heatsinks with no airflow you'd still have problems.

Those temps are fine for ram anyway as Mushkin said.

That said, sure if there isn't adequate airflow it could be a problem... having proper airflow is a given. If you put sticks in a oven(SFF) they are going to be hot though.

Anyone can think of exceptions to the rule to make their case. The proof however is in the vast majority, not one off's.

But servers are not running in a sometimes 30C+ environment and inside sometimes small cases, they are running in huge well cooled rooms 24-25C or maybe even less. The room temperature and ventilation of parts is a huge factor. Additionally servers are not using OC RAM i think, most performance gamers may use OC RAMs, that are running above "initial spec", in that term they produce dissipation that is higher than sever RAM. However, it is surely correct that the sink is nowadays mainly a marketing instrument, but i think sometimes it can be useful in order not to let the RAM sweat to much for special conditions (the conditions i have for example). Servers always run with highest stability in mind and even ECC RAMs with additional performance loss, they just want endless amount of RAM at max stability... performance is a low demand and as lower performance as lesser dissipation.

Sure, people may think i just want to pick a good reason in order to judge my sink, or any sink at all,... but seriously if it goes above 60-70C you can keep it for yourself i dont want to deal with RAM having such temps because it will surely decrease stability and i want good timings, maybe even 1T (even 2+ channels) without having to worry about possible stability loss. 2 of my systems was indeed able to achieve such specs but i would feel unsafe if they dont stay well cooled, so a sink is useful. I guess its a question of, if someone just wants RAM or RAM used under special condition, high room temp, bad case and good timings... the full bag with less stability loss. 95% of the people may not need sinks... maybe... i cant judge, but there is surely exceptions.

Well usually OCer make a huge deal out of temps but when it comes to RAM not so much of a matter anymore, i dunno. I guess even RAM can benefit from cooler temps for higher stability. Usually its not a matter what works or what dont work, its is always a matter how stable a system will be able to run, there is always some instability, a bulletproof stability is a myth.

I work in a Data Center (15+ years). I deal with servers. They do NOT have a lot of space in them at all. That said, they have a lot of fans in them for airflow so all is well on that front. As far as ambient temps, sure its not 30C intake, but ASHRAE (governing body for Data Center environmental) allows up to an 80F intake temp and a lot of our servers (our entire production row, truth me told) are running just fine there.

Servers are not running overclocked ram, correct. And unless the user overclocks their ram, its not running over spec either.

Did you miss the review we have on the front page regarding the samsung sticks I assume? If you search for it, you will see that these sticks overclocked to the moon to 1.65v+ without heatsinks on them.

Again, unless there are extenuating circumstances, you do not need heatsinks on DDR3. Ive had sticks to 1.75v that didn't even get warm to the touch in fact (open air case with no airflow for the record).

You can also ask Woomack, our local memory guru since you seemingly do not want to believe us (popular sentiment).

sometimes it can be useful in order not to let the RAM sweat to much for special conditions (the conditions i have for example).

Click to expand...

As I said, 'one off's' are not the rule.

My RAMs are overclocked in several spots, but it is the clock considered stable by manufacturer (well not 1T, this is additional OC). Originally one of the RAM is a 1333 MHz chip that has been tested and specced to be stable to run at 1600 MHz by the manufacturer (Mushkin) for example but the chips are not specced for such speeds, so it is OC. What i can say, at least the old Mushkin RAM (very old, guess 4 year already) can truly heat up a lot, i made measurements.

Yes i missed the review, i guess the time has changed and nowadays the Samsung RAM and such may have much lesser heat dissipation to the point where no sink is needed anymore. But it was not always the case that the DDR3 chips was running so cool. However, nowadays i think the manufacturers are keeping up the sink-stuff for marketing purpose only, even if they know exactly that the new chips are not anymore heating up. Anyway, thanks for infos i may check out the situation for my next gen systems in about a year. Finally, yes it seems to be mainly marketing nowadays but in term the price is just marginally higher i think it would simply be a additional goodie... in order to make a system more favorable in term of looks, so we may say it is a "design element" that may have a price. Not new at all... many gamers are looking for "nice looking" parts, not peformance only.

Whatever it says on the label is what it is. Don't get into the crap that CPUz says (DDR3 1333 but its rated to 1866). I went around and around with some other clown on this stuff until I asked a Kingston rep at CES what that deal was. Just go by what's on the label and do not concern yourself with the underlying JEDEC specs.

As I said earlier, its a non issue in MOST cases. Surely if you are sitting in the core of the earth with a SFF PC you would want to make concessions for that environment... but again, its a one off and not remotely the rule.

EDIT: Here is that sammy review (1.35v to start, ended up at 1.58v and 2400MHz, no heatsinks) - http://www.overclockers.com/samsung-ddr3-1600-ram/

DDR3 is specified to run up to 85*C in home environment. You feel it's hot above 50*C but hard to say how high are they running without thrermal sensors or some kind of probes next to chips.
Earlier DDR3 like 1-2GB modules from Elpida, Qimonda, Micron ... were running at higher temps than new IC.

My PSC/BBSE kits which I use for benching are without heatsinks and I run them up to 1.95V on air.

Here is screenshot from Crucial 4x4GB 1600 Ballistix Elite thread. 4 modules next to each other without additional cooling - temps read from build-in sensors / Crucial software. Memory is overclocked and at 1.7V. During full load was below 50*C as I remember ( it's somewhere in that thread ).