8 vs 16 GB of memory

Dravenspur · Aug 7, 2016

I was wondering about 8 vs 16 GB of memory. I know 8 is ok for gaming rigs these days, but do you think I ought to just buy 16, or do you think I will have to upgrade again before too long and I can move to 16 in a couple years? I only ask because 8 GB is starting to become the minimum for some games now (No Man's Sky, for example; or is that the first game people have seen so far with a minimum requirement of 8 GB?), and since I'm building this brand new rig, I'd like to be set for a while.

Also, I had a question about upgrading memory in the future. Is memory one of those things where you turn off the computer, pop out the old memory, pop in the new sticks, turn it back on and you're good? As long as the motherboard supports the speed and size, you're ok right? I haven't upgraded memory in a long time (video card, yes...memory, no). If I go with 8 and want to upgrade to 16 in the future, I'd like to know how to upgrade it. Thanks for responses.

Jeff G · Aug 7, 2016

What CPU do you have?

dudleycpa · Aug 7, 2016

The process you described is an excellent description on how you go about upgrading memory.

Since 16GB isn't that expensive anymore why not just go that route?

Alaric · Aug 7, 2016

I got 16 GB for my new build last month. I had 8 GB in the old rig and I found I was using up to 6 GB often enough for it to be an issue. There are some browsers that eat RAM like potato chips, and I could feel my system slow down well before I hit 8 GB usage. I figured the new stuff is twice as fast and twice as much of it should hold me for the future. And if some unforeseen need shows up I can always get another pair of 8 GB sticks for the empty slots. I wouldn't build a new rig with less than 16 GB unless I was using a 32 bit OS. And I wouldn't use a 32 bit OS.

Tír na nÓg · Aug 7, 2016

^This.

I was set on "8GB is enough" til I upgrade to a x99 platform where you need at least 4x4GB to enjoy the Quad channel tech.

Difference between now and before is that I can have a huge excel file opened with a couple of Adobe apps, a game and loads of browser tabs.

Right now, without any demanding app running, I am already a bit over 3GB (A few tabs in Firefox, some news streaming, BitTorrent, Steam...).

And with the price difference between 8 and 16GB, there is no reason not to go with 16GB IMO.

Kenrou · Aug 7, 2016

I had seen my old rig hit 9gb-10gb on occasion, heavy multitasking and gaming at the same time, that's why i went 2x8gb with this build. Was fairly cheap as well at the time for memory that came out a few weeks earlier.

Lochekey · Aug 7, 2016

I will echo what the others have said. If you are building a new rig for more than just web surfing. Go 16gb, I recommend 16gb to anyone building a new rig nowadays.

LutaWicasa · Aug 7, 2016

8 gigs = apartment
16 gigs = house
A bit more elbow room and comfort in a house.

As to pop out old/pop in new...there may be a setting or two in bios that might require attention. Nothing earth shattering.

JrClocker · Aug 7, 2016

16 GB is the minimum I would recommend if you are running a 64-bit operating system.

As more games go to 64-bit, the developers will find ways to use even more RAM.

Heck - if I have 10 browser tabs open I can easily use 4 to 6 GB of RAM!

Woomack · Aug 8, 2016

I thought that 8GB is enough till I started to play some games like Civilization V on a large map. After 2h+ with some other applications in the background there was already 9GB in use. The same in some other games. If you play longer then Windows is not refreshing all RAM and you may see 10GB+ when at start was ~4GB.
On the other hand when there is less RAM then OS is working better to clean it faster what is also interesting.
Since price isn't high then I would get 16GB and don't think about upgrading for longer. If you have older DDR3 platform then I wouldn't invest in RAM but think to move to DDR4 and then get 16GB. That's just my opinion but I understand that not all want/wish to spend money on the latest hardware when it's not much faster.

TechWizard · Aug 20, 2016

I'm at the point where I have to manage what I use and what I don't use on my 8GB laptop and it makes me reluctant to recommend clients anything less than 16GB.

This is what my memory usage looks on a normal basis and I don't have that many tabs open in chrome. I know there have to be others out there that experience the same thing!

I don't know how I do it. I feel like I must be doing something wrong, but I don't even have every program I normally use open. This is why I decided to personally go with 32GB.

EarthDog · Aug 20, 2016

What is shootergame.exe that is taking up 9GB?

Its tough for me to use 16GB... even when playing BF4, Doom, Battlefront, Dirt, etc... I rarely see over 9GB total.

TechWizard · Aug 20, 2016

Ark: Survival Evolved. Just Cause 3 sometimes uses over 12.

wingman99 · Aug 21, 2016

With 50 Tabs open in chrome and playing BF4 I only use 10GB. I just started the game to see the amount.

TechWizard · Aug 22, 2016

50 tabs of what though? Most sites I use often have heavy interfaces or video playing on them. I can only assume that is why I have a few chrome.exe's using 200MB+ each. I can barely open 20 tabs without surpassing 6GB total usage while only running my security camera software, discord, and Team Viewer... and that's not even half of what I like to run.

If I have 50 tabs of just webpages with text on them, then sure they don't use as much memory.

No offense, but I don't understand why your benchmark for testing gaming memory usage is a 3 year old FPS game. In my experience, it's RPG's or large world games that use the most memory. GTAV, The Witcher 3, Fallout 4, ARK, etc... for the most part that is where I see 9GB+ memory usage from a single game. I just got Fallout 4 together with a bunch of mods. I haven't had the chance to check out how that will affect things, but I have a feeling FO4 will be surpassing 12-14GB usage easily with the amount of additions I downloaded. Games are only going to get more memory intensive from here on out - FPS not so much, but RPG's and games with extremely large worlds are that's for sure.

For those who want to play hardware intensive RPG's I have a feeling 16GB of RAM isn't going to cut it in another year unless you're willing to turn some settings down.

Tír na nÓg · Aug 22, 2016

I run 16GB, never goes above 10/12GB with lots of Firefox tabs open and games like the Withcer 3 (yeah, finally^^), WoW...

M@rk · Aug 22, 2016

Barely had an issue with 4GB

I mean ofcourse i dont play heavy duty games but still.

wingman99 · Aug 22, 2016

TechWizard said:
50 tabs of what though? Most sites I use often have heavy interfaces or video playing on them. I can only assume that is why I have a few chrome.exe's using 200MB+ each. I can barely open 20 tabs without surpassing 6GB total usage while only running my security camera software, discord, and Team Viewer... and that's not even half of what I like to run.

If I have 50 tabs of just webpages with text on them, then sure they don't use as much memory.

No offense, but I don't understand why your benchmark for testing gaming memory usage is a 3 year old FPS game. In my experience, it's RPG's or large world games that use the most memory. GTAV, The Witcher 3, Fallout 4, ARK, etc... for the most part that is where I see 9GB+ memory usage from a single game. I just got Fallout 4 together with a bunch of mods. I haven't had the chance to check out how that will affect things, but I have a feeling FO4 will be surpassing 12-14GB usage easily with the amount of additions I downloaded. Games are only going to get more memory intensive from here on out - FPS not so much, but RPG's and games with extremely large worlds are that's for sure.

For those who want to play hardware intensive RPG's I have a feeling 16GB of RAM isn't going to cut it in another year unless you're willing to turn some settings down.

Do you really need to load the hole world game into memory, it can spool from the HDD in time to reach the other side according to game requirements for memory.

50 Chrome tabs using 7GB then I just ran the new Star Wars battlefront game it was a total of 11GBs with Chrome, people don't need more then 16GB for gaming you could even do just fine with 8GB just for gaming.

TechWizard · Aug 22, 2016

How would you explain my screen shot then? Ark was using 9GB in the picture I posted. It probably isn't the first game to do so and will not be the last.

I'll admit ARK is technically a "work in progress" and it is probably poorly optimized, but this what the gaming industry has become. There are more and more games becoming early access or having some sort of revolutionary graphics engine.

Just Cause 3 is a AAA game and people with 8GB couldn't play it - it just stuttered too hard and it's minimum requirement is listed as 6GB.

I wouldn't doubt it if gaming companies were beginning to enter an era where they could under-estimate hardware requirements on some titles here and there so they can compare a new gen game's requirements to lesser titles without throwing the fact out there that you won't have an enjoyable experience without excessive hardware to play them.

I made that mistake with DOOM prior to purchasing my current rig. I bought DOOM thinking it would run on low settings no problem on my older rig with great frame rates and I was wrong (Yes, this was mostly a graphics card issue, but RAM was also proving to be a limiting factor). It actually ran worse on low and medium settings and I ended up playing through it on high until I got to points where it was too intensive to deal with dropping below 10FPS. What did I do? I started putting together a new build, got advice, and threw together an updated rig within the same month. I wonder how many people do that? Probably more than we think.

Let's say you buy a game - you find out you don't have enough memory to play it without capping constantly... what do you do? Return the game or purchase more memory? I'd purchase more memory because gaming is a hobby of mine and that's the point, right? To play the game.

I just don't see the point in limiting myself or others from a selection of games just because I/they wanted to save $50-75 on memory they "might not need".

I don't remember the last time I had an excess of memory problem at home or at work, it is always the other way around.

Tír na nÓg · Aug 22, 2016

TechWizard said:
How would you explain my screen shot then? Ark was using 9GB in the picture I posted. It probably isn't the first game to do so and will not be the last.

I'll admit ARK is technically a "work in progress" and it is probably poorly optimized, but this what the gaming industry has become. There are more and more games becoming early access or having some sort of revolutionary graphics engine.

Just Cause 3 is a AAA game and people with 8GB couldn't play it - it just stuttered too hard and it's minimum requirement is listed as 6GB.

I wouldn't doubt it if gaming companies were beginning to enter an era where they could under-estimate hardware requirements on some titles here and there so they can compare a new gen game's requirements to lesser titles without throwing the fact out there that you won't have an enjoyable experience without excessive hardware to play them.

I made that mistake with DOOM prior to purchasing my current rig. I bought DOOM thinking it would run on low settings no problem on my older rig with great frame rates and I was wrong (Yes, this was mostly a graphics card issue, but RAM was also proving to be a limiting factor). It actually ran worse on low and medium settings and I ended up playing through it on high until I got to points where it was too intensive to deal with dropping below 10FPS. What did I do? I started putting together a new build, got advice, and threw together an updated rig within the same month. I wonder how many people do that? Probably more than we think.

Let's say you buy a game - you find out you don't have enough memory to play it without capping constantly... what do you do? Return the game or purchase more memory? I'd purchase more memory because gaming is a hobby of mine and that's the point, right? To play the game.

I just don't see the point in limiting myself or others from a selection of games just because I/they wanted to save $50-75 on memory they "might not need".

I don't remember the last time I had an excess of memory problem at home or at work, it is always the other way around.

I run Doom with the rig in sig with no drop below 50 FPS@1080p maxed out... Are you sure there is not something wrong with your Windows install, maybe a malware or a virus? Never heard of any game needing more than 8GB...

8 vs 16 GB of memory

Member

Member

Member

New Member

Member

Member

Senior Pink Member

, Immutable, Administrator

AKA: JrMiyagi

Benching Team Leader

Member

Gulper Nozzle Co-Owner

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Similar threads