Are we likely to ever need more than 16 GB RAM on this generation of PCs?

[Vexr]

This is for gaming of course. I'm still using 12 GB of DDR3 and seem to have plenty of head room. I've even had an intermittent problem where 1 stick goes missing (showing as 4 GB hardware reserved), so only 8 GB of RAM was available, and I didn't notice any difference.

I'm wondering about upgrading and going for 2x4 GB DDR4 sticks, and then buying another matching pair as funds allow.

By the time we need 32 GB of RAM as the new standard, will we all be crossing over on to DDR5 / much faster clocked DDR4 RAM systems, and the current generation of DDR4-using processors and RAM being old hat like DDR3 now is? Or are we likely to be seeing the benefits of 32 GB any time soon, making it advisable to go with 2x8 GB sticks now with that upgrade in mind?

 

[Finners]

2x8gb sticks is the minimum I'd recommended to anyone buying new now.

RAM prices are dropping quite fast and I've seen 16gb 3000mhz ram for 100 quid a couple of times in the past few weeks. For that money it's a no brainer!

I think it's been shown on a few modern games (Battlefield springs to mind) that with the game and a 'normal' amount of background processes going that you do hit 8gb usage and then it impacts the gaming experience with stutters etc.

 

[greatash]

yes I think a decent 16gb kit will last a good while. my 8gb 1866 ddr3 has lasted me from 2011 until now and still does the job on the majority of games, the only two games where ive noticed issues is forza horizon 3 and battlefield V. Im switching to zen 2 with 3200 16gb soon.

Like you said by the time you'll need more than 16gb it'll be 2025+ and we'll have DDR5.

 

[arrkaye]

I have 32GB on my home desktop and its waayy overkill. I don't think I've ever seen it above 12-13. I only have it because each 8GB stick was about ~£40 and I thought why not?

My work machine on the other hand, 16GB was not enough. Had to up that to 32GB because of all the developer tools + SSMS.

 

[ZedPowered]

64GB on a 2011 v3 proc. Probably used upwards of 40GB so yea I’d say it’s useable.

 

[MartinPrince]

As you're using it for gaming I would say to save your money and put towards something else; 16GB is more than enough.

 

[PC777]

I did a motherboard, ram and cpu upgrade over Christmas without researching thoroughly enough and not upgrading for ages on just an 8GB ram build, so I ended up getting 32GB as I didn't want to upgrade ram later on, just to get a large amount at once in 2 slots and be done with it.

I doubt I'll even need the other 16GB but was surprised to see GTA just now using 13.5GB ram only at 1080p 60FPS, so getting close to maxing it if it was only 16GB. Wouldn't be surprised to see RDR 2 if it comes to PC continuing that large ram usage.

Also using Ram Cache III so trying to get some use out of any unused ram, but overall, 16GB's a much better option to use the extra cash on other parts of the build at least for gaming.

 

[clone]

I run 16gb at the moment and don't find that I'm having any problems but I'll upgrade to 32gb when and if the ram prices drop.

 

[Randomface74]

16 is plenty atm. Maybe in 5 years we'll want 32 but not yet.

 

[Oblivion]

I'm purely a gamer and don't do any video, photo editing etc etc... With loads of background applications open whilst gaming the most i have seen used is 16.5 GB in BFV... I have 32 GB of Ram and i am hoping its plenty for the next 5 years. Buying 64 GB and just gaming with it would be a waste. You'd have about 45-50 GB sat there which would never get used.

So in summary i would say 16 GB is still good for gaming. 32 GB to future proof yourself a bit more. Anything above that a total waste for a gaming PC.

 

[Deleted member 209350]

I did a motherboard, ram and cpu upgrade over Christmas without researching thoroughly enough and not upgrading for ages on just an 8GB ram build, so I ended up getting 32GB as I didn't want to upgrade ram later on, just to get a large amount at once in 2 slots and be done with it.

I doubt I'll even need the other 16GB but was surprised to see GTA just now using 13.5GB ram only at 1080p 60FPS, so getting close to maxing it if it was only 16GB. Wouldn't be surprised to see RDR 2 if it comes to PC continuing that large ram usage.

Also using Ram Cache III so trying to get some use out of any unused ram, but overall, 16GB's a much better option to use the extra cash on other parts of the build at least for gaming.

Its kind of strange, as you could play the same game on same settings on 16gb vs 32gb ram and they'll both use different amounts of RAM? Its quite strange

 

[chaparral]

When I built my system last summer i bought 32GB but it is over kill at the moment but I don't normally upgrade my ram & cpu for about 4 years

 

[fridayfred]

I need 32GB now not for my gaming but for running virtual machines, I game too, but 16GB is sufficient on my PC for that.

 

[edscdk]

16gb why would I downgrade, im sure intel/ Samsung / memory makers are in talks with Microsoft to bloat and slow windows... use more disk space, hog more CPU and use more RAM = happy day for all the big boys

 

[Psycho Sonny]

I did a motherboard, ram and cpu upgrade over Christmas without researching thoroughly enough and not upgrading for ages on just an 8GB ram build, so I ended up getting 32GB as I didn't want to upgrade ram later on, just to get a large amount at once in 2 slots and be done with it.

I doubt I'll even need the other 16GB but was surprised to see GTA just now using 13.5GB ram only at 1080p 60FPS, so getting close to maxing it if it was only 16GB. Wouldn't be surprised to see RDR 2 if it comes to PC continuing that large ram usage.

Also using Ram Cache III so trying to get some use out of any unused ram, but overall, 16GB's a much better option to use the extra cash on other parts of the build at least for gaming.

you must have a memory leak somewhere or your running a lot of rubbish in the background. 16GB is the max needed and probably will be for the next 10 years for gaming. GPU's aren't advancing fast enough to need above 16GB any time soon

 

[almoststew1990]

I certainly hope not as I am thinking with Ryzen 3 I can finally upgrade my 8GB DDR3 2133MHz RAM I got in 2010 (which cost me about £120 I think) to 16GB DDR4 I've never had any problems with 8GB although I don't have RGB "drivers" software packages running, or feel the need to install keyboard/mouse software or anything. No discord etc. The only start up program I have is Dropbox. So yes, in my view 16GB of RAM will be plenty, for me, for a long time as I am used to being frugal / sensible.

 

[Vexr]

When I made this thread I wasn't clued up on the fact DDR4 effectively has to be in a 1x matched pair dual-channel configuration, and not realising the other two slots were basically redundant. This wasn't so in the DDR3 system I was used to where you could sling in odd job bits of RAM without too much thought and still get stable dual channel in flex mode.

I've now got 16 GB of DDR4 (2 x 8 GB), and to be honest I'm often seeing higher VRAM usage than I am of the system RAM. I think I can safely conclude it'll be a very brave games developer that requires anyone to have more than 16 GB of RAM before about 2023, as adding more RAM to existing DDR4 systems in their spare slots means huge losses of speed/stability.

 

[MaXxBoulton]

I think I can safely conclude it'll be a very brave games developer that requires anyone to have more than 16 GB of RAM before about 2023, as adding more RAM to existing DDR4 systems in their spare slots means huge losses of speed/stability.

Why do you lose speed/stability from running unmatched sticks.

you can buy the same type of ram and it will be fine.
i have a system with 4 x 8gb crucial single channel sticks in, i got them months apart. 2 are 2400mhz cl16 and 2 are 2133mhz cl17 and all run fine. i overclocked them to 2800mhz and fixed timing to a lower cl16
system show dual channel too.

 

[Vexr]

Why do you lose speed/stability from running unmatched sticks.

you can buy the same type of ram and it will be fine.
i have a system with 4 x 8gb crucial single channel sticks in, i got them months apart. 2 are 2400mhz cl16 and 2 are 2133mhz cl17 and all run fine. i overclocked them to 2800mhz and fixed timing to a lower cl16
system show dual channel too.

I was largely going by the memory compatibility tables I've seen for AM4 motherboards, where it'll say some sticks are only supported for 2 slots rather than 4, or show that the supported speed will be 3200 MHz in 2 slots or 2400 MHz if using 4 with X brand RAM. That and some anecdotal evidence I've heard. Maybe that's relevant to Ryzen only and not Intel.

 

[MaXxBoulton]

I was largely going by the memory compatibility tables I've seen for AM4 motherboards, where it'll say some sticks are only supported for 2 slots rather than 4, or show that the supported speed will be 3200 MHz in 2 slots or 2400 MHz if using 4 with X brand RAM. That and some anecdotal evidence I've heard. Maybe that's relevant to Ryzen only and not Intel.

Ooo yer amd is poo with ram right now. This is something that needs sorting in the 3000 chips.

Although it is funny that Samsung ram is supported on a cpu made with a compony owned by samsung.... And none Samsung b die ram struggls to run.