Why should i? Im not the one telling people what to do, with the `almighty` entitled attitude. I know what i do and my own case use needs more ram than i have; as a home user.
Is buying 128GB RAM overkill?
- Thread starter sybaris
- Start date
Why should i? Im not the one telling people what to do, with the `almighty` entitled attitude. I know what i do and my own case use needs more ram than i have; as a home user.
Associate
- Joined
- 5 Apr 2004
- Posts
- 1,214
That's just being pedantic. The phrase home user obviously refers to a typical home user use case. Which you obviously don't need 128gb of ram for. Fine if that's what you need in your home but the ops use case I would define as fairly typical for a gamer and they've not mentioned anything so far that would benefit from large quantities of ram.
Associate
- Joined
- 30 Dec 2011
- Posts
- 605
- Location
- Essex
Literally pointless, get the fastest stuff you can afford
Associate
- Joined
- 5 Apr 2004
- Posts
- 1,214
What are you on about?
"Entitled" How?
Telling people what to do? How?
I made a comment about a typical home user. I couldn't give a **** what your home use case is as it certainly isn't typical if you need 128gb of ram.
I then commented on the information the op has provided so far.
No sense to automatically get the fastest possible.
3600MHz with fast latencies would be pretty much optimum for Ryzen at least if wanting XMP fire and forget setup.
3800MHz isn't certain to avoid hitting InfinityFabric limit and decoupling memory clock from IF would degrade gaming performance by increasing memory latency.
Any faster would need pretty much golden sample CPU to keep IF running in sync.
And while faster kit would work also at 3600MHz, it would need manual adjusting of settings.
32GB in 2021 is all a home user needs at max even a home power user, this is only 32GB because some games take advantage of it now like FS2020 and due to some video editing software now for home use that can take advantage of it too. Most home users can easily get away with 16GB max if not using demanding software and not power users.
I am an I.T professional power user and have 64GB in my workstation system currently and finding it's more than enough for my work right now but once prices come down I may go 128GB to have some space to create some RAM drives or to run some VMs, my work build before had 32GB and was fine too an X99 system before. My current workstation here :- https://www.overclockers.co.uk/forums/posts/34846430/ some specs in signature too but has been updated more since and link will explain the changes, it's a dual 3090 system for work first with 64GB and I do some gaming on it too.. now tell me a home user needs more than 32GB.
No home user needs more than 32GB unless they are using some professional software that can make use of it. 128GB for a home user is just silly and 3/4 will never be used and sat idle.
Some people on this forum offer very bad advice and in some cases even offer dangerous advice when it comes to PSUs and wiring up a system recently too.
@sybaris 32GB is the max you need for what you have said and you will be more than happy with that till your next platform upgrade again.
I am an I.T professional power user and have 64GB in my workstation system currently and finding it's more than enough for my work right now but once prices come down I may go 128GB to have some space to create some RAM drives or to run some VMs, my work build before had 32GB and was fine too an X99 system before. My current workstation here :- https://www.overclockers.co.uk/forums/posts/34846430/ some specs in signature too but has been updated more since and link will explain the changes, it's a dual 3090 system for work first with 64GB and I do some gaming on it too.. now tell me a home user needs more than 32GB.
No home user needs more than 32GB unless they are using some professional software that can make use of it. 128GB for a home user is just silly and 3/4 will never be used and sat idle.
Some people on this forum offer very bad advice and in some cases even offer dangerous advice when it comes to PSUs and wiring up a system recently too.
@sybaris 32GB is the max you need for what you have said and you will be more than happy with that till your next platform upgrade again.
Last edited:
What is the full spec of your system and what software do you run that you think will take advantage of this much memory ? Any professional software being used or is it just general home user based software ?
What a ridiculous reaction towards people asking what your use case is.
More than 32GB of RAM is nowhere near typical for a home user, I find the fact you're so reticent to simply tell people why you need several times that amount highly questionable. As for why you should tell people? You're on a forum for discussion and you chose to chime in, moreover this is a thread with a user asking for advice regarding how much memory he needs as a fairly typical home user. Given his suggested use case he needs nowhere near the amount he is considering, if you can suggest reasons as to why he might why won't you? Otherwise why did you choose to pop in and inform people on the forum (a place for debate and discussion) that you use a gigantic amount of memory even for professional use and then sit there attacking people for trying to engage with you?
Permabanned
- Joined
- 9 Aug 2008
- Posts
- 35,711
This isn't the way things should work. If your not using it why get something that isn't been used. It's just a waste.
Associate
- Joined
- 4 Jun 2020
- Posts
- 2,410
Unless you're doing heavy productivity work of sorts, and much more than just streaming / YouTube videos / making music, 32 Gb is still going to be loads.
Its also not a great idea to spend a lot on DDR4 right now with DDR5 right around the corner.
Its also not a great idea to spend a lot on DDR4 right now with DDR5 right around the corner.
I’m sensing some frustration here. Everyone has a view and all opinions are welcome.
By asking the question I have a better idea and can make a more informed decision.
At least now I realise that it is a waste to spend on something that won’t be used which I
Wouldn’t have done had I not posted the question.
By asking the question I have a better idea and can make a more informed decision.
At least now I realise that it is a waste to spend on something that won’t be used which I
Wouldn’t have done had I not posted the question.
Associate
- Joined
- 1 Dec 2006
- Posts
- 69
I have 64Gb. My 6 year old computer had 32Gb.
I'm not a TYPICAL home user.
I use my computer for work, which is web development, and does not come close to utilising the RAM.
Though I include in my hobbies:
AI Programming (Computer vision, etc) - Uses large datasets.
3D Modelling and rendering (initially up to 16k images, for them to be later downscaled)
I don't get paid, I'm not even good enough for that. I do it to learn about them, and because I enjoy the topic.
So I consider these HOME uses.
Even 64Gb is not enough for some of the bigger tasks I try to do.
I also hate virtual memory. It's a necessary evil.
Here I'm sitting with VSCode open, a web browser, mysql workbench, and my email open.
9.1Gb RAM used, 12Gb virtual memory used.
I read people talking all about memory speed, and not wanting much RAM.
That is silly. If all you wanted was speed, you'd get a lot (64Gb min, and disable virtual memory).
I read 'not worth DDR4, DDR5 is soon'.
That is also not a TYPICAL home user argument.
Most people buy a computer and stick with it for years, by the time they upgrade next, they could be on DDR6.
I know the OP has stated his uses, and they seem trivial, and I'd agree not much RAM is needed for those, but the thread devolved into arguments about what are 'home' requirements.
Answer is: They vary.
Someone looking to do trivial things without using virtual memory, is going to need a lot of ram.
Someone looking to learn and practice more demanding uses, is also going to need a lot of ram.
I'm not a TYPICAL home user.
I use my computer for work, which is web development, and does not come close to utilising the RAM.
Though I include in my hobbies:
AI Programming (Computer vision, etc) - Uses large datasets.
3D Modelling and rendering (initially up to 16k images, for them to be later downscaled)
I don't get paid, I'm not even good enough for that. I do it to learn about them, and because I enjoy the topic.
So I consider these HOME uses.
Even 64Gb is not enough for some of the bigger tasks I try to do.
I also hate virtual memory. It's a necessary evil.
Here I'm sitting with VSCode open, a web browser, mysql workbench, and my email open.
9.1Gb RAM used, 12Gb virtual memory used.
I read people talking all about memory speed, and not wanting much RAM.
That is silly. If all you wanted was speed, you'd get a lot (64Gb min, and disable virtual memory).
I read 'not worth DDR4, DDR5 is soon'.
That is also not a TYPICAL home user argument.
Most people buy a computer and stick with it for years, by the time they upgrade next, they could be on DDR6.
I know the OP has stated his uses, and they seem trivial, and I'd agree not much RAM is needed for those, but the thread devolved into arguments about what are 'home' requirements.
Answer is: They vary.
Someone looking to do trivial things without using virtual memory, is going to need a lot of ram.
Someone looking to learn and practice more demanding uses, is also going to need a lot of ram.
Associate
- Joined
- 4 Jun 2020
- Posts
- 2,410
We already covered all that.
You have a work PC at home, not a facebook machine.
If you have the need for the ram then you buy it. If you aren't using it then you don't.
'get a lot and disable virtual memory' ...
My ram is better than 99% of other systems thanks and I haven't yet exceeded how much I have for it to dip into virtual memory.
Getting higher density ram would slow my PC down because it would have rubbish speed and timings.
You have a work PC at home, not a facebook machine.
If you have the need for the ram then you buy it. If you aren't using it then you don't.
'get a lot and disable virtual memory' ...
My ram is better than 99% of other systems thanks and I haven't yet exceeded how much I have for it to dip into virtual memory.
Getting higher density ram would slow my PC down because it would have rubbish speed and timings.
Fair enough, but like said above, this is not a home PC, you have a workstation use case there, or even a server.
If a 'typical' home user was to buy 64GB, the PC would likely be obsolete (or something else breaks which makes it so) long before it chews through all that RAM.
Associate
- Joined
- 1 Dec 2006
- Posts
- 69
Maybe you missed the part where I said I have 9.1Gb/64Gb ram being used, yet still have 12Gb of virtual memory being used.
If you have virtual memory enabled, it is ALWAYS being used, no matter how much you have.
Are there actual definitions, or is that your opinion?
My opinion tells me, my uses are personal to me, there's no 'work' being done (except for the web development, which I admitted was not the reason I need RAM), therefore it's 'home use'.
It definitely is no server, I have a few. One for web/email/database, another media server, and another private gitlab server. 8Gb, 4Gb and 16Gb RAM respectively.
This computer serves nothing but the user.
Associate
- Joined
- 4 Jun 2020
- Posts
- 2,410
Yes if you have virtual memory being used that's not at all a bad thing as long as you still have free ram.
This doesn't slow your PC down, especially not if the virtual memory is going to an SSD.
There is no noticeable difference between switching virtual memory on or off as long as you are not running out of ram.
I have a second PC with 8 Gb ram and a Pentium. Actually feels faster to use just in windows because there isn't as much stuff on it and no background apps and such.
This doesn't slow your PC down, especially not if the virtual memory is going to an SSD.
There is no noticeable difference between switching virtual memory on or off as long as you are not running out of ram.
I have a second PC with 8 Gb ram and a Pentium. Actually feels faster to use just in windows because there isn't as much stuff on it and no background apps and such.
Associate
- Joined
- 1 Dec 2006
- Posts
- 69
You do not want an SSD to be the location of your virtual memory, that is the fastest way to get through the drive's TBW. Unless maybe if you have an older 'disposable' SSD that you won't be upset when it starts to fail.
It consumes quite a lot of your IOPS. If you're using the same drive for your virtual memory as the one you're loading a program/game from, it will actually be a noticeable difference in load speed.
Associate
- Joined
- 4 Jun 2020
- Posts
- 2,410
This is actually not true at all. Ive had the same 128 Gb Crucial M4 SSD for around 8 years with maybe over 50 windows reinstallations and never moved virtual memory off of it?
Its still at over 90% health with zero errors.
The whole 'total writes' stuff is garbage as the tolerance is actually vastly beyond what people think.
I have purposefully tried to batter the crap out of it with reinstalls just to see for science and it is still fsr above and beyond any expectations.