• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

16 vs 32 gbs of ram

Not for gaming yet, 8 GB is still fine for them and 16 GB will be more than enough for many years.

I'd expect transcoding to stress the CPU much more than RAM but it's not something I do. A handbrake forum might have tips on optimizing speed. If it makes multiple passes through the source then there might be a tiny speed bump from being able to buffer a complete DVD or an extra 16 GB of the blu-ray into RAM. Maybe.
 
You should see more then tiny speed bump with 32 GB of memory if you are transcoding Blu-Rays. If you are also a heavy multitasker should see some major benefits as well.
 
I have 32GB, and I don't see much benefit over 16GB. You can have multiple Handbrakes open, each one transcoding one thing with threads=1, but I'm never sure if that's worth the hassle. And even 16GB could probably handle three or four.
 
Ken g6 said:
I have 32GB, and I don't see much benefit over 16GB. You can have multiple Handbrakes open, each one transcoding one thing with threads=1, but I'm never sure if that's worth the hassle. And even 16GB could probably handle three or four.
Click to expand...

Would depend more on the source quality, I know encoding 4k source uses a good deal of my RAM. But I only do one at a time.
 
For years, RAM requirements have slowly crept upwards. The current PC market trends seem to suggest that the creep may be over and that 16Gb may be the most anyone would really need/want for their desktop PC unless you do professional-level work. But 32Gb might let you have some fun with a RAM disk.
 
If the cost differential isn't terrible for your budget, get the 32gb. Memory is a bit like money in that you will always find a new project or application that will eat up what you thought was sufficient.

Also, if you are planning on using your system for 4 or 5 years (which seems reasonable given the recent pace of change out of Intel), then your file sizes may grow immeasurably over that time period.
 
Wrong forum, but even I would say 16GB is currently enough. I use around 3-4GB out of that daily. I'd skip 8GB, I was easily cracking 50% with that.
 
i've found 32 GB nice... as you can utilize the extra memory for disk caching... ie Romex PrimoCache. Just make sure you use a UPS...
 
I don't see the point in buying for the future this early in DDR4s life span. You'll see better price per GB, higher density, and faster speeds/lower timings at a given voltage as DDR4 matures.
 
DDR4 is pretty cheap. If your board has four slots get 2x8GB and see if that's enough.
 
128GB minimum. It'll scream....of course it depends on what you do. RNA-seq analysis likes memory and fast CPUs and many cores.

But for surfing the web 128GB is overkill
 
windows 7 works almost OK with 512MB, so I recommend 768 or 1GB!

but seriously, 99% will be fine nowadays with 8GB, 16GB is double that... 32GB is for very special use cases, if you are not sure you need 32GB you probably don't.
 
SPBHM said:
windows 7 works almost OK with 512MB, so I recommend 768 or 1GB!

but seriously, 99% will be fine nowadays with 8GB, 16GB is double that... 32GB is for very special use cases, if you are not sure you need 32GB you probably don't.
Click to expand...
Windows 7 may work OK with 1GB, but what about applications? Personally I think that any computer with a 32 bit CPU should be dumped and since memory is dirt cheap, no system should be allowed to come with less then 8GB of it.
 
arandomguy said:
I don't see the point in buying for the future this early in DDR4s life span. You'll see better price per GB, higher density, and faster speeds/lower timings at a given voltage as DDR4 matures.
Click to expand...

Exactly what I wanted to point out. Get 16 GB of fast DDR4 now (3200 mhz seems the sweetspot right now when including price) and if needed upgrade all of it to in couple years to faster and lower latency DDR4 32 GB. Skylake does greatly benefit in some scenarios from faster RAM.

32Gb RAM is only really need if you run large database or do some big data analysis stuff on the machine. Encoding is mostly CPU limited. Only way to speed that up is sacrifice some quality and go GPU/QuickSync encode route.
 
Xpage said:
128GB minimum. It'll scream....of course it depends on what you do. RNA-seq analysis likes memory and fast CPUs and many cores.

But for surfing the web 128GB is overkill
Click to expand...

Reminds me of how extravagant it felt in 1997/98 to have a system with 128 Mb of RAM. My previous system only had 16 Mb.
 
Beware of RAM caches, in the event of a random kernel crash (e.g. a driver causing BSOD) may corrupt your file-systems (even if you have battery/UPS). 32GB RAM are perfect for virtual machines, you can create your own mini cluster in your PC.

Let's say for Windows host you need 8GB, then 4GB RAM for a linux VM is a must if you are to use a modern GUI and some applications. Another 4GB RAM for say a Windows 7 VM or something, you are already at 16GB RAM.

Now, it's very easy to go over 16GB usage if you want. For instance, if you want to test a cluster of 3 Windows Server VMs connecting to 5 Linux VMs as backbone, but who does that 😛

Then there is also hardware and games that become more demanding. For instance, the new graphics cards have 8GB of VRAM, it wouldn't be very efficient to have a system that doesn't have at least 8GB of system RAM for the driver and the game.
 
16GB isn't enough for my work machine, with VS 2015, Android Studio, Sql Server Management Studio & various other tools all running.

my home machine does OK with 12GB
 
jamesdsimone said:
Any advantage to having 32 gb's. I will be transcoding with Linux/handbrake with some gaming with Win7.
Click to expand...

Nope, there will be very little if any benefits in that process. If you work with 4K video editing, you would probably gain a significant amount. Transcoding will in most cases be cpu limited.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top