4 core or not 8GB? Any Guesses?

[supaxi]

Hi,

With my less than unlimited budget, I have to decide between a dual core and 8GB ram or a Quad and 4 GB ram. Of course, if I need more ram later, I can add it, but I can't exactly add more cores onto a CPU. Now, while I don't have any application that can use 8GB ram, I'm worried that Vista might struggle with only 4GB on board. Anyone have any suggestions? I usually run a web server, MySQL server, Visual Studio, and Photoshop at the same time. Anyone have any recommendations or experience on what gives you the best performance since quads are clocked lower also?

Thanks!!

 

[cmdrdredd]

quad + 4GB because you can spread each app out to one core dedicated only for it, but you can't really dedicate memory the same way. I think the performance gained from a quad CPU outweighs 8GB of memory.

 

[krotchy]

4 GB is pretty much the sweet spot in vista, so you dont need to worry about struggling. In fact adding 8GB will likely not add any noticeable effect at all.

4 Cores is definitely the way to go, especially considering you are planning on running 4 fairly hefty programs at once, your going to need the threading power alot more.

Also the Q6600 will be 260 bucks if you wait till July 22nd, and I bet 8 Gigs of RAM will cost around 400 bucks then, so you could try both. But if you need it now, go quad core and 2x2GB for sure.

 

[supaxi]

Thanks for the help, I think you are right, if I need more ram later, I can add it as needed.

Thanks!!

 

[lopri]

Do you have a copy of Vista now? It's best to try out yourself and get the 'feel' of how it manages memory, IMO. I have no idea how much memory those server apps that you listed so I can't say much. For an enthusiast, I agree with others in that 4GB is ideal. Just to give you an idea - After 2 months of installation, leaving Firefox open (but minimized to taskbar) and running one modern game (Oblivion, Company of Heroes, etc.) chewed up over 3GB of actual memory. (not cached, but actively being used) I can easily crank up the usage above 6~7GB by running a couple virtual OSes, opening Windows Photo Gallery (or Photoshop Picture browser, for that matter), and running one game. If going with 4GB, pick 2x2GB sticks so that you have room for more sticks in the future.

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: lopri
Do you have a copy of Vista now? It's best to try out yourself and get the 'feel' of how it manages memory, IMO. I have no idea how much memory those server apps that you listed so I can't say much. For an enthusiast, I agree with others in that 4GB is ideal. Just to give you an idea - After 2 months of installation, leaving Firefox open (but minimized to taskbar) and running one modern game (Oblivion, Company of Heroes, etc.) chewed up over 3GB of actual memory. (not cached, but actively being used) I can easily crank up the usage above 6~7GB by running a couple virtual OSes, opening Windows Photo Gallery (or Photoshop Picture browser, for that matter), and running one game. If going with 4GB, pick 2x2GB sticks so that you have room for more sticks in the future.

+1

I have no idea how much memory those apps you listed use also. If it exceeds the standard 4GB physical memory bank, then your on your swapfile.

So in that case, the 8GB would be a far better upgrade then the quadcore.


yeah i know i just restated him. But he said everything i wanted to say.

 

[lopri]

An awesome deal for 2x2GB kit.

http://shop4.outpost.com/product/5200607

Lifetime warranty and even EPP-ready!

 

[lopri]

I know it sucks that it's not July 22nd yet.. You could have both 4 cores and 4 sticks and probably some change left over with your current budget. :brokenheart: