Is 16GB enough for Game Dev?

[DeadlyTitan]

I am currently on an old system with 16 GB ram, i would like to know if its enough for Game dev

Programs i use will be

• Unity
• VS 2017
• Monogame
• Tiled
• Photoshop
• Illustrator

i'll be working on sprites, 2D assets, background images, tilesets, Visual Studio 2017. my system specs

• i7 3770(non K)
• H61 Board
• 2 x 8 GB Ram
• GTX 1060 6 GB
• 500 GB SSD

The reason i ask is cause 16GB is the max my motherboard can support, and those boards are no longer available, so i'll have to change both board and cpu if i need more, which can be a costly affair. Also I am currently moving to an another city and it'll take some time before i can set things up, maybe 2 weeks. Its just a piece of mind thing. It just helps me focus on current tasks at hand (packing and moving) than pondering weather it'll be enough until i can set it up and see for myself, also it'll be easier now to just grab a new board, cpu and ram, that is if its absolutely necessary and if 16 GB is not enough, cause is just convenient to set things up and start working right away without any other distractions.

So is 16 GB enough ? i also run chrome with a few tabs and a video player in the background.

 

[VirtualLarry]

16GB is barely enough for the Chrome browser, if @TornMind is to be believed. He was talking about needing a 32GB or even 64GB rig just for Chrome browsing, nevermind other stuff.

Clearly, OP, you need a ThreadRipper 1950X rig with 8 DIMM slots for Chrome.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

VL's sarcasm aside, yes, it's enough. In fact, those are pretty similar to the specs of our dev systems we get issued at work.

 

[DeadlyTitan]

VL's sarcasm aside, yes, it's enough. In fact, those are pretty similar to the specs of our dev systems we get issued at work.

That's good to know. thnx for the input

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Well, it should be enough, anyway.

As a general rule, your dev system should mimic the configs your customers will be using. So if you want the game to be playable on 3-4 year old hardware, then pull a DIMM out so you only have 8GB, and make it work well on your system before you ship it.

(Don't really do that, but I think you get my point.)

 

[nickmania]

I am using a Q6600 with 4gb of ram and a SSD to make a game with unreal engine. I also make the 3d desing in cinema 4d and have not use textures yet but work a lot with RAW files in photoshop and have no problems. if you have an ssd the paging is very fast. just my SSD has write near 40TB form all the paging and Photoshop cache with raw files.

 

[Hail The Brain Slug]

I used to dev from home using most of the same programs you list. I have 32GB and I rarely saw usage over 16GB even with multiple VS instances, Unity, and a ton of Chrone tabs and assorted other programs going.

Unity might balloon up a bit if your game has a lot of assets and large scenes loaded, though. Our project was extremely small, almost no assets in a single scene.

I'll check when I get to work where we have a much larger game with piles of assets and complex scenes to see if I am using over 16GB.

Edit: At work with our small/medium sized game (relative to AAA) in play mode, two VS instances (plugins and Unity project), some chrome tabs, slack, and perforce up I'm only using around 12GB. If you add Photoshop and Illustrator to that, you might be over 16GB page file. If you manage your programs instead of leaving everything open all the time, you should be fine, but it might limit your productivity if you're thrashing page writes or constantly opening and closing stuff.

 

[DaveSimmons]

Well, it should be enough, anyway.

As a general rule, your dev system should mimic the configs your customers will be using. So if you want the game to be playable on 3-4 year old hardware, then pull a DIMM out so you only have 8GB, and make it work well on your system before you ship it.

(Don't really do that, but I think you get my point.)

I disagree. Your QA systems should mimic the configs your customers will be using. Devs do also need access to other test systems for fixing bugs tied to lower speed, lower RAM, or a different GPU, but your main work PC should be as fast as your budget allows (within reason) so you spend less time waiting on your tools.

That said, 16 GB is enough to build Chromium from source so it's probably fine for your use. There might be times when some task is slower than it needs to be, but it sounds like you don't want to do a full system upgrade right now.

 

[Lordhumungus]

I disagree. Your QA systems should mimic the configs your customers will be using. Devs do also need access to other test systems for fixing bugs tied to lower speed, lower RAM, or a different GPU, but your main work PC should be as fast as your budget allows (within reason) so you spend less time waiting on your tools.

That said, 16 GB is enough to build Chromium from source so it's probably fine for your use. There might be times when some task is slower than it needs to be, but it sounds like you don't want to do a full system upgrade right now.

**In my experience as a QA Manager, it's actually beneficial to somewhat constrain developers in their hardware so that they have an experience closer to that of the end user. It's a balancing act for sure, as you don't want to cost everyone time, but you also want the end result to actually be usable for real end users.

I've found that as a general rule, telling a developer with powerful hardware that something runs or functions poorly on lower end hardware often falls on deaf ears until they have to experience the pain point for themselves and then it magically becomes a priority, or in fact "possible" to fix.

In a perfect world, this wouldn't be necessary, but I've found that in the reality we occupy, it absolutely is.

**Note that I am referring to game development specifically.

 

[DaveSimmons]

Perhaps I should have said "experienced developers" should get a fast PC, or even less kindly "good developers"

I understand your point, but a developer who doesn't see that kind of problem until you rub their nose in it needs to learn and grow a bit more. When QA gives me a ticket that I can't reproduce on a 16 GB i7-7700, I have i3 and Atom test PCs I can fire up to check for CPU speed issues.

 

[nopainnogain]

Fast machine to build, slow machine to test.

 

[soulbadguy]

Really depends on the size of your builds but VS and chrome together are usually heavy on the ram. Added to that a lot of programing and testing tools also requires additional memory proportional to the programing being tested; So for example VS 17 + a game being debugged + whatever valgrind etc...
If the machine is your primary dev box, i always recommend 32 Gig

 

[Chaotic42]

I'm going to go with the cop-out answer and say use your current system until you get to a point where you can afford a newer system. If you're maxing out your memory and it's costing you time and/or money, upgrade. The point of a development system is to allow you to make money. If its slowness is costing you money, you need to look into it.

 

[cbn]

Really depends on the size of your builds but VS and chrome together are usually heavy on the ram. Added to that a lot of programing and testing tools also requires additional memory proportional to the programing being tested; So for example VS 17 + a game being debugged + whatever valgrind etc...
If the machine is your primary dev box, i always recommend 32 Gig

If he really needs 32GB of RAM.....and on a budget.... there is always used LGA 2011 Workstations to consider. (They are pretty nice. I own a HP Z420 myself)

8 x 4GB DDR3 1333 ECC RDIMMs cost $40 (or less) last time I checked. Even 8 x 8GB DDR3 1333 ECC RDIMM is pretty cheap (a bit over $100 last time I checked).

 

[Alpha One Seven]

Fast machine to build, slow machine to test.

LOL

 

[soulbadguy]

Oups, i didnt carefully read OP post ; I though he was building a new rig speecifically for game dev.
To OP, dont try to predict the amount of RAM you will need; Use what ever you have right now, and upgrade if you feel like your workflow suffers

 

[nopainnogain]

LOL

Brilliant reply.

 

[Alpha One Seven]

Brilliant reply.

What can I say, it made me laugh out loud. (That's what LOL meant).

 

[nopainnogain]

What can I say, it made me laugh out loud. (That's what LOL meant).

Ok, kid.