Is 4gb enough?

[gmjimmy]

I looked for a thread on this but couldn't come up with one that addressed this subject specifically. Initially I was going to buy 8 gb of ram (thought it would be quicker) for my new system (SIG) But I later decided to go with 4 gb so I'm using 4gb of G.Skill F3-10666CL7D ram and my plans are for regular use with some photo editing and a little video editing too. Is 4gb enough? I have an opportunity to buy another 2 sticks of the same ram I'm using at a little bit of a discount but as much as I think I might need it I'm not sure. Anybody have any suggestions?
Thanks

 

[TemjinGold]

Are you satisfied with how your machine runs now?

 

[gmjimmy]

Well I guess the short answer would be yes but then I thought my old machine was quick until I built this new one with a Intel SSD. It runs ok now but I haven't put it to the test yet and I would rather put in the extra 4gb's in now while I have the chance if research here indicates I need it. Even if this deal falls through I could buy the ram at the regular price and it wouldn't be the end of the world. It's really not a matter of spending the money but more a matter of wasting the money if you know what I mean. If I didn't have this forum to get help I'd probably spend the money and not know the difference.

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

I can't think of a situation where 8gb would be any better than 4gb. I have 6gb in my i7 computer but for a long time I ran a 32bit OS which can only use 3gb of ram. I am now running 64 bit windows 7 (64 bit can use all 6gb) and Im positive I see no difference.

 

[jsedlak]

4gb is fine for starters. I edit RAW files in CS4 all the time and don't have issues. 8gb might be better if you have a massive sensor or are doing HDR.

 

[Beautiful_Life]

4GB is more than enough. The simple way to answer your question is to install a sma;; gadget on your desktop so you can monitor your RAM usage all the time. If it ever hits 4GB, that means you've not enough ram,

 

[sxr7171]

Check your peak commit charge. I rarely ever see it get beyond 2Gb unless I use Google Earth. 4GB is plenty in most cases.

 

[gmjimmy]

Check your peak commit charge. I rarely ever see it get beyond 2Gb unless I use Google Earth. 4GB is plenty in most cases.

How do I check that?

 

[sxr7171]

How do I check that?

Just right click on the taskbar and bring up task manager. It will be in the performance tab. It used to be in XP it would tell you the peak, now I guess you have to check periodically since it shows current commit charge. Also check out resource monitor in Win 7 which is accessible from the performance tab.

I have really never seen above 2GB unless I'm running Google Earth which is a major memory hog.

 

[jsedlak]

I can't think of a situation where 8gb would be any better than 4gb. I have 6gb in my i7 computer but for a long time I ran a 32bit OS which can only use 3gb of ram. I am now running 64 bit windows 7 (64 bit can use all 6gb) and Im positive I see no difference.

I can think of several. I am consistently over 4gb used. Visual Studio and Photoshop are memory hogs. As are many instances of Chrome/IE.

 

[sxr7171]

I can think of several. I am consistently over 4gb used. Visual Studio and Photoshop are memory hogs. As are many instances of Chrome/IE.

Yeah Chrome is insane. We used to complain about FF but once I caught it using 1.5GB by itself. I killed it immediately. There is no reason on earth for any program rendering 2 tabs of about 1MB each to need 1.5GB RAM. Unless its a buggy POS. I like Chrome too but man they need to still work on it.

But yeah PS uses a lot but I think that's valid when handling raw photo data of several million pixels.

 

[gmjimmy]

Thanks for the replies. I'll try 4 gb's for now and wait and see. I just don't want to have this ram part number become obsolete then I'll have to buy 8gb's of new stuff. Trying to find matching ram could be a pain.
Jim

 

[pcslookout]

Yeah Chrome is insane. We used to complain about FF but once I caught it using 1.5GB by itself. I killed it immediately. There is no reason on earth for any program rendering 2 tabs of about 1MB each to need 1.5GB RAM. Unless its a buggy POS. I like Chrome too but man they need to still work on it.

But yeah PS uses a lot but I think that's valid when handling raw photo data of several million pixels.

lol

 

[Emulex]

if you run OSX 10.6.2 in a VM give it 2-3gb of ram and it will run as fast as a mac mini vmware workstation 7

 

[sxr7171]

lol

Yeah. When a browser uses 1.5GB RAM to render 2 pages the only thing you can do is laugh.

 

[n7]

I'm idling @ 3.43 GB usage right now :hmm:

Yay for sidebar memory leaks!

 

[pcslookout]

I'm idling @ 3.43 GB usage right now :hmm:

Yay for sidebar memory leaks!

Are you using Windows Vista or 7?

 

[pcslookout]

Yeah. When a browser uses 1.5GB RAM to render 2 pages the only thing you can do is laugh.

Not really I know how to fix it.