is 8GB enough for windows 7?

[Red Squirrel]

And if the 4x4 is worse on gas you're then out an extra 5K plus the extra cost of gas which is recurring the entire time you own the vehicle. The extra electricity required to run either more or more dense modules is going to be fractions of a penny and isn't even a consideration.

PC to car analogies never work, just say no.

Yeah because a ram stick uses like 500 watts.

It's better to have something and not need it than to need it and not have it. Especially when there are no repercussions to having it in first place.

 

[ViRGE]

Yeah because a ram stick uses like 500 watts.

It's better to have something and not need it than to need it and not have it. Especially when there are no repercussions to having it in first place.

Plus RAM isn't going to stay this cheap. We're at the bottom of a cycle, so once the overcapacity situation is resolved prices are going to go back up. Grab the extra RAM now; you won't have to worry about RAM again for a very long time.

 

[Nothinman]

Yeah because a ram stick uses like 500 watts.

It's better to have something and not need it than to need it and not have it. Especially when there are no repercussions to having it in first place.

That was my point. Additional memory has practically no downside while your truck analogy has at least one pretty large one.

 

[mikeymikec]

I don't understand people that say "go 16GB, memory is cheap". So what if it is cheap? It is still a cost that you don't need.

It will be reassuring that if you ever hit upon hard times, and you're having financial difficulty putting food on the table, you'll think "I'm glad I got that additional memory"

Of course, similar things could be said for the rest of the computer, but there isn't a definite line for everyone to be drawn between "necessary" and "unnecessary".

I would be surprised if I max out the memory on this board though (16GB), unless it's a case of "well, I need to upgrade from 4GB, and as far as my finances are concerned, the cost of 16GB is a mouse fart beyond 8GB".

 

[Red Squirrel]

That was my point. Additional memory has practically no downside while your truck analogy has at least one pretty large one.

Not really, you can turn off 4x4 on most trucks and only engage it when you actually do need it which is the smart thing to do. The analogy's point is if you can add something extra that's nice to have at a very low cost, may as well do it.

 

[gmaster456]

Not really, you can turn off 4x4 on most trucks and only engage it when you actually do need it which is the smart thing to do.

Until the tansfer case goes bad.

 

[mikeymikec]

And in one of the worse case scenarios you could get some spray-on mud and pretended you had to use that feature!

 

[pcunite]

I don't know what some of you guy's version of "running fine" is if you were only using 2GB. Even with XP 2GB is barely good enough. With AV software and typical background apps, bunch of apps open, things get ugly pretty quick.

But anyways, I managed to fit in the extra stick so I'm good either way. At the price of ram I like having the extra buffer. Right now I'm only using 3.65GB according to task manager so I have tons left over. I'm guessing part of that 3.65GB is some caching stuff too.

I was working as a contractor for a very well funded org around the year 2001 ... I was forced to use a Windows 2K box with 64MB of ram ... I was very tempted to steal RAM out of the secretary's PC. 2GB is fine son ...

 

[jhansman]

8 is plenty for most of what you or I do in an average day. I went to 16GB in my rig only because memory has gotten so cheap I couldn't resist, and I use Photoshop and Lightroom. Better to have and not need it...

 

[Red Squirrel]

I was working as a contractor for a very well funded org around the year 2001 ... I was forced to use a Windows 2K box with 64MB of ram ... I was very tempted to steal RAM out of the secretary's PC. 2GB is fine son ...

That's windows 2000. That was one of the most lightweight high performance OS MS has ever put out. Then they got into bloated style OSes starting with XP. Even then, what were you running, some dos based app? I doubt you had multiple browser windows, email, RDP etc open. Even then, back in 2001 those programs were coded more efficiently than they are now. Firefox used in the 10's MB of ram, not 1000's for example.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Firefox used in the 10's MB of ram, not 1000's for example.

No, Firefox has always been a bloated pig, and has had memory leaks.

I remember it crashing (well, making my system unusable), after hitting my max physical memory, quite a few times. It was frustrating, because any further browsing, to close tabs, etc., still pushed the memory usage even higher and higher, and further blocked the browser into a corner as far as performance and memory usage went.

It used to have code to frob the memory buffers, after every delete. Only problem was, that thrashes VM all to hell, it basically means that you need to have physical memory available to hold Firefox and not VM. It totally defeated the purpose of VM entirely. And caused massive slowdown, when the app started to thrash the available RAM.

Edit: This is when I was running 2000.

 

[Berryracer]

With the prices of RAM being so low these days. I find it very easy to upgrade to 8 GB or even 16 GB. I wouldn't go for anything less

I got each of my GEIL 8 GB sticks for 65 USD

a Kingston 4 GB SODIMM here in Dubai only costs 25 USD!

 

[lowrider69]

I jumped from 4 to 8 gigs because I use VMware, but I only need to fire up one VM at a time.