Recommended Minimum RAM for Modest Gaming Build

[Madmick]

I received a computer for free from an IT friend whose company was e-wasting them. It has a 3Ghz Intel Core Duo Processor. I've purchased a Radeon 7750 video card for it (since it only has 1 Molex connector the 6850/6870/460GTX would have required an upgraded PSU). It came with 4x1GB DDR2 RAM. The maximum this computer is capable of with Windows 7 is 4x4GB.

So in the PSU forum BlastingCap informed me that "system RAM beyond 3GB will not materially improve your gaming experience." Nevertheless, he pointed out that this is assuming I'm not running anything else. On my laptop, I work with huge libraries in the eBook management software Calibre sometimes, and that seems to challenge my system the most. But the heaviest load I could conceive would be Gaming + Browser + Music Player + Video Player + PDF Viewer/Microsoft Office...or something like that. I'm not using this professionally.

What do you think is a solid target minimum for RAM beyond which a casual user like myself is wasting money on diminished returns increasing performance? DDR2 is remarkably expensive compared to DDR3, so I'd prefer adding as little as possible to this system since I'm probably going to build an entirely new rig in 2 years.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

DDR2 isn't worth buying, 4GB is enough for gaming in most cases if not all.

It's worth having an 64bit OS though to use all the ram.

 

[Magic Carpet]

4GB is plenty for modest gaming. Unless you play BF3 multiplayer ;-p

 

[Madmick]

That's not the first reference I've heard to BF3's RAM-hogging. Why does BF3 specifically use so much RAM? Is it the map sizes?

I guess I'll sit at 4GB. After all, for the $90-$110 it would cost me to up to 8-10GB, I could purchase 4x4GB DDR3 RAM on my way to a new build. I'll just keep it in the bank.

 

[Madmick]

Also, do graphics mods increase RAM requirements, and how severely? What about add-ons in games like WoW?

 

[aaksheytalwar]

If you want an acceptable experience in most games then 4GB is okay. If you want a near perfect experience in all games but not with much/any multitasking then 8GB RAM.

If you want to do heavy multitasking then at least 16GB RAM.

With RAM being so cheap, going for less than 8GB RAM makes no sense at all.

But with a Core 2 Duo you probably won't get a smooth experience with anything higher than low-med settings, so 4GB RAM is plenty for you.

 

[beginner99]

4 GB is mostly enough but as said you get 8 GB for like $50 so it is a no-brainer.

I have 12 GB (4 from initial build and then added another 8) However I rarely ever break the 4 Gb limit...

 

[Magic Carpet]

Yeah, mods usually require extra ram, and video ram as well. e.g. Skyrim.

8GB+ seriously reduces loading times in BF3. It will allow the whole map to reside in memory, rather than constantly juggling it around [not as noticeable on SSD though]. And you can have other processes running!

 

[Madmick]

If you want an acceptable experience in most games then 4GB is okay. If you want a near perfect experience in all games but not with much/any multitasking then 8GB RAM.

If you want to do heavy multitasking then at least 16GB RAM.

With RAM being so cheap, going for less than 8GB RAM makes no sense at all.

But with a Core 2 Duo you probably won't get a smooth experience with anything higher than low-med settings, so 4GB RAM is plenty for you.

In the PSU forum you made sweeping claims about hardware inadequacy that proved to be profoundly inaccurate, so I'm disinclined to believe anything you say until you back your claims with some concrete evidence or analysis.

Furthermore, DDR2 RAM is not cheap; DDR3 RAM is cheap.

4 GB is mostly enough but as said you get 8 GB for like $50 so it is a no-brainer.

I have 12 GB (4 from initial build and then added another 8) However I rarely ever break the 4 Gb limit...

No: remember I have 4x1GB in there now. So ~$50 would get me 2x2GB, but those would only replace two of the 1GB cards, so 2x2GB + 2x1GB= 6GB total, not 8GB. Ergo, a much better dollar per GB boost would be to buy the Komputer Bay DDR2 PC-5300 cards from Amazon for $108. This would give me 2x4GB + 2x1GB= 10GB total.

Is there a caveat to running such a large disparity in RAM between paired slots? I mean to say: if the computer recognizes all 4 slots are occupied, does it assign 50% of the load to one pair, and 50% to the other? Because if it does this then I might see better performance with 2x4GB alone. Another option would be to possibly purchase 4x2GB cards more cheaply.

Yeah, mods usually require extra ram, and video ram as well. e.g. Skyrim.

8GB+ seriously reduces loading times in BF3. It will allow the whole map to reside in memory, rather than constantly juggling it around [not as noticeable on SSD though]. And you can have other processes running!

I don't play BF3 specifically, I was just curious. How much RAM is desired by someone expecting to run a typical mod setup in a game like Skyrim, for example?

Also, how much performance difference is there, practically, between the 667Mhz PC 5300/5400 and the 800Mhz PC6400 class?

 

[TemjinGold]

OP: Your cpu isn't powerful enough to play anything that would tangibly benefit from more than your 4 gig of ram.

 

[poohbear]

C2D still holds its own in alot of games, its not like games have become anymore demanding on the cpu end of things in the past couple of years.

Anyways to answer OP, upgrading from 4gb to 8gb made my experience with BF3 & crysis 2 stutter free, whereas before with 4gb they were always stuttering @ max in game settings. 8 gb is so cheap now its a no brainer.

Sent from my MB861 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Magic Carpet]

How much RAM is desired by someone expecting to run a typical mod setup in a game like Skyrim, for example?

Skyrim can be taxing on video ram (>1GB). 4GB of conventional RAM is enough.

Also, how much performance difference is there, practically, between the 667Mhz PC 5300/5400 and the 800Mhz PC6400 class?

Maybe 1-5 FPS in games? If you're not overclocking. I'd get the 800 Mhz version though, as it offers a little more bandwidth. What's your mobo?

 

[slayernine]

BF3 doesn't just use RAM it doesn't garbage collect at all, horrible memory leaks that get out of control and start lagging the entire system. I have 8GB and it sometimes is using 7GB to itself

 

[icanhascpu2]

Buying ram based on a game bug that will likely be patched isnt wise.

 

[thelastjuju]

First of all, BF3 is in a separate league.. and its also poorly optimized because they love to neglect PC games. But many of us are more into indie games rather than these types of generic commercial shooters.

I too would say 4gb is enough for gaming.. I mean, I play GTA4 maxed out multiplayer and it doesn't even use a full 3 gigs of ram. As much as people like to load up on RAM because its cheap, doesn't mean you should or that it would amount to any difference what-so-ever. Your processor's cache will probably limit you more than anything else.

 

[Madmick]

Maybe 1-5 FPS in games? If you're not overclocking. I'd get the 800 Mhz version though, as it offers a little more bandwidth. What's your mobo?

I believe this is the Mobo (this AS# turned up multiple results, but I opened up the tower, and this pic looks identical, and the page also notes it's for the HP dc7900 Convertible Minitower which is the correct model):
http://www.thebestpartinc.com/460963-001.html
I'm guessing that you're asking this because a motherboard can become the bottleneck for the bandwidth of a RAM card?

I'm not certain that all "dc7900 CMT" models carry the exact same hardware, but this page indicates it comes with 2x1GB 800 Mhz RAM by default:
http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/ca/e...87-3328898-3328898-3784892-3785379.html?dnr=1

Also, nobody yet answered the question I asked earlier: is it not wise to have 2x4GB RAM in one paired slot and 2x1GB in the other? I'm just curious if the computer evenly distributes RAM tasks to the two slots if it recognizes they both have cards in them. Because if it does:
50% x (2x4GB) + 50% x (2x1GB)= 5GB RAM utilized, compared to
100% x (2x4GB)= 8GB RAM utilized

Ergo, I was just curious

 

[WaTaGuMp]

Over 9000.

 

[Cerb]

Also, do graphics mods increase RAM requirements, and how severely? What about add-ons in games like WoW?

Yes, but how much will vary, and VRAM will generally be more of an issue than system RAM. You can use >1GB VRAM in Morrowind, with enough mods.

>4GB could be nice, but it's probably not worth the money.

Also, nobody yet answered the question I asked earlier: is it not wise to have 2x4GB RAM in one paired slot and 2x1GB in the other? I'm just curious if the computer evenly distributes RAM tasks to the two slots if it recognizes they both have cards in them.

It might be able to get slightly better performance using more banks, but Intel, TMK, has never said anything about it, nor has anyone tried testing for it, on the desktop. Absence of evidence may not be evidence of absence, but it would seem like they'd mention if they did such optimizations on the desktop, as both have made it a point to show off such optimizations in server products over the years. However, the server optimizations, specifically, would net you nothing on the desktop (see all the whining about SB-E's memory performance, as an example).

If you get it working with dual-channel, you'd have two channels of 3GB, functioning just like your current two channels of 2GB. With current prices, and an ever-present chance of RAM mixing failure, you might be better off getting a new mobo (if possible; some DCs used standard ATX, but slim and SFF ones I've seen didn't) and 8GB of DDR3, instead, if you really wanted the RAM. A new mobo would also let you OC the CPU. With a 4 series chipset and DDR3 1600, 4GHz, without expensive cooling or too much voltage, would not be unreasonable.

 

[Magic Carpet]

I believe this is the Mobo (this AS# turned up multiple results, but I opened up the tower, and this pic looks identical, and the page also notes it's for the HP dc7900 Convertible Minitower which is the correct model):
http://www.thebestpartinc.com/460963-001.html
I'm guessing that you're asking this because a motherboard can become the bottleneck for the bandwidth of a RAM card?

Sometimes, it's better to buy a cheap 775 board with DDR3 support. I wouldn't invest much in DDR2 at this point.

Also, nobody yet answered the question I asked earlier: is it not wise to have 2x4GB RAM in one paired slot and 2x1GB in the other?

I would just have 2x4GB in two banks and sell the rest.

 

[Madmick]

Okay, thanks Cerb and Magic Carpet. The chip on this one reads Malay '07, so I think it's an Allendale Dual Core 3.0Ghz.

I rarely game, anymore, so I suppose the best way to proceed is to test the few games I'm actually interested in playing and see how the 4GB handles it. I've read that Mass Effect 3, Diablo III, and WoW and aren't too demanding.

If I'm forced to upgrade I'll probably go with 4x2GB since that's ~$20 cheaper than tha $108 for 2x4GB because I'd never use the free slots with the latter option to upgrade beyond 8GB. I'd have to choose between adding this RAM and basically gutting the tower and building a whole new budget rig inside it with its current heatsink, hard drive, DVD-ROM, etc. (I wouldn't spend significant money on a gaming build until the new consoles arrive).

DDR3 is absurdly cheap at ~$75 for 16GB. After rebates, I've seen the CX430 PSU at $20 and the Radeon 6870 at $130. Throw in a $65 AS Rock LGA 1155 PCI-E 2.0 capable Micro ATX Mobo and a $123 on a Dual Core i3 Sandy Bridge 3.1Ghz processor. That's $338 for a rig that could at least attempt higher settings on games like Crysis 2, Deus Ex: Human Revolution and The Witcher 2. That seems like a much wiser route than spending $216 on 16GB of DDR2 PC-5300 RAM with the current hardware.

 

[Cerb]

That seems like a much wiser route than spending $216 on 16GB of DDR2 PC-5300 RAM with the current hardware.

A OCed Core 2 can compete with very slow<=2GHz Pentiums, but when you get to costs of the ~3GHz ones, and any current i3s or better, it's just not worth it.

 

[Madmick]

A OCed Core 2 can compete with very slow<=2GHz Pentiums, but when you get to costs of the ~3GHz ones, and any current i3s or better, it's just not worth it.

What do you think is the best value in the current Intel CPU market? Also, I've heard that among the i3/i5/i7's, the best value are the i5's (which are all quad core). Is that true?

 

[Cerb]

What do you think is the best value in the current Intel CPU market? Also, I've heard that among the i3/i5/i7's, the best value are the i5's (which are all quad core). Is that true?

Yes. IB is on the way, so who knows exactly how it will affect what we see now, much less how long actual time to market for a more full range of them will be, but the i5-2500(K) has been the best value since its release, wit for years, and especially if you may want to overclock, it's a no-brainer to move up, since the platform upgrade to an i3-21xx is already going to cost around around $300, with a nice mobo, unless you live near a Microcenter.

 

[BFG10K]

4GB is fine for most gaming situations.

 

[Magic Carpet]

Allendale's were very good overclockers. With a $50-60 S775 motherboard, you can easily double its performance and get some nice DDR3 in advance for your next upgrade.