• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

When will 4 gb of memory be recommended for PC games?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
When you feel like it. I'm still running with 1Gb on a single core:Q. No job, not enough things I want on PC that won't run to merit an upgrade. I definately see a 'need' for 2GB right now though. Damn Crysis...
 
Originally posted by: Jaskalas
Originally posted by: bamacre
With 4GB kits being far less than $100, the real question is, who cares?
Click to expand...

Because using XP I am capped at 3.25 or whatever the maximum for the OS is.

A game that uses 4GB would also require Vista - and that's a pretty bad selling point.
Click to expand...

Im betting Vista will be what Millenium was for 32bit. Dead in a year. My guess is the next MS OS that comes out will be better and then we will need 4gb+ at that point.
 
depends...in a few years probably.

but for whatever reason, 2x2GB DDR2-800 (i got my 2x2GB DDR2-1000 for $75!) is so cheap enough that you might as well get it instead of 2x1GB.
 
Do any games requires 2GB yet? I don't usually pay attention to system requirements, my system is always good enough to run with reasonable graphics and reasonable frames/second.
 
Originally posted by: Eeezee
Do any games requires 2GB yet? I don't usually pay attention to system requirements, my system is always good enough to run with reasonable graphics and reasonable frames/second.
Click to expand...

Battlefield 2 benefits from 2GB of ram, as well as Battlefield 2142. But I dont think any game REQUIRES 2GB yet.
 
Originally posted by: Jaskalas
Because using XP I am capped at 3.25 or whatever the maximum for the OS is.

A game that uses 4GB would also require Vista - and that's a pretty bad selling point.
Click to expand...

No, no, no. You'd be capped at the same 3.25GB, no matter which 32-bit version of Windows you were using*. And you don't need Vista to run a 64-bit OS, either.



* 32-bit Windows Sever 2003 is the only exception.
 
Originally posted by: slugg
Well, just as the title suggests.... lets hear it 🙂

thanks
Click to expand...

Some games benefit from 4GB right now,as to when 4GB is recommended I would say within 18 months,look at the game /ram history , every year its slowly moving upwards not down,now is a very good time to upgrade ram,ram prices are so cheap it makes me almost cry when I see people with new hardware/OS and only 1 GB of ram for gaming.


 
For all of us running Vista, last year?

Everyone with DDR2 systems should have taken advantage of the low DDR2 prices & gotten 4 GB already...if not, they should do so now 🙂
 
I have 4GB (and 4 cores) because I can be running ten things in the background and alt-tab out of an intensive game to any of them without things slowing down due to thrashing the swap file.
 
Originally posted by: n7
For all of us running Vista, last year?

Everyone with DDR2 systems should have taken advantage of the low DDR2 prices & gotten 4 GB already...if not, they should do so now 🙂
Click to expand...


Don't you mean 8 GB 😉 Everyone could use more ram sooner or later.


Originally posted by: Atheus
I have 4GB (and 4 cores) because I can be running ten things in the background and alt-tab out of an intensive game to any of them without things slowing down due to thrashing the swap file.
Click to expand...

Maybe you should have 8 GB just in case you never know when it could come in handy. Lets say you want to run two games at one or anything else that is memory intensive ?

 
some games already do. Supreme Commander was coded to utilize quad core and will regularly overtake 2gb of ram is you can give it that. it runs much better with 4gb of ram.
 
Originally posted by: Chiropteran
Originally posted by: ochadd
I may be spoiled by still running XP but what games push you over 2GB?
Click to expand...

Age of Conan. Doesn't seem to directly use much more than 2GB, but if you ever alt-tab to check something in a browser or run Ventrillo etc you will want more than 2GB.
Click to expand...

WoW is the same. Alt tabbing is somewhat slow and occasionally crashes on my xp 2giger. Totally different experience on the Vista 4 gig one.
 
Originally posted by: pcslookout
Originally posted by: n7
For all of us running Vista, last year?

Everyone with DDR2 systems should have taken advantage of the low DDR2 prices & gotten 4 GB already...if not, they should do so now 🙂
Click to expand...


Don't you mean 8 GB 😉 Everyone could use more ram sooner or later.


Originally posted by: Atheus
I have 4GB (and 4 cores) because I can be running ten things in the background and alt-tab out of an intensive game to any of them without things slowing down due to thrashing the swap file.
Click to expand...

Maybe you should have 8 GB just in case you never know when it could come in handy. Lets say you want to run two games at one or anything else that is memory intensive ?
Click to expand...

Sarcasm? Maight you be suggesting I don't really need 4GB? Well I'd agree with you. I bet you could run just about anything available today on 1GB if you toned it down enough. But who wants to do that when RAM is so dirt cheap?

If you're seriously suggesting 8GB the reason I don't have that is that 4GB sticks are too slow...
 
Originally posted by: pcslookout
Originally posted by: n7
For all of us running Vista, last year?

Everyone with DDR2 systems should have taken advantage of the low DDR2 prices & gotten 4 GB already...if not, they should do so now 🙂
Click to expand...


Don't you mean 8 GB 😉 Everyone could use more ram sooner or later.


Originally posted by: Atheus
I have 4GB (and 4 cores) because I can be running ten things in the background and alt-tab out of an intensive game to any of them without things slowing down due to thrashing the swap file.
Click to expand...

Maybe you should have 8 GB just in case you never know when it could come in handy. Lets say you want to run two games at one or anything else that is memory intensive ?
Click to expand...

I can run 4 copies of wow easily with 2gb
 
Originally posted by: Atheus
Originally posted by: pcslookout
Originally posted by: n7
For all of us running Vista, last year?

Everyone with DDR2 systems should have taken advantage of the low DDR2 prices & gotten 4 GB already...if not, they should do so now 🙂
Click to expand...


Don't you mean 8 GB 😉 Everyone could use more ram sooner or later.


Originally posted by: Atheus
I have 4GB (and 4 cores) because I can be running ten things in the background and alt-tab out of an intensive game to any of them without things slowing down due to thrashing the swap file.
Click to expand...

Maybe you should have 8 GB just in case you never know when it could come in handy. Lets say you want to run two games at one or anything else that is memory intensive ?
Click to expand...

Sarcasm? Maight you be suggesting I don't really need 4GB? Well I'd agree with you. I bet you could run just about anything available today on 1GB if you toned it down enough. But who wants to do that when RAM is so dirt cheap?

If you're seriously suggesting 8GB the reason I don't have that is that 4GB sticks are too slow...
Click to expand...

No sarcasm. I forgot about 4 GB sticks being to slow. I can't believe they still are that sucks.
 
Originally posted by: KMFJD
Originally posted by: pcslookout
Originally posted by: n7
For all of us running Vista, last year?

Everyone with DDR2 systems should have taken advantage of the low DDR2 prices & gotten 4 GB already...if not, they should do so now 🙂
Click to expand...


Don't you mean 8 GB 😉 Everyone could use more ram sooner or later.


Originally posted by: Atheus
I have 4GB (and 4 cores) because I can be running ten things in the background and alt-tab out of an intensive game to any of them without things slowing down due to thrashing the swap file.
Click to expand...

Maybe you should have 8 GB just in case you never know when it could come in handy. Lets say you want to run two games at one or anything else that is memory intensive ?
Click to expand...

I can run 4 copies of wow easily with 2gb
Click to expand...

What about Crysis and BF2 ?
 
Originally posted by: pcslookout
Originally posted by: KMFJD
Originally posted by: pcslookout
Originally posted by: n7
For all of us running Vista, last year?

Everyone with DDR2 systems should have taken advantage of the low DDR2 prices & gotten 4 GB already...if not, they should do so now 🙂
Click to expand...


Don't you mean 8 GB 😉 Everyone could use more ram sooner or later.


Originally posted by: Atheus
I have 4GB (and 4 cores) because I can be running ten things in the background and alt-tab out of an intensive game to any of them without things slowing down due to thrashing the swap file.
Click to expand...

Maybe you should have 8 GB just in case you never know when it could come in handy. Lets say you want to run two games at one or anything else that is memory intensive ?
Click to expand...

I can run 4 copies of wow easily with 2gb
Click to expand...

What about Crysis and BF2 ?
Click to expand...

Lol no way, you don't need a great system to run 4 wow's , 2 gb's an 8800 and dual core does it no problems with a 24" screen , using maximizer you get 4 instances running at 800/600
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top