Hi there,

I'm running:

Windows Vista Ultimate 64 bit.
XFX 680i SLI MBoard
Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 (3.0ghz)
2x 2gb corsair xms2 pc6400 800mhz memory.

I just upgraded from an 8800GTS OC (640mb) to an nVidia GTX 260. (896mb)

I found a good deal on my memory, question is:

IS IT WORTH UPGRADING FROM 4GB OT 8GB?

I don't think going from 4 to 8 gigs is going to make a lot of difference but i do know that 2 to 4 gigs made big change in my system and allowed me to turn off virtual memory.  You shouldn't have enough programs running at 1 time to eat 4 GB's of system ram if you do you are probably killing cpu cycles and you should close them 1st. But if you just want the extra space then go ahead and grab the 8 gigs. 

- edit: did you have the option to sli a second 8800gts oc if so might have been a better option

 I have seen tons of arguments on pros and cons of sli 8800 gts vs 280/260 cards looks like it is up to the owners pref and if the board supports sli and the power needed

 - edit 2:just read your second post that makes sense.   I don't see any reviews or posts with proof that 8gb's will improve performance noticably for any games most say increase CPU or get a better vid card some even say try sata raiding to bump up performance more.

Well, I've done some reading and long story short my Gcard decided to die on me.

Some other people were in the predicament of upgrading from an 8800GTX (768mb) and were told to grab a GTX 260 every time due to higher performance. Overall the GTX260 also gives between 20-50% performance and FPS boost to the 8800GTX too.

Figured it was an easy answer if I have an 8800GTS.

4 gig is more than sufficient. I am not running Vista (went back to XP) and I run 6 gigs. The problem with XP, Vista, etc.. is that there are not programs pushing and utilizing that much memory currently especially in the gaming aspect that I am aware of. Talk has been going for a few years now about what will or won't utilize that much memory. I could see if you were maybe doing CAD work, design, etc.. there may be some programs pushing the boundaries then.

Unless your getting a killer deal on the memory and its good memory, I would not spend the extra cash on 8 gigs if it were me.

Originally posted by DuClaire

Hi there,

I'm running:

Windows Vista Ultimate 64 bit.
XFX 680i SLI MBoard
Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 (3.0ghz)
2x 2gb corsair xms2 pc6400 800mhz memory.

I just upgraded from an 8800GTS OC (640mb) to an nVidia GTX 260. (896mb)

I found a good deal on my memory, question is:

IS IT WORTH UPGRADING FROM 4GB OT 8GB?

Frankly I cant imagine you having any performance issues with that setup (don't know what kind of HDD's you are running but that is an awesome system as is...

 edit : I think you are going to love windows 7 with that setup  

4GB can be had for $20

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820145184

nobody short of image/cad design needs more than 4gb of ram.

i dont think you should get 8giga, maby in a year...,....

most people do very good with 4. 

Actually the new sweet spot for the current high end Pc running a 64bit Windows is 6gigs of memory. Most people like to multi task a lot, so it's pointless to debate about how much memory a game using a 32bit emulator on a 64bit OS can access, which is 2gig. With the prices of DDR2 being so dirt cheap because we're now moving in to much faster memory with DDR3, you may as well add another 2 gigs of exactly the same type and brand you're currently using if you like to multi task. What's the point of you using a 64bit OS if you're only going to use 2gigs?

I always play games in windowed mode with tons of apps running, I can't help but multitask.. and I don't think I've ever gone over 3.2gb of the 4gb I have on Vista 64.  That's while encoding a dvd, playing a movie and a game, firefox and a spreadsheet open.. You'd have to be running a hell of an app to need 8gb of ram.  Ram is pretty cheap but by the time you need 8gb, ddr3 will probably be the standard.

I find 8gb to be helpful in Vista. It allows you to turn of disk paging which is slower than memory paging. I have noticed that overall my system runs much better on 8gb over 4. With memory as cheap as it is now there is no reason not to have it.

Several months ago when 8gb would have set you back over $400 no it wasnt worth it. Now that you can have it for less than $150, yeah its worth it.

I would say go ahead and get the ram.  I have 4 gigs right now and there are a few games that actually use most what I have,  like GTA4 & Crysis.  I never thought the day would come when 8 gigs would be feasible, but yeah these days it really is.  Think of it as something you'll be able to grow into.

I have Vista 64 with 8Gb. My sidebar has a a CPU and Memory usage monitor and I've never seen it go above halway so I would say that currently 4Gb is ample.

I would say the 8 gis would be really nice! you be able to run multiple things while your playing a game or open two cilents of the game if it lets you. though a good video card can be great also. i would go for the 8 gigs

Get the 8gb, you won't regret it.

Meh you guys are making me consider upgrading my ram. I'm still on 2 gigs, but that's because of 32 bit XP....

4gbs for xp 8 gbs for vista is fine,theres no such thing as having to much system supported ram although one could argue that 16 gbs is pushing it.

Is 8 gbs worth it?

Most definately,running multi applications will rarely if ever slow down,movie conversion file compression and decompression will enjoy large amounts or ram,allowing games to have access to as much available ram is always a good thing.

Ram at this time is so cheap that manufacturers are praticaly giving it away with all the rebates they are giving.

Always and I do meen ALWAYS run memtest on newly installed memory as anything from a stray radioactive particle from the sun or just a plain old faulty stick can save you alot of time and frustration.

i have a monitor for ram and CPU usage and i have 4 gb of 1066 DDRII ram never seen it over 38% though the extra speed probally makes the diffrence

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/memory-module-upgrade,2264.html

Windows XP, 4gig max (only uses 3.2gigs)

Unless your running multiple copies of a large game, 4gigs is plenty.

Overclock a post 2006 Intel cpu to 3.0ghz  or more, 800mhz or faster ram, sli something gtx255/ati4870 or better or get gtx260 or better single card.

Don't save money on your power supply!! Save it on ram if anything. (easily replaced) Cheap power supplies cause your system to be unstable and shorten the life of your hardware.

Its important to make sure your ram is dual channeled too.

no

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/memory-module-upgrade,review-31549-3.html

same 260 card. tho its ddr3. and faster than ddr2, its pretty much same, its not like you own i7 to need ddr3

from 3gb to 12gb.. 1-2 fps.. if your lucky

I'll go with the 8 gig crowd :-) Extreme multitasking,better loadtimes and future games/programs using it :-)

But if your looking for FPS in a game this is probably not the investment. 

Anyone know how Windows 7 is on memory handling?

Depends on WTHeck your playing.

If you play lots of RTS's then Ignore all the No's in here.

If you play Vanguard You Really want that 8 gigs.

If your playing 99% of the mmo's or FPS's then No there is no need.

Originally posted by Ekibiogami

Depends on WTHeck your playing.

If you play lots of RTS's then Ignore all the No's in here.

If you play Vanguard You Really want that 8 gigs.

If your playing 99% of the mmo's or FPS's then No there is no need.

I played Vanguard with a smooth FPS with 2 gigs, and 4 gigs made hardly any difference at all. Does Vanguard even have a 64 bit exe? If not, then you know automatically that the extra gigs wont matter, because the client wont address them. Now, i currently have 8 gigs of ram, and have seen no increase in performance at all in anything that I do. I have yet to see my memory usage go over 4 gigs under any circumstance. My CPU will max out WAY before my ram will ever be an issue I would assume. It is the same as my quadcore. I have a q9550 OCed to 3.23ghz per core, and it is pretty much useless. Every game I have played, other than GTA4 will only use two cores anyway. Only Prime95 maxes my CPU, and yeah... that is what it is there for, so no surprise.

32 bit executables can only access 2 gb of ram (this is different than the 4gb limit for 32bit OS), so it doesn't really matter what type of game you're playing cuz only a handful of games even have a 64 bit version. Even then they don't get up to 2gb. All that matters is how much ram the apps you're multitasking are using. Most apps don't use a whole lot of memory. My Firefox with 8 tabs open is at 180mb, and I have Chrome with 2 tabs at 40mb.

The only apps that actually use a lot of memory are things like CAD and video editing. Not video encoding - when I encode a video it only uses ~80mb.  8gb is more about influencing paging behavior than actually being used.  At 8gb Vista doesn't feel the need to page the kernel or unused apps in memory out as often, even though it doesn't need to at 4gb either it still would page parts out after long periods of non-use because of its paging behavior.  It prefers to have the ram available for usage before it's needed so it pages out preemptively.  This is what causes apps to get paged to disk after you've been playing a game for a few hours - even if you have enough ram to keep them all loaded at once.

Linux has much more tweakable paging behavior but in Windows you can force the kernel to stay loaded in ram with a registry setting which may help a bit, and you should be able to set your paging file to something very small (like.. 16mb) with 4gb of ram installed which will force most your apps to stay loaded in RAM even if you don't use them for a long time.

I haven't bothered testing it myself because I alt-tab so much nothing gets a chance to get paged but I just set my page file to 16mb and I'll see how it works.  If you are looking specifically for game performance, it's better to spend $40 on 4gb ram and invest $40 more into your video card, than to spend $80 on 8gb of ram.