DDR3 16GB vs 32GB worth it?

[LetsPlayThisBro]

I know this question has been asked before but those threads are old and may no longer apply to the modern environment.

I have Win10 Pro with 16GB of DDR3, I can get to 32GB for only 70-ish bucks identical sticks. Is it worth it or should I just live with 16GB for now and wait until I do my DDR4 upgrade at some point in 2017 when Cannonlake comes out, thoughts?

I'm leaning toward holding off but wanted to bounce it off of others to get opinions.

Thanks in advance.

 

[cdabc123]

what do you use the computer for?

 

[huvik]

have you ever maxed out your 16GB?(probably not) if not then no, you don't need 32

 

[muniz_ri]

I know this question has been asked before but those threads are old and may no longer apply to the modern environment.

I have Win10 Pro with 16GB of DDR3, I can get to 32GB for only 70-ish bucks identical sticks. Is it worth it or should I just live with 16GB for now and wait until I do my DDR4 upgrade at some point in 2017 when Cannonlake comes out, thoughts?

I'm leaning toward holding off but wanted to bounce it off of others to get opinions.

Thanks in advance.

I recently upgraded from 16gb to 32gb and noticed only a slight difference in overall system performance. Diminishing returns seems to start after 16gb'sh

 

[ThatVietGuy]

I've been using 16GB for 5 years and I've come nowhere near maxing it. Please clarify your statement when you refer to the "modern environment."

 

[LetsPlayThisBro]

As far as what I mean by modern environment pretty much Win10 Pro vs Win8.1.... I game with it, but I also do some video editing/game streaming and the like. It's why I have an i7 vs an i5 to make sure i can multitask with a game running, OBS, Chrome all at the same time. What I don't know is if I'd see a 70 dollar improvement going to 32gb. Perhaps running a game on a RamDisk if I had the extra memory would be a big improvement but honestly I don't know, don't have the practical experience with it and was hoping others might.

 

[ThatVietGuy]

The OS has nothing to do with it. Nothing has changed from Windows 8.1 to Windows 10 in terms of RAM usage.

For most consumers 8GB is enough. For enthusiast users, I highly doubt anyone needs more than 16GB of RAM on a regular basis.

If you want proof of this, monitor your own RAM usage and see how often you can get to using up all 16GB of RAM.

 

[cdabc123]

As far as what I mean by modern environment pretty much Win10 Pro vs Win8.1.... I game with it, but I also do some video editing/game streaming and the like. It's why I have an i7 vs an i5 to make sure i can multitask with a game running, OBS, Chrome all at the same time. What I don't know is if I'd see a 70 dollar improvement going to 32gb. Perhaps running a game on a RamDisk if I had the extra memory would be a big improvement but honestly I don't know, don't have the practical experience with it and was hoping others might.

for that usage 16 gigs is more than enough. and a ramdisk wouldn't much at all

 

[dudeman509]

I have almost never come close to tapping out 16 GB in pretty intensive workloads.

Unless you're doing some serious video editing, Photoshop, running a bunch of virtual machines, or CAD work, you don't need 32.

 

[photonboy]

Video editing.
You can easily benefit from more than 16GB, however... that depends on a lot of factors. Video size/bitrate. Editing program. Editing details. If you're getting above 14GB then I'd consider it, otherwise no.

Game on Ramdisk?
Generally pointless. It's a huge hassle and only benefits game load times (though you defeat the point by having to load into the cache in the first place). Stick with an SSD for games with frequent load points like SKYRIM.

So...
If it was a new PC, maybe but you're apparently building a new PC in a year so unless you do a lot of video editing I wouldn't bother.

 

[LetsPlayThisBro]

Thanks for all the input, much appreciated. I'm also thinking that DDR3 is investing in an older tech which won't be as good as my retrofit build next year-ish. Might wait till 2018 for Cannonlake to put out their enthusiast chip/mobo/memory upgrade. This year I'll stick to a new Nvidia GPU and switching out cases and add watercooling.

 

[photonboy]

Thanks for all the input, much appreciated. I'm also thinking that DDR3 is investing in an older tech which won't be as good as my retrofit build next year-ish. Might wait till 2018 for Cannonlake to put out their enthusiast chip/mobo/memory upgrade. This year I'll stick to a new Nvidia GPU and switching out cases and add watercooling.

AMD may end up being the best choice for your next CPU though. For example, you may see something like an AM4 Zen that is 8C/16T for much cheaper than what Intel offers. I'm talking 14nm not the Zen architecture offering coming soonish on the current AMD node.

Intel has quad-core Skylake CPU's that use about HALF of the die for the GPU. Thus, they could have actually built an 8-core for the same cost without an iGPU.

(Much of Intel's pricing is based on lack of competition)

AMD needs to be more value oriented whilst offering a product this is at least SIMILAR to what Intel offers in performance. At estimated 40% IPC that may mean somewhere just shy of Haswell, but then probably overclockable so it's hard to say at this point.

I'd love to see an 8C/16T Zen (14nm model) for about the same cost as an i5-6600K.

 

[LetsPlayThisBro]

Thanks for all the input, much appreciated. I'm also thinking that DDR3 is investing in an older tech which won't be as good as my retrofit build next year-ish. Might wait till 2018 for Cannonlake to put out their enthusiast chip/mobo/memory upgrade. This year I'll stick to a new Nvidia GPU and switching out cases and add watercooling.

AMD may end up being the best choice for your next CPU though. For example, you may see something like an AM4 Zen that is 8C/16T for much cheaper than what Intel offers. I'm talking 14nm not the Zen architecture offering coming soonish on the current AMD node.

Intel has quad-core Skylake CPU's that use about HALF of the die for the GPU. Thus, they could have actually built an 8-core for the same cost without an iGPU.

(Much of Intel's pricing is based on lack of competition)

AMD needs to be more value oriented whilst offering a product this is at least SIMILAR to what Intel offers in performance. At estimated 40% IPC that may mean somewhere just shy of Haswell, but then probably overclockable so it's hard to say at this point.

I'd love to see an 8C/16T Zen (14nm model) for about the same cost as an i5-6600K.

I prefer Intel but I'm not necessarily a zealot of their products, when the time comes I'll crunch the numbers... performance vs dollars and make a decision based on that, but I admit I lean toward Intel. I wish AMD were more competitive not just with price but performance. My bigger wish for all chips is for both AMD/Intel to create a true enthusiast gamer chip without a GPU element on it. More room = more processing power, because most enthusiasts buy a discrete GPU. Or if not completely remove graphic support to minimize it.

I know there are always the Xeon option, but that's not really geared for high performance on fewer cores, Hex core is fine with hyperthreading, but I don't think gaming needs 12 cores with hyperthreading quite yet. Give me a 5.0ghz 6 core/12 hyperthread chip in trade for graphics on the chip. Thermals be damned.. or actually better cooling is best.

I want to turn my computer on from a completely off state and be able to start doing things in no more than 7 seconds... <--- someday that will look like a lowball request.