Don’t Buy a PC With 8GB of RAM (Unless You Plan to Upgrade It)

[InvalidError]

There are still AAA games out with system requirements at least 8GB RAM.

A requirement of "AT LEAST" 8GB doesn't mean you will have an enjoyable experience at 8GB, only that the developers deem 8GB to be the minimum realistically necessary for the game to probably run without game-breaking issues as long as you don't have any major other stuff open at the same time.

While you can play WoW and many other large games on 8GB of RAM, most are far more enjoyable with 16GB to greatly reduce asset streaming hiccups and loading screen times. Easily worth the extra ~$30 if laptop and PC manufacturers decided to make 16GB the baseline for ~$10 extra profit or $50 if the laptop's memory can be swapped out with an aftermarket kit.

 

[PiranhaTech]

I bought a $250 Walmart Dell, upgraded it to 8GB of RAM (at the time) and swapped the HDD with a SATA SSD. It ended up a pretty good coffee shop laptop for light usage like document creation and moderate web browsing . 8 GB of RAM is very usable if you have a decent SSD. In fact, Windows changes its paging and RAM behavior if you have one.

However, for today's games? 16GB definitely recommended.

 

[USAFRet]

If this is to be your only machine...
Or if you are a gamer even a little bit
Or if you are into any kind of productivity
Or if you are into any kind of creative arts....

Then no, 8GB is not enough and should not be tolerated.

But if you have a good grasp of what it is and can do...don't fret.

 

[Udyr]

Don’t Buy a PC With 8GB of RAM (Unless You Plan to Upgrade It)

*Unless you want a PC for simple home/office tasks and the 16GB version doesn't cost $150+ more.

 

[MeeLee]

Bs! I still run some of my units with only 2GB of Ram (granted, they run Ubuntu 18.04).

I do have a windows 11 pc, and with some fiddling, I can run it off 4GB of RAM, and run an additional 4GB of swap on the ssd, and it does work just like the Ubuntu one (good for basic stuff).

There's no reason with Windows compressed memory, you'll need more than 8GB of RAM. And if you do, you can easily add 4 to 8GB of swap space just fine. Unless you want to play heavy memory intense games or programs like video editors or so...

 

[USAFRet]

There's no reason with Windows compressed memory, you'll need more than 8GB of RAM. And if you do, you can easily add 4 to 8GB of swap space just fine. Unless you want to play heavy memory intense games or programs like video editors or so...

"There's no reason..."
"...Unless ...

So yes, there ARE valid reasons.
Just not every use case.

 

[Bob.B]

Some expensive ultrabooks and gaming laptops come with just 8GB of RAM. That’s not enough memory for gaming or even light productivity.

Don’t Buy a PC With 8GB of RAM (Unless You Plan to Upgrade It) : Read more

I would not go so far as to say DON'T.

It depends on what your going to do with the machine.

I use 8GB and have for years it works fine but I'm not a gamer or into editing or have 40 tabs open or have a startup group filled with unneeded stuff.

If you don't know what your going to do with the machine then it might be best to start with 16GB and make sure there is an upgrade path.

 

[stancilmor]

I recommend a minimum of 16 GB RAM even for those just doing light office work and web browsing.

my home machine has 32GB and I routinely use over 20GB

my work machine also has 32 GB and I routinely use over 70 GB.

I keep a lot of applications open for weeks, so I suspect Windows and many applications suffer memory leaks.

number one reason for rebooting my machine is low memory or monthly windows updates.

 

[Colif]

Doesn't windows adapt to the RAM it has available?

Yes. The more you have, the more it will use. But it will also move out of your way if you need it.

I have 32gb, regularly use 20gb just running 1 VM. I didn't plan on using VM but hey, at least I can and not notice any hit on my resources at the time.

I wouldn't buy a machine with 8gb that doesn't allow upgrades. And try to avoid ram soldered into sockets.

I do have a windows 11 pc, and with some fiddling, I can run it off 4GB of RAM, and run an additional 4GB of swap on the ssd

ug, so much page file usage. If you happy with it, fine, but ram is still faster than nvme/ssd so you could notice it if you run over 4gb
Could reduce life span of ssd with all the extra work.

 

[Darkbreeze]

We’ve reached the point in computing history where you can’t competently run Windows and browse the Internet with less than 16GB on board.

This is nonsense.

If you're a power user or a hardcore gamer, then sure, 16GB should be the minimum. But for the vast majority of people, Windows plus a browser with a reasonable number of tabs plus light office applications and even some basic Photoshop or Gimp stuff works perfectly fine.

I honestly can't believe some of the stuff I read here anymore sometimes.

 

[mitch074]

For "gaming" 8GB isn't enough for modern games. For general productivity and paired with an NVME or even SSD 8GB is plenty.

No. I equipped all my staff with PCs 4 years ago; base stats were quad core with HT, 8 Gb of RAM, and a 250 Gb SSD. When you load Windows (2.4Gb), an antivirus (300 Mb), Skype (500 Mb), Teams (500 Mb), Discord (400 Mb), Outlook (300 Mb) and open Chrome with a dozen tabs (2 Gb), you've already used up 6.4 Gb of your RAM; consider 128-256 Mb of RAM are allocated to your IGPU, that's when Windows starts swapping like mad, and your SSD won't enjoy it.

Open even one single app, you're out of RAM.

I had to upgrade all these machines to 16 Gb to allow them to work without slowdowns nor hangs / crashes, eventough the software setup hasn't changed ever since I had originally equipped them 4 years ago, and everybody was plugging along with 5 Gb used out of 8. Instead, all software got ever more bloated - Microsoft and Google stuff especially.

In comparison, the few users I have that run Firefox and Thunderbird instead of G/M's stuff and use in-browser apps are still good with 8 Gb (4.5 Gb actually used). I won't mention the odd Linux machine out there that can actually still make do with 4 Gb.

 

[InvalidError]

This is nonsense.

If you're a power user or a hardcore gamer, then sure, 16GB should be the minimum.

Pretty sure most people who self-describe as power users or hardcore gamers in 2022 are aiming at 32GB, 64GB or possibly even higher as a minimum, cringing at the idea of going down to 16GB. I've had 32GB for the last 10 years and wouldn't go back.

I'm a fan of future-proofing within reason and 8GB vs 16GB for $20-25 aftermarket, $15-20 for the OEMs is very much well within reason for anyone who believes they'll every use their PC for anything beyond Chrome. Though if you are not going to do much beyond that, you should probably buy a Chromebook, tablet or similar device instead of a PC or laptop.

Another thing to keep in mind is that most 8GB pre-built PCs and laptops currently on shelves come with 1x8GB DIMM since there is only ~$5 between a 4GB and 8GB DIMM vs ~$12 for a whole second 4GB DIMM, so you get gimped single-channel performance on top of being tight on memory for basic everyday use.

 

[Tac 25]

main gaming pc has 16 GB ddr4 = best pc in the house, it is fast and has not lagged in any playstation 4 or playstation 5 game that I play with it.

backup pc has 32 GB ddr3 = it plays almost all the playstation 4 and playstation 5 games I own. However, it cannot handle the max graphics resolution of Dead or Alive 6. But I think this is more of a GPU limitation than ram. My main gaming pc has less ram than this pc, but can handle DOA 6 without lag.

my storage pc has 4 GB ddr3 - this lga 775 pc is semi-retired and mostly used as backup storage. Surprisingly, it can still play DNF Duel, a very new fighting game at Ultra settings without lag -- but it's probably the GTX 1650 GDDR6 equipped to it doing most of the work, not the 4 GB ddr3 ram.

 

[blppt]

Isn't it a bad idea to say "yeah, low ram, but fast ssd!"?

My understanding of SSD technology is that the more random access (read/writes) you force it to perform will degrade and possibly cause early failure of the SSD, as would be with constant swapping of the overused page file.

 

[PEnns]

This is like dialogue of the deaf!!

If you can run your Ubunutu or email client on a machine with 8 GB of RAM, it doesn't mean EVERYBODY does the same thing and should stick with 8 GB of RAM!

If RAM prices are low and upgrading a laptop to more RAM WILL always be a pain (and costs a pretty penny at the PC store), if even possible at all, then go with more RAM and be done with it.

It's called future proofing, because your next Windows and any decent app may require more RAM. End of the story.

 

[King_V]

Another thing to keep in mind is that most 8GB pre-built PCs and laptops currently on shelves come with 1x8GB DIMM since there is only ~$5 between a 4GB and 8GB DIMM vs ~$12 for a whole second 4GB DIMM, so you get gimped single-channel performance on top of being tight on memory for basic everyday use.

My memory's a little hazy on this, but I could've sworn I've seen the occasional 1x16GB setup, and one corner of my brain went into histrionics while another corner of my brain was just trying to cringe in a corner somewhere.

Maybe I don't remember it clearly because my subconscious is trying to protect my conscious brain from the thought.

 

[alceryes]

I have several users on new-ish laptops with good core i5s, 8GBs RAM, and 256GB SSDs. Most of them are fine and they do run somewhat heavy programs. With that said, I do agree that we are on the cusp of the 8/16GB mark for business users.
Note that, when I say 8GB, I mean 2x4GB in dual channel mode. Losing another ~7% memory performance to single channel is NOT an option.

Another issue is optimizations. I've run computers out of the box that suck up all 8GBs just opening one Edge tab. After optimizations and removal/disable of unneeded trial programs, Windows 'apps', programs, and telemetry crap. That same system will only use ~4GB performing the exact same function.

For standard home users, and a heavily optimized system, 8GBs is still fine, as long as you've got an SSD.

 

[InvalidError]

My memory's a little hazy on this, but I could've sworn I've seen the occasional 1x16GB setup

Pretty sure LTT or one of the YTers who did off-the-shelf PC tear-downs have caught one or two of those - if it can be done, someone has almost certainly done it to shave a few dollars on costs, performance be damned. I suspect their sparseness is largely because most people who are savvy enough to aim for 16GB even if it costs $30-50 extra retail are also savvy enough to check single vs dual channel.

I went to check laptops at Dell.ca since my sister asked me to shop for a decent laptop for my nephew. Surprisingly enough, the 16GB i5 Inspirion 16 is currently $70 less than its 8GB counterpart due to a $220 discount.

 

[punkncat]

No. I equipped all my staff with PCs 4 years ago; base stats were quad core with HT, 8 Gb of RAM, and a 250 Gb SSD. When you load Windows (2.4Gb), an antivirus (300 Mb), Skype (500 Mb), Teams (500 Mb), Discord (400 Mb), Outlook (300 Mb) and open Chrome with a dozen tabs (2 Gb), you've already used up 6.4 Gb of your RAM; consider 128-256 Mb of RAM are allocated to your IGPU, that's when Windows starts swapping like mad, and your SSD won't enjoy it.

Open even one single app, you're out of RAM.

I had to upgrade all these machines to 16 Gb to allow them to work without slowdowns nor hangs / crashes, eventough the software setup hasn't changed ever since I had originally equipped them 4 years ago, and everybody was plugging along with 5 Gb used out of 8. Instead, all software got ever more bloated - Microsoft and Google stuff especially.

In comparison, the few users I have that run Firefox and Thunderbird instead of G/M's stuff and use in-browser apps are still good with 8 Gb (4.5 Gb actually used). I won't mention the odd Linux machine out there that can actually still make do with 4 Gb.

It's open to quite a bit of interpretation. In a case where you have a "limited" amount of RAM you have to consider what is open, when, and what use case. I cannot imagine your employees being on Skype and Teams all day long open talking to someone. So why keep it open?
My work at our shop is being done on an older 2nd gen Ryzen budget laptop that was given to me for being busted (screen), so I slapped it on the back of a TV and use it every time I am there. I have no less than 4 Chrome tabs open, Dropbox running, Quickbooks running, MS Office and Excel running as well as Adobe Pro running for conversion purposes, as needed. When every single thing listed above is open, at the same time, the system is "using" all of it's RAM...however, the important aspect to note is that as a human I cannot make ALL those programs and tabs open and active at the same time. Page file works hella faster than I do.
I have noted that with all that going I cannot run a bluetooth speaker and Pandora. So, instead of upgrading to 16GB of RAM (which I can't) I just use my phone to listen to music. I do this because I have a firm understanding of the limitation I am working with.

 

[InvalidError]

It's open to quite a bit of interpretation. In a case where you have a "limited" amount of RAM you have to consider what is open, when, and what use case. I cannot imagine your employees being on Skype and Teams all day long open talking to someone. So why keep it open?

If you want people to be able to call or text you on Skype or any other instant/voice-messaging platform, it has to be running, so it makes sense for anyone using Skype or whatever other communications tools all of the time just like emails and whatever else the company's administrative package dictates which may include aftermarket AV, remote management tools, remote backup agent, etc.

When every single thing listed above is open, at the same time, the system is "using" all of it's RAM...however, the important aspect to note is that as a human I cannot make ALL those programs and tabs open and active at the same time. Page file works hella faster than I do.

R.I.P. S.S.D.

When I had only 8GB on my Core2 10+ years ago, having to wait for a second for windows to re-appear when alt-tabbing through stuff drove me nuts. 16GB of DDR2 costing nearly as much as an i3 + 16GB of DDR3 + motherboard back then was the main reason I got my i5-3470 which I ended up maxing out almost immediately to 32GB since my typical background stuff already consumed 12-14GB.

 

[punkncat]

If you want people to be able to call or text you on Skype or any other instant/voice-messaging platform, it has to be running, so it makes sense for anyone using Skype or whatever other communications tools all of the time just like emails and whatever else the company's administrative package dictates which may include aftermarket AV, remote management tools, remote backup agent, etc.


R.I.P. S.S.D.

When I had only 8GB on my Core2 10+ years ago, having to wait for a second for windows to re-appear when alt-tabbing through stuff drove me nuts. 16GB of DDR2 costing nearly as much as an i3 + 16GB of DDR3 + motherboard back then was the main reason I got my i5-3470 which I ended up maxing out almost immediately to 32GB since my typical background stuff already consumed 12-14GB.

You are really going to talk about a Core 2 and its capability on 8GB as opposed to even semi modern machines capability today? Weak. Your waiting was assuredly not a result of having only 8GB of RAM on that architecture.

Even with the page file use, SSD often FAR outlast their use case. This is also a stick man.

 

[InvalidError]

You are really going to talk about a Core 2 and its capability on 8GB as opposed to even semi modern machines capability today? Weak. Your waiting was assuredly not a result of having only 8GB of RAM on that architecture.

It was very much an insufficient RAM issue since I had ~0MB free with the HDD LEDs on almost constantly. I had to make the swapfile span three HDDs to make performance somewhat bearable until I decided I couldn't take it anymore. 16GB on the i5 wasn't quite enough to eliminate the hiccups (12-14GB of typical baseline memory usage doesn't leave much room for caching and other stuff on 16GB - same workload I had been previously been torturing my 8GB Core2 with), so I tossed another 16GB in

Even with the page file use, SSD often FAR outlast their use case. This is also a stick man.

SSDs "outlasting their use case" is only true when there is enough RAM to save them from getting swap-raped. An SSD would likely have been ruined within a year on my Core2.

 

[martinch]

Honestly, usages vary.

A PC with 8GB of RAM is absolutely fine for some users - I've yet to see my parents' PC go over 6GB RAM utilisation (and nil swap) even with multiple logged-in users, although it does run Linux Mint which is somewhat more memory-efficient than Windows (750MB used on login vs 2GB), and they use Firefox not Chrome. If you're just doing a bit of light web browsing and other home-office stuff, then 8GB is being entirely usable (even with Windows ). Of course, memory's cheap right now if you're buying the parts yourself, so it's probably worth the extra £30 to put 16GB in "just in case". When you look at retail systems, the picture is a bit different - looking at one of the large retailers in the UK, 70% of laptops they sell have 8GB RAM or less, and going to 16GB can be a £300-500 jump in price as the 16GB models also tend to have a larger SSD and faster CPU (I know you should be able to just drop more memory in, but soldered-in memory is more common than it should be).

I have 16GB in my home PC, and haven't come close to using all of it. I mostly use it for gaming, and photo editing (raw files from a DSLR, generally 100-400 images in a run) - I haven't seen it using even 8GB when doing photo editing.

I'm a software developer, my work computer has 16GB RAM, and is mostly sat at around 15GB used - for some reason the corporate Windows image takes up 5GB on boot, and Chrome uses about 5GB. Running Outlook, Teams, and Visual Studio with containers/VMs takes the rest. Having 32GB would be nice, although I wouldn't be saying that if I didn't have a bunch of cruft using up 3GB of RAM...

Are there use cases for 32GB+? Yup, although I personally haven't met anyone that falls into that category.

 

[mitch074]

It's open to quite a bit of interpretation. In a case where you have a "limited" amount of RAM you have to consider what is open, when, and what use case. I cannot imagine your employees being on Skype and Teams all day long open talking to someone. So why keep it open?
My work at our shop is being done on an older 2nd gen Ryzen budget laptop that was given to me for being busted (screen), so I slapped it on the back of a TV and use it every time I am there. I have no less than 4 Chrome tabs open, Dropbox running, Quickbooks running, MS Office and Excel running as well as Adobe Pro running for conversion purposes, as needed. When every single thing listed above is open, at the same time, the system is "using" all of it's RAM...however, the important aspect to note is that as a human I cannot make ALL those programs and tabs open and active at the same time. Page file works hella faster than I do.
I have noted that with all that going I cannot run a bluetooth speaker and Pandora. So, instead of upgrading to 16GB of RAM (which I can't) I just use my phone to listen to music. I do this because I have a firm understanding of the limitation I am working with.

Most work in sales ; they get customer calls all day long, and those may use Teams or Skype indiscriminately. Discord is used internally by some teams. So, yes, they have to keep them open. They also keep an eye on as many websites as they can, all for business reasons, thus the Chrome tabs. Some courageous ones use Firefox, but for compatibility reasons (Chrome is the new IE6 and web devs have gotten ever more lazy), they need to have another browser open anyway.

 

[red.deugemo]

Why is windows constantly eating more ram the more the years go by? i remember windows 8 would use 500-700mb of ram tops. Now you need 11? to do what? Android VMs for app even if you don't use it? services that could be loaded on demand?

Right now i'm using a Zephyrus g14 gen1 full spec(32gb of ram, 8c,2060).

Windows will use at least 6 to 7gb of ram to just turn on.
Ubuntu sits at 990. It means that when i use blender on linux i have 6 more gigabytes of ram free to use before hitting swap.

This trend needs to stop.