intel i7 4790k, will it support 64gb

[Danny Persaud]

will the Intel Core i7 4790k support 64gb of RAM out of the box

 

[Darkbreeze]

No, 32GB max.

http://ark.intel.com/products/80807/Intel-Core-i7-4790K-Processor-8M-Cache-up-to-4_40-GHz

 

[photonboy]

Since it sounds like you are doing VIDEO EDITING or similar you may want to consider the i7-5820K CPU and appropriate motherboard and I believe that requires DDR4 memory.

It's a six-core CPU but reasonably priced. DDR4 memory is a bit more expensive but not sure what other options you would have.

pcpartpicker is pretty helpful: http://pcpartpicker.com/

 

[Darkbreeze]

Unless you're in a corporate environment, or running some SERIOUSLY professional applicatons like high end CAD or movie production type video editing, or VM's, there's no way you'd ever use more than 16GB of RAM anyhow. Most common applications rarely use more than 8 and almost never more than 16GB.

 

[Josh Levinson]

Unless you're in a corporate environment, or running some SERIOUSLY professional applicatons like high end CAD or movie production type video editing, or VM's, there's no way you'd ever use more than 16GB of RAM anyhow. Most common applications rarely use more than 8 and almost never more than 16GB.

Totally not true. I do stitching of 36 megapixel images in Photoshop all the time, and regularly go past 32 GB of RAM. Even when working on a single image, use of multiple layers (including smart layers) will very often go past 16 GB of RAM. Add some multitasking to that, and... Bottom line is if you're using photo/video editing software to any serious extent (even as a non-professional), you will most definitely benefit from having more than 16 GB of RAM.

 

[Darkbreeze]

The processes you're describing would be best included in areas of professional graphic arts and photography. The average user who does light editing of family video, records video gameplay and touches up photographs here and there is never going to be working with multiple 36 megapixel images or use more than a couple of layers. I do work with between 5 and 20 layers in Photoshop CS6 all the time, as well as animations with hundreds of frames, and have never run out of memory with 16GB. There is also no indication that the OP is even doing anything of the sort. Most these kinds of posts are by noob gamers who are convinced that if they have more RAM their systems will game better and faster. Not that THIS thread is one of those, just to be clear.

Anybody with a serious concern regarding resources, like a professional or serious amateur, would bring that fact into the light. But thanks for pointing out that there are some situations where more RAM could be useful. I think most anybody running image editing software at a high level, whether professionally or not, or other configurations like virtual machines, would know enough to disagree with a recommendation that doesn't fit the scenario they already know will be likely.

 

[Josh Levinson]

The processes you're describing would be best included in areas of professional graphic arts and photography. The average user who does light editing of family video, records video gameplay and touches up photographs here and there is never going to be working with multiple 36 megapixel images or use more than a couple of layers. I do work with between 5 and 20 layers in Photoshop CS6 all the time, as well as animations with hundreds of frames, and have never run out of memory with 16GB. There is also no indication that the OP is even doing anything of the sort. Most these kinds of posts are by noob gamers who are convinced that if they have more RAM their systems will game better and faster. Not that THIS thread is one of those, just to be clear.

Anybody with a serious concern regarding resources, like a professional or serious amateur, would bring that fact into the light. But thanks for pointing out that there are some situations where more RAM could be useful. I think most anybody running image editing software at a high level, whether professionally or not, or other configurations like virtual machines, would know enough to disagree with a recommendation that doesn't fit the scenario they already know will be likely.

That's true. I guess I was just wanting to emphasize that many people do need more than 16, or even 32 GB of RAM - not just "professionals", or those doing super high end video editing/graphic design. Of course, there are many levels of user between Joe Blow doing light editing of family photos, and high end professionals.

I just felt the need to comment here because before I bought my current rig, one of the main questions I was considering was whether I needed as much as 32 GB of RAM, based on my needs (I'm just a hobbyist, BTW, not a pro), and I was having a hard time determining the answer to that question. It turns out 32 GB wasn't even enough (well, it's enough to get by, to be sure, but it does still become a bottleneck quite regularly)! So I was just commenting to hopefully help others who are in the same situation I was in.

BTW, the reason I was poking around in here is because my house was broken into last weekend and the bastard stole my custom built computer. So I'm now in the market for a new computer, and since my main issue before was a RAM deficit, I was researching whether the i7 4790k can support more than 32 GB - which apparently, it cannot. So I'm now even thinking about going for an i7 5820k (which does allow this), and upping the RAM to 48 or 64 GB. I know the 5820k has a much slower clockspeed than the 4790k, but I'm hoping I can get the 5820k to come close to matching the single core performance of the 4790k by overclocking it.

 

[Darkbreeze]

Actually, I'd consider the Intel Xeon E5-1630 V3 which supports up to 768GB of RAM, is less expensive than the 5820k, has a 3.7Ghz base clock with 8 threads and the cost of a motherboard and RAM have dropped considerably for DDR4 modules and boards so it's at least an option. The 300mhz difference between it and the 4790k is probably negligible and it also supports ECC Memory if that's a consideration.

Another option is the E5 1620v3 at 3.5Ghz, 8 threads, 768GB of RAM and about a hundred bucks cheaper than either of those other processors.