Question about RAM upgrade

[monsterstack]

I recently discovered a neat way to speed some tasks up on Linux, by creating a temporary RAM file system and offloading some of the temporary file operations (such as Firefox's cache) to that. Makes everything much faster. But really need some more RAM on this old machine anyway. I can go up to eight gigs, but would I have any benefit from using such a vast amount even with a 64-bit OS? Has anyone here upgraded their RAM to silly amounts of awesome and cares to help me out? Thanks a lot!

[Skripka]

I recently discovered a neat way to speed some tasks up on Linux, by creating a temporary RAM file system and offloading some of the temporary file operations (such as Firefox's cache) to that. Makes everything much faster. But really need some more RAM on this old machine anyway. I can go up to eight gigs, but would I have any benefit from using such a vast amount even with a 64-bit OS? Has anyone here upgraded their RAM to silly amounts of awesome and cares to help me out? Thanks a lot!

I have 4GB, and run 64bit-and have never even used all of that, except in circumstances of severe memory leaks.

[LowSky]

anymore than 2GB and its wasted money. I have 4Gb and I dont think I have ever loaded it up beyond a maybe one Gig... maybe I should do more encoding?

[Therion]

I can go up to eight gigs, but would I have any benefit from using such a vast amount even with a 64-bit OS?
Unless you're doing some INSANE video encoding or something else massively memory-intensive, save yourself a few bucks and hold off on 8GB. I'm going to hazard a guess and say that somewhere around 2GB of available system RAM is going to be the "sweet spot". That's a dangerous statement but I stand by it. And by "available" I mean that if you have onboard graphics that share your system RAM and use it for graphics-processing, that your system has a full 2GB of RAM to use besides what's being shared.

So, long story short, I'd suggest your PC have around 2GB of system RAM.

While having more won't hurt, you're going to run into the Point of Diminishing Returns VERY quickly with more than that.

[monsterstack]

Thanks for the replies. I do actually do quite a bit of video-encoding (I record TV documentaries and put them on an ftp for my friends to watch in other countries), so any help there would be really useful. Eight gigabytes does seem a bit like overkill, though. Hrmm. I'll have to think about this some more.

[starcraft.man]

Unless you're doing some INSANE video encoding or something else massively memory-intensive, save yourself a few bucks and hold off on 8GB. I'm going to hazard a guess and say that somewhere around 2GB of available system RAM is going to be the "sweet spot". That's a dangerous statement but I stand by it. And by "available" I mean that if you have onboard graphics that share your system RAM and use it for graphics-processing, that your system has a full 2GB of RAM to use besides what's being shared.

So, long story short, I'd suggest your PC have around 2GB of system RAM.

While having more won't hurt, you're going to run into the Point of Diminishing Returns VERY quickly with more than that.

+1

See, not so dangerous.

8GBs is for the following:
- Virtual Machine users (multiple at once, usually for development)
- Adobe Suite Production
- High End Video Editing

If you don't do any of that, 2GB is fine. 4 GB will be more than enough for years.

Edit: So you do video encoding. I assume 4GB would be enough, you don't handle 1080p video do you? Is it just SD?

[Dark Aspect]

Go with 4 GB, it can't hurt. I am using 2 GB and while I don't have a problem, you can have some serious fun with 4 GB. Such as creating temporary ram disk and turning the swap file off.

[Dragonbite]

I've got 512 MB so I'm jealous either way!