4gb of ram?

[tgxiii]

Originally posted by alesis_c
so how does everyone know that 2 gig isn't worth it?

where does everybody get their facts if they haven't used it...

not flaming but a serious question...

I haven't tried out 2 gigs, but I do know that I spent over $100 on 512MB and I'm happy with it. I know that someone would have to put a gun to my head for me to buy another 512 megs. That, or it would have to be given to me for free.

RAM costs a lot of money, and I have a limited amount of it. I would rather spend my money on other things.

[HeadBand]

Originally posted by alesis_c
so how does everyone know that 2 gig isn't worth it?

where does everybody get their facts if they haven't used it...

not flaming but a serious question...

we check to see if we are using any of the pagefile and if we are then we need more ram

[hansbroken]

I cannot see a home desktop PC (gaming rig or not) benefiting from anything over 1 Gig. You might be able to justify 1.5 Gb, but there would have to be some sort of control (i.e a benchmark(s) ) used for a comparison between 512 MB, 1Gig and 1.5 GB to see any difference.

If anything, more RAM can make things run slower. As posted above, there is a point of diminished return. A desktop PC with the current XP 32 bit OS (and Games or other programs) can only use so much RAM for it's resources. On an AMD 761 Chipset MB, I had 512 MB ram, I added an extra stick of 512 (both cas 2-2-2 low latency). It 'seemed' faster. But after running several benchmarks, I actually lost some performance in my memory. Not a lot, but I NEVER benched higher than the 512 MB. The MB supported up to 3.5 gig (2 gig non-registered and 3.5 registered – which the manual states is more for a server than for desktop usage).

Increasing the RAM beyond what the components & programs can optimally use does not mean extra performance.

The fact that a computer 'seems' to run smoother is a placebo effect. It's like, you give a group of people pills and say it will take headaches away. You give out to one group medicine (say Aspirin) and the other gets a placebo (i.e. 'sugar pill'). After 2 hours, there will be many (not all) that claim relief from their headache even though all they took was a placebo.

If you want to prove that your system benefits from 2 Gig over 512MB or 1Gig etc.., then run SiSondra, PCMark and or 3dMark etc.. and see if there is an measurable difference between them. But I believe that you will find that there is either no difference or a decrease as you go up. You would actually gain a lot more by improving components (add some WD Raptors and a good video card) and fine tuning the settings in your Bios.

And I'm not putting down, or afraid of 2 gig or 4 gig or 10 Gigs of RAM. The new AMD FX chip is recommended to use 1 GB - of registered RAM - to run properly. And I'm sure that a 64 bit OS will require a bit more ram that our current 32 bit. The key is to use Faster RAM (ex low latency and DDRII when it comes out) over copious amounts of it.

“That’s the fact, Jack” J

[Jeordiewhite]

Well he is however using dual channel DDR, which doubles the bandwidth, not really helping tho when he has a 400mhz FSB processor that can't utilize anything over the 400mhz FSB.
With larger sticks like say he went with 4GB, you deffinatly would need registered, ECC would be great as well, but not a must. Otherwise the memory would not function as well with it being so large.

As for being 'future proof', that isn't quite true, you bought the last line of the athlon XP barton core processors and will later on need a new motherboard, what will happen when you get a new mobo/cpu and the new standard might be growing towards DDR2 down the road?
I think you made a bad choice, buying ram just for the sake of bragging rights, while it would be interesting if your system needed it and you tend to utilize it with graphic apps/video editing or server or any other high end work station programs. However even with premier this isn't likely a justified reason for the money you spent on the ram, I dont believe it will make using premier any differe't using 1GB even. Even if you are encoding the video for a high deffinition tv in very high res and fps. It's just not a program known for using up to 2GB of ram, and yeah have used premier 7 myself.

1GB does seem to be the standard these days, I have 1GB because I am using dual channel and needed larger than 512mb, so I went with 1gb and am happy with it.
I hardly do max out with it, I have at times and started using the page file heavily, but it is rare and I end up opening more things than I should at the time.