NewTRUMP Order:

I guess this is a way to get around the MHZ drop in speed when you use 4 sticks of DDR 5 ram?

The "issue" is about physics, and has been a "problem" forever. Just like 4x ddr4 dimms, the max frequency doable is lower than using 2x dimms. For maximum performance with ddr4 performance we used dualrank 2x16GB and overclocked it, instead of using 4x8GB ddr4 with lower max frequency. We could do ~4700mhz with tight timings with 2x16GB, but only ~4133mhz with 4x8GB.

MegaFalloutFan:

32GB in 2023 is bare minimum

lol, no.

abula:

The problem with DDR5 is you simply can get 64GB stable above 6400, and thats with a lot of IFs... i feel DDR5 is simply to volatile, having DDR5 8200 its impossible to go above 32gb... so compromises are needed by the end user.

Max with 2x32GB hynix A-die is about 7000mhz now. With the new IC's we can do 8200+ with 2x24GB, and that's great news to everyone that need more RAM, but want maximum performance too. Motherboard of choice for high density and high frequency is ofc Asus Apex z790. Maybe the first MB that is qualified for this memory. New bios is already ready 😀

RealNC:

lol, no.

this is what happens when people have little idea of what to buy, go on yt, listen to advice from channels who are paid to push products from their sponsors, then tell you that you need to have a hundred tabs open as a bare minimum in 2023 cause that's the only scenario where they can use more than 16g. Haven't seen any problem with multiple tabs open while gaming on 16GB.

TLD LARS:

I could get Call of duty warzone to crash reliably with out of memory error at high settings with 16GB system memory. Game runs fine for 1-5 minutes and then crashes, only fix is to turn down settings to prevent ram getting filled up. This was more then 1 year after release. Have multiple other games that fill 16GB memory, but atleast they are better coded to not crash, but only loose performance. 16GB system mem and 6900XT with 16GB mem. I do not want to use more money on AM4 platform anymore, but I would go for at least 32-48GB next.

Strange, I don't see how it's possible for a game like that to take up so much DRAM. I assume you don't have a paging file? Windows has traditionally been very "swappy", though I don't know if it still is today. Back when I used to use Windows, I found some games would crash without a paging file or get interrupted with virtual memory warnings, even though I had plenty of RAM left.

MegaFalloutFan:

32gb is far from waste.I been using 64Gb since DDr4 era and on DDR3 i had 32Gb, and i can fill 64Gb just with my open browsers and all the tabs i keep i open, sometimes even crash with out of memory until i enabled 64Gb swap as help 32GB in 2023 is bare minimum, its not some comic money we talking about, ram is DIRT cheap now, its INSANELY cheap to the point i can even recover 40% of what i paid for 32GB DDR5 6000 cl 30 back when it came out So saying that you dont need it and go and save 10-20$ is idiotic, its not worth saving, its like buying anything smaller then 2Tb SSD now, when the difference models going down is minuscule.

I have a hard time wrapping my head around this sort of mentality. First of all, RAM with both good timings and clock speeds is not cheap; DDR5 (of any speed) has only been affordable within the past year, and probably only because desktop CPU sales are down. There's a substantial price difference between budget RAM and actually good stuff. You don't need the best of the best because there is a point of diminishing returns, but you don't want the cheapest stuff either. This is particularly true when you get 32GB or more, since you really ought to have ECC at that point. I would so much rather have less RAM but with good performance than just simply a lot of slow RAM for roughly the same price. Why? Because if you're sensible about what you load, you don't need more. Meanwhile, whatever is loaded will perform better. If you're filling up 64GB just in web browser tabs, you're doing things wrong. Use bookmarks, or at least a browser that allows you to put tabs to sleep. If you claim "I'm a web developer/designer" then I call BS - I know of people who make a living doing web development/design with 12GB and they don't feel the need for any more than that. There is no valid excuse for a browser to use that much. Even if it's just a dozen tabs using that much, there's something very wrong with the sites you're visiting. "But I want my tabs to load instantaneously!" then get faster internet, which will improve all aspects about your online experience. "I don't have access to a high-speed ISP!" then get a better SSD for caching, which will improve all aspects about your offline experience. Remember: unused RAM doesn't make things faster. Very broadly speaking, the more you use that isn't buffered, the slower your overall experience will be. To fill up RAM implies that data is coming from somewhere, whether that be loaded from the internet, from disk, or processed through CPU cycles. Use less where possible. The thing about living in excess is you adapt your methods to be less efficient, to a point where that excess then feels necessary.

schmidtbag:

Strange, I don't see how it's possible for a game like that to take up so much DRAM. I assume you don't have a paging file? Windows has traditionally been very "swappy", though I don't know if it still is today. Back when I used to use Windows, I found some games would crash without a paging file or get interrupted with virtual memory warnings, even though I had plenty of RAM left.

I have not removed the windows page file function and windows has its own drive and my games has it own drive, I have no idea why the game crashes, because it should just continue with bad performance and not crash. Just played 1 round of Warhammer darktide. 13.7GB memory used out of 16GB and the graph looks like it is software limited because it is flat with very little variation. Browser and other programs closed during testing, so there is nothing left for the normal programs I mostly have open. If I had 32GB mem I am sure it would use more then I am doing now. The more memory you have the less the OS needs to make room and delete things you actually could use a couple of seconds later and less need of pagefile.

TLD LARS:

I have not removed the windows page file function and windows has its own drive and my games has it own drive, I have no idea why the game crashes, because it should just continue with bad performance and not crash. Just played 1 round of Warhammer darktide. 13.7GB memory used out of 16GB and the graph looks like it is software limited because it is flat with very little variation. Browser and other programs closed during testing, so there is nothing left for the normal programs I mostly have open. If I had 32GB mem I am sure it would use more then I am doing now.

Sometimes if there is a sudden influx of needing more RAM, an application will crash even if there is enough swap space left. Seems to me Warhammer is designed to not use up more than 85% of your total used memory, probably for the sake of avoiding what CoD does.

The more memory you have the less the OS needs to make room and delete things you actually could use a couple of seconds later and less need of pagefile.

That is true but when it comes to gaming, you're not likely to be loading tens of GB of assets over and over again. I also suspect once DirectStorage becomes more common, DRAM usage will decrease. As a Linux user, my memory footprint is considerably smaller, so I'll probably be fine a little while longer before I need to go above 16GB.