Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

How much RAM is too much RAM?

Last response: in Memory
Share
December 5, 2012 8:52:44 AM

Let's assume I have the highest end CPU and GPU for average consumers
e.g.
i7 3970X (Overclocked)
and
Asus Direct CU II GTX 690 4Gb

such that RAM is being the "bottleneck" or limiting factor.

How much RAM is optimal for HD video editing on programs such as Adobe AE CS5+ or Sony Vegas Pro 10+, without being overkill?

I'm inclined to think between 16Gb and 32Gb is the sweet spot, do you think it's worth getting 32Gb?

More about : ram ram

a b } Memory
December 5, 2012 11:55:30 AM

If you can afford to throw over $1200 at MoBo+CPU, I think you can afford to throw $80 extra to go from 16GB to 32GB.
December 5, 2012 12:04:09 PM

InvalidError said:
If you can afford to throw over $1200 at MoBo+CPU, I think you can afford to throw $80 extra to go from 16GB to 32GB.


The whole build (case, mouse, keyb, hphones etc.) was $3.8k, and I already have 4x4Gb 1800Mhz cors. vengeance in quad channel.

I know I can afford to buy an extra 4x4Gb or, what I'll probably end up doing, swapping the 4x4Gb with 4x8Gb.

Whether I can afford it or not is off the point, I only mentioned my extreme build to provide context, that there is no bottlenecking going on, and so the situation is purely theoretical and hypothetical:

How much RAM is optimal for HD Video editing, and at what point is it overkill?

Hope this helped you understand my question better
Related resources
December 5, 2012 12:33:30 PM

At Least 16Gb, 32Gb is somewhat overkill, unless you do edit 3 videos using 3 different software while gaming fitting all those windows in one monitor or two, while doing all that at the same time, which is impossible. It also depends on the speed of the RAM.
December 5, 2012 12:48:33 PM

empty213 said:
At Least 16Gb, 32Gb is somewhat overkill, unless you do edit 3 videos using 3 different software while gaming fitting all those windows in one monitor or two, while doing all that at the same time, which is impossible. It also depends on the speed of the RAM.


I'll be using 1800Mhz 4xAGb Quad Channel memory cards, where A is either 4 or 8, depending on whether I want 16 or 32Gb of Ram respectively.

How come 32Gb is overkill? Do you have experience with this? Or are you muttering out of your bum, excuse my bluntness but too long have I been teased by "advice" given to me by "experts" who just ramble guesses, opinions or sometimes fancily dressed up bullshit.

Just to reiterate, I will emphasise the letters HD in the previously mentioned "HD Video Editing". I am talking about Good-Best quality preview playback, on 1080p footage, in editing software such as the ones mentioned above. I'll have you know 16Gb is definitely not enough for the caliber of HD playback I'm interested in, so unless you do have personal experience and savvy on the matter of HD video editing, and are instead rambling poppycock, please don't even bother replying.
a b } Memory
December 5, 2012 1:51:00 PM

HD and 3d HD are different. 3D is literally playing / editing 2 separate video's at once.

Anyhow... I personally feel that 16GB is more than enough. But a good indication would be to pop open a large project. Open your task manager, and click on the performance tab. Apply a couple effects or something that you commonly do, and run a render.

Watch your RAM, and see what it does. If you are pushing upwards of 80% of capacity then it would be a good idea to bump up to the next tier.

However, I doubt that you will be. Especially since the biggest bottleneck for Video editing is actually storage. Even SSD's will bottleneck. You would need a RAMDisk or something like a Revo drive to keep that from happening.
December 5, 2012 2:08:15 PM

itzdanielp said:
HD and 3d HD are different. 3D is literally playing / editing 2 separate video's at once.

Anyhow... I personally feel that 16GB is more than enough. But a good indication would be to pop open a large project. Open your task manager, and click on the performance tab. Apply a couple effects or something that you commonly do, and run a render.

Watch your RAM, and see what it does. If you are pushing upwards of 80% of capacity then it would be a good idea to bump up to the next tier.

However, I doubt that you will be. Especially since the biggest bottleneck for Video editing is actually storage. Even SSD's will bottleneck. You would need a RAMDisk or something like a Revo drive to keep that from happening.


Right, thank you, finally something interesting I learnt on this thread!

Didn't know about SSD bottlenecking, I am running 2 ocz vertex 4's in RAID 0, with a few 3TB WD HDDs but thats just for storage, and are not involved in any of this.

Not sure how 3D HD video editing came into topic seems like a random subject to bring up..but anyway,

I'll just upgrade to 4x8Gb 1800Mhz Quad Channel for a total of 32Gigs. I could go for 8x8 but I'd rather have 4xanything, to enjoy the Quad Channel ram goodness that is supported by my badass rampageIV extreme.

None of this thread really helped me in my situation at all, but at least I learnt something interesting.
a b } Memory
December 5, 2012 2:25:16 PM

8xXGB will still be quad channel...

It would just have 2 dimms per channel. Just like you can have 4 DIMMS in dual channel.

For Dual channel chipsets it is often grouped like this

CPU 1212

For most quad channel boards it is grouped like this

1234 CPU 1234

Read the motherboard documentation to see how your MB is setup. But chances are if you are only using 4 out of 8 dimms, if you are skipping slots you are not running in quad channel.
December 5, 2012 2:45:29 PM

itzdanielp said:
if you are only using 4 out of 8 dimms, if you are skipping slots you are not running in quad channel.


No.
a b } Memory
December 5, 2012 2:52:16 PM

Ok, sounds good. But upgrading to 8 x 4GB is still quad channel. You will have no performance difference in using 4 x 8 or 8 x 4
a b } Memory
December 5, 2012 3:11:05 PM

Old school rule of thumb: "You cannot have too much RAM or a hard drive that is too big."
December 5, 2012 3:47:30 PM

InvalidError said:
If you can afford to throw over $1200 at MoBo+CPU, I think you can afford to throw $80 extra to go from 16GB to 32GB.


^ THIS!!! lol.

But as other said, open up your performance tab under task manager (or another monitoring program of your choice). Edit/encoded something. If you are close to maxing out your RAM, get more. I am not 100% sure when RAM starts dumping to virtual memory/page file, but if your 80-85%+ I'd say get more. Very easy to find out.
a b } Memory
December 5, 2012 6:24:52 PM

xFriarx said:
If you are close to maxing out your RAM, get more. I am not 100% sure when RAM starts dumping to virtual memory/page file, but if your 80-85%+ I'd say get more. Very easy to find out.

Performance may have very noticeable degradation long before hitting 80% "commit charge" since by the time you get there, the OS will already be sacrificing disk cache to accommodate program allocations. Depending on individual program's behavior, the increasing frequent reloading may become a major irritant.

Granted, this isn't half as much of an issue with SSDs.

Personally, a lot of my stuff is on external HDDs and wouldn't fit on a $80 SSD so I would be much happier with spending $80 going from 16GB to 32GB so my applications/data can get cached wherever they may be. Initial load times may be longer but since I reboot only about once a month and simply having to restart my programs is a far greater inconvenience in itself (at least to me) than the boot/load times.
a b } Memory
December 5, 2012 8:15:08 PM

Go for the 32 gigs of Ram - The extra 16 gigs will not be wasted.
Reason:
You will be able to compare 16 gigs vs 32 gig - Face it Not many have 32 gigs to give an honest answer. IF NOT a good boost in performance then use the 16 gigs for a Ram Drive. NOTE, your 2 X SSDs in Raid0 will be like a Bike compared to a Motorcycle. Ramdisk is approx 6->10 X faster than a SSD.
RamDisk Used for comparision: http://memory.dataram.com/products-and-services/softwar...
Gone up to $19, I bought @ 15 bucks.

December 5, 2012 8:27:17 PM

Sweet, they have a 4Gb free version too.
a b } Memory
December 5, 2012 9:56:16 PM

RetiredChief said:
IF NOT a good boost in performance then use the 16 gigs for a Ram Drive. NOTE, your 2 X SSDs in Raid0 will be like a Bike compared to a Motorcycle. Ramdisk is approx 6->10 X faster than a SSD.

Simply letting the OS use the otherwise unused RAM to extend the disk cache will achieve most of the same effect without any user intervention or third-party software involved.

This speedup obviously won't show up in disk benchmarks that disable or otherwise bypass disk caches.
January 9, 2013 3:06:46 AM

yanxtar said:
I'll be using 1800Mhz 4xAGb Quad Channel memory cards, where A is either 4 or 8, depending on whether I want 16 or 32Gb of Ram respectively.

How come 32Gb is overkill? Do you have experience with this? Or are you muttering out of your bum, excuse my bluntness but too long have I been teased by "advice" given to me by "experts" who just ramble guesses, opinions or sometimes fancily dressed up bullshit.

Just to reiterate, I will emphasise the letters HD in the previously mentioned "HD Video Editing". I am talking about Good-Best quality preview playback, on 1080p footage, in editing software such as the ones mentioned above. I'll have you know 16Gb is definitely not enough for the caliber of HD playback I'm interested in, so unless you do have personal experience and savvy on the matter of HD video editing, and are instead rambling poppycock, please don't even bother replying.

sounds like you already kno u need 32gb. price isnt an issue for u so just do it, better to have and not need than vice versa
!