Why I Won’t Use Less Than 32GB of RAM

(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)
118

Most RAM buying guides, including ours, insist that 16GB is the value sweet spot, and for good reason: Many consumer programs tend to spill over 8GB of use, while few consume more than 16GB. Going with less than that “sweet spot” will cause some data to be written to much-slower virtual memory on your storage drive. Going up from 16GB to 32GB doubles your cost from around $60 to $120 (at current market pricing).

For most people, 16GB is probably OK, but if you’re a power user like me, more RAM is more than worth the cost, because you’re literally paying to get some of your time back.

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware
TOPICS
Thomas Soderstrom is a Senior Staff Editor at Tom's Hardware US. He tests and reviews cases, cooling, memory and motherboards.
  • daglesj
    You run a messy system good for you!
    Reply
  • Gurg
    Silly me. I thought you might be running something like MSI Afterburner or Task Manager Performance in the background and monitoring your active computer system to see the max speeds and usages of the various PC components. Thereby determining that you were using close to the maximum RAM usage and could benefit from either faster or more RAM capacity. Instead you are just flying by the seat of your pants which is not what I would expect from a tech site.

    Personally I monitor my system to see what weak points are for my uses. I also keep up with sites like yours to see what is new and reviews for PC components. Finally I check various retailers to see the price of my current components and possible upgrades. Additionally I will check out top scoring systems on 3DMark TIME SPY that use my CPU or GPU and how they are generating those higher scores. Also see if buying a supposed upgrade CPU or GPU would improve my scores. Then I will make cost/benefit decisions as to whether I need or want to tweak my system with minor upgrades or replace it.
    Reply
  • rubix_1011
    As a content creator for the site, I can agree with the content of this article.

    Silly me. I thought you might be running something like MSI Afterburner or Task Manager Performance in the background and monitoring your computer system to see the max speeds and usages of the various PC components. Thereby determining that you were using close to the maximum RAM usage and could benefit from either faster or more RAM capacity. Instead you are just flying by the seat of your pants which is not what I would expect from a tech site. .

    I wouldn't even consider using MSI Afterburner for anything like that.

    A software suite like HWInfo would be much more suited to delivering this kind of information to a power user over an overclocking/fan control software UI.

    Task Manager would provide enough information to start building a basis for real-time system allocation of memory usage, and would be one of the first places I would look. I can't find a reason why someone wouldn't use Task Manager to identify these items on a Windows PC and then work from there.

    While you want this to sound like you are completely outraged, your argument offers little-to-no basis for debate over that in the article. It also sounds like you want there to be a much more difficult and in-depth set of steps to evaluate system resources, but the fact is that it should be simple for any user of any skill ability to easily determine these and make adjustments to suit their needs.
    Reply
  • csm101
    for my next platform jump(not sure when it happens) i'm going for 32GB as well.
    Reply
  • 32 is my new standard as well, this 16 is garbage for hosting lots of test VMs and whatnot. 32 to 64 GB or go home. it's a good read.
    Reply
  • g-unit1111
    Things change for sure. Since RAM is so cheap having more isn't necessarily a bad thing especially since CPUs are moving beyond 4 cores, why should we stick with the cheap option for RAM?
    Reply
  • nofanneeded
    How about 24GB ? 2x8 and 2x4 ?

    I dont think that 32 GB is needed given you dont really fill up upto 24 GB of RAM
    Reply
  • bignastyid
    nofanneeded said:
    How about 24GB ? 2x8 and 2x4 ?

    I dont think that 32 GB is needed given you dont really fill up upto 24 GB of RAM
    Mixing ram is not a suggested practice. Best to buy in a kit/set and there hasn't been 24gb kits since triple channel made it's short appearance.
    Reply
  • USAFRet
    I have 32GB.
    Then again, I routinely run a few VM's simultaneously. 4-6-8GB RAM each sucks up RAM quickly.
    Reply
  • TJ Hooker
    admin said:
    We keep saying 16GB is the “sweet spot,” of memory capacity. So why aren’t we all using it?
    I think people say 16GB is the "sweet spot" for gaming/basic desktop use. Most people I see giving advice on these forums for how much RAM to get add a caveat that you may benefit from more if you're doing media production/content creation. Which is basically in line with this article (except for the bit about wanting two ranks per channel, but that doesn't necessarily require 32GB).

    And as far as getting 32GB just for 'future proofing', by the time you need more than 16GB for gaming it'll probably be time to upgrade to a DDR5 platform anyway.
    Reply