[QUOTE=faze;25870319]Whatever, I'm not a programmer. You get what I mean though.[/QUOTE]
Then stop being pseudo-intelligent.
[QUOTE=thf;25870649]You sure you aren't talking about base 2?
[editline]1:11[/editline]
late[/QUOTE]
Base 2 is Binary. Oh Facepunch, you so silly :v:
8Gb is just overkill, I'm managing fine on 3 currently.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;25870735]Base 2 is Binary. Oh Facepunch, you so silly :v:[/QUOTE]
I rather meant exponentiation with the base 2 :v:
[QUOTE=lkhrizl;25869955]4GBs 32-bit os
8GBs 64-bit os[/QUOTE]
That's dumb. 4gb is 32-bit, 64-bit has an enormously larger limit. I know OS X can support 64tb of RAM, and the actual 64-bit limit is even higher.
[QUOTE=thf;25870888]I rather meant exponentiation with the base 2 :v:[/QUOTE]
Thought you might. Just correcting small mistakes as not to confuse people :v:
[editline]5th November 2010[/editline]
[QUOTE=MacTrekkie;25870901]That's dumb. 4gb is 32-bit, 64-bit has an enormously larger limit. I know OS X can support 64tb of RAM, and the actual 64-bit limit is even higher.[/QUOTE]
I believe Windows caps off at 128GB RAM, as that is an absurd amount anyway.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;25870936]I believe Windows caps off at 128GB RAM, as that is [b]an absurd amount[/b] anyway.[/QUOTE]
That's really all you need to know.
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;25870585]Even though Windows 7 is a different OS, doesn't mean it can magically use more than 32-bit restricts it to.[/QUOTE]
Well Windows 7 x86 works for me with over 3.5GB, maybe I'm just special.
I use 6gb just since i don't want to use 3gb and still have triple channel on my x58 :P altough triplechannel ain't that much better.
4gb always feel perfect.
[QUOTE=MacTrekkie;25870901]That's dumb. 4gb is 32-bit, 64-bit has an enormously larger limit. I know OS X can support 64tb of RAM, and the actual 64-bit limit is even higher.[/QUOTE]
16 exabytes?
faze, Windows 7 x86 can detect over 4GB of RAM, but it can't actually use it.
It's just a limitation of 32-bit operating systems..
It's the same damn thing no matter what version of Windows, Linux, Mac OS X, BSD, Plan 9 etc. you use.
There however is the PAE-extension that allows you to use (I think) 64GB of RAM in a 32-bit OS, but pretty much nobody uses it.
[QUOTE=faze;25871012]Well Windows 7 x86 works for me with over 3.5GB, maybe I'm just special.[/QUOTE]
But you're still wrong.
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;25871770]But you're still wrong.[/QUOTE]
k.
jesus christ stop arguing if you fon't know what the fuck you're talking about
Windows 7: [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_7_editions#Comparison_chart[/url]
Windows Visa: [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Vista_editions#Comparison_chart[/url]
[QUOTE=faze;25871012]Well Windows 7 x86 works for me with over 3.5GB, maybe I'm just special.[/QUOTE]
of course it will work, it's just not going to use it.
[editline]5th November 2010[/editline]
[QUOTE=hexpunK;25870394]Indeed. Normally RAM in powers of 2 is recommended. Though I'm sure having DDR3 in a triple channel configuration (so 3x2GB sticks in 3 linked channels) is meant to increase performance a little. I can't remember mind you.[/QUOTE]
god this makes no sense at all, having 4GB of RAM instead of 5GB doesn't all of a sudden lessen the impact of having that extra 1GB RAM
[editline]5th November 2010[/editline]
[QUOTE=faze;25869923]Every programmer I know says to stick with the base 10. 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, etc. Programs are written to make better use of RAM that way. Without understanding software archiceture, any argument you make will just make you sound stupid.[/QUOTE]
shutup, wrong
[editline]5th November 2010[/editline]
[QUOTE=faze;25869836]That's your problem. Windows 7 32 bit [b]sees[/b] it fine, I use it at work...[/QUOTE]
bolded
[editline]5th November 2010[/editline]
[QUOTE=FFStudios;25869794]4GB, plenty. Until games require 4GB of RAM or Sony Vegas needs that much, it'll be just fine.
[editline]5th November 2010[/editline]
Vista has a cap too, however it's much smaller. 3.8GB.[/QUOTE]
no there's no set cap, it's the amount of RAM you have minus all the other memory your OS is utilizing
[editline]5th November 2010[/editline]
[QUOTE=faze;25869788]64. Windows 7 32 bit is not capped. That's only XP.[/QUOTE]
really?
[editline]5th November 2010[/editline]
any questions?
How has this gone on for so long? It was a simple question with an obvious answer, get 4GB. He doesn't have an i7 so bringing triple channel/6GB into this was pointless. Please let this thread die before more people make idiots of themselves
[QUOTE=FINLEY;25874828]How has this gone on for so long? It was a simple question with an obvious answer, get 4GB. He doesn't have an i7 so bringing triple channel/6GB into this was pointless. Please let this thread die before more people make idiots of themselves[/QUOTE]
X58 motherboard, not an i7.
Where does it say this? If he did why would he have 4GB of RAM?
[QUOTE=FINLEY;25875499]Where does it say this? If he did why would he have 4GB of RAM?[/QUOTE]
there are i7s on 1156, 1156 doesn't support triple channel
[QUOTE=Odellus;25874331]no there's no set cap, it's the amount of RAM you have minus all the other memory your OS is utilizing[/QUOTE]
More like 4GB minus other stuff like Vram can be used.
The number 4 comes from 2^32 = 4 294 967 296B = 4GB
[QUOTE=thf;25875697]More like 4GB minus other stuff like Vram can be used.
The number 4 comes from 2^32 = 4 294 967 296B = 4GB[/QUOTE]
meant to say 4GB, forgot to edit
[QUOTE=Odellus;25875542]there are i7s on 1156, 1156 doesn't support triple channel[/QUOTE]
Aren't x58 motherboards 1366 socket?
[QUOTE=MacTrekkie;25870901]That's dumb. 4gb is 32-bit, 64-bit has an enormously larger limit. I know OS X can support 64tb of RAM, and the actual 64-bit limit is even higher.[/QUOTE]
fucking jesus how many sticks of ram would you need to get 64TB of RAM?
I mean fuck.
[QUOTE=faze;25869923]Every programmer I know says to stick with the base 10. 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, etc. Programs are written to make better use of RAM that way. Without understanding software archiceture, any argument you make will just make you sound stupid.[/QUOTE]
dude you're fucking stupid
[QUOTE=FFStudios;25878275]fucking jesus how many sticks of ram would you need to get 64TB of RAM?
I mean fuck.[/QUOTE]
Depends on when they start manufacturing sticks big enough. It's an insanely high number that has little to no value in actual computing because it is too high to even think about utilizing. Unless, of course, you want to make a supercomputer that runs OS X... for some reason.
More ram will be needed when other components get better.
Wait, how did such a simple question generate 87 posts?
Just like saying "Hello" can start a massive conversation...
Remember that "How much hard drive space is enough?" thread?
Ah, the nostalgia.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.