Because of this article, I've ordered another 16GB of RAM to give my system 32GB. Thoughts? http://simhqmotorsports.com/too-much-sim-racing-causes-memory-loss/
Please run some tests now to record data, run them again when you install the memory and post your results. I'm not sure what we would measure, though, to determine if there is an improvement.
Aargh! I don't believe RAM usage is meaningful unless it affects fps or stutters, yet the article provides no measurements of those.
Wow, never took a look at the RAM usage before. I didn't know it drinks that much RAM. Although those are maximum values, the average values are just 1gb lower.
Those figures are a bit misleading, because they include Windows RAM usage. Windows (especially newer versions) optimizes RAM usage depending on how much free memory there is, Windows 10 even includes a compressed memory feature. So stating that you need more than 16 GB of RAM just because the total usage on a 32 GB system exceeds 16 GB, isn't necessarily true. I never found the need to go above 8 GB for rF2. With many processes running and using HD+ resolutions things might change, but going above 16 GB seems silly to me.
WARNING !!! WARNING !!! WARNING !!!! lol He is a imbecile. He offers no comparison with a single GPU single Monitor system ......yet he could have easily done so. Lame Like is he a tard ? What does he think is sucking that much ram. You been driving rF for 4 year now you get more this ram because this Noddy says so. He will have people have 8GB wasting $100 Australian on 16GB Did he say to anyone with a single GPU Single Monitor disregard this. ? Seriously...... " IT'S LIKELY " ? hahahahahaha No it is NOT LIKELY ...... if he did a bloody single GPU/ Monitor Test he would know that....... Thoughts? mate yes put the rubbish in Hardware for the people have more money then sense where it belongs.
Um... wow his system is horribly badly optimised. Seriously, who has so much crap open whilst actively gaming that 5.4GB of RAM is being used before he even opens the game? I've got five different largeish programs open in Windows 10 right now and I'm only using 2.7GB (Baseline without: 1.9GB). Take my system as a baseline and close the various editors I've got open and even in the worst case scenario you won't need more than 16GB and that's before you pick apart the methodology. Notice, too, that he's not actually demonstrated an FPS benefit from 32GB over 16GB. I'm going to guess that not everything that's stored in RAM is being refreshed all the time and could just as easily sit in the page file if it needed with no visible performance hit and that's not including the fact a good chunk of that OS/background task puppy fat would likely be cached in case another task took over further reducing the need. Nothing short of a rendering program or similar should get any real benefit from 32GB of RAM unless your task manager list is basically a sewer of updaters, adware and extraneous software.
Doesn't windows keep a fixed percentage of your total ram in constant background use for faster start/load time of your most frequently used programs? I could be wrong but the fact that you both share the same percentage of windows background ram use might suggest so. Yours is 2.7gb of 16gb ram and his is 5.4gb of 32gb. Both equal to 17% of net ram. Just coincidence?
with Hinfo64 with 8gb of ram AC use around 50% with 24 cars, RF2 around 60% and Pcars 65% of my physical Memory load with around 30 or 35 cars online. with 4gb I had many problems with Pcars and now not. here normal values View attachment 19124 after 5 min watching a rf2 replay at Mid-Ohio with 35 cars View attachment 19125
I hadn't actually considered that but after some research you are totally right. Either way it's another hole in this 'test' but hell, I learned something today.
This is where I lose interest in these RAM usage discussions. Windows has, over time, become very, very good at allocating physical RAM for things that need it and paging the lower prioroty stuff to disk. Maybe in the Windows 2000 days there were tweaks and questiosn to be asked. Nowadays, there's little need. 8 GB should be fine for most gaming, 16 GB is nice and is a cheap upgrade. I don't see the need for 32 GB. I need to do some testing of my own... I find it hard to believe that rF2 is grabbing 13.6 GB. Consider that it wasn't that long ago we had a 32-bit executable with the complementary 3.5 GB limit of that addressing and the sim ran fine except when we started running large fields of detailed cars and/or large detailed tracks like the 'Ring.
Well, i'll admit that i'm a little sceptical myself that it should need so much ram but i simply don't know. I've never tried running 28-32 AI cars in rf2 so i simply don't know if rf2 would require up to 8.2gb of ram (if we minus the 5.4gb background ram usage from his 13.6gb total) to run so many AI. Perhaps someone here could test to check if his results are correct or not (please)?
More RAM can make your computing more pleasant. 8 GB is fine for gaming and I don't see the need for 32 GB. if you're looking to improve your game quality, a better video card is going to make a much bigger difference than going from 8GB to 32GB, which may have no effect at all.
