Upgrading RAM

[Rennn]

I have 4GB of generic RAM, but about 3.5GB of that is used by Windows 7 and background functions.

 

When I play Skyrim it starts out fairly smooth, as long as I don't run it beyond high settings with the mods I'm using. However, even if my framerate stays in the 50-60 range, by the time I've been in and out of a few cells there's some pretty bad stutter and hang-ups. I'm guessing that my RAM is filling, considering I only ever have about 0.5GB free for Skyrim and it's allowed to use 3.5GB. I have an extra 4GB paging file, so I'm assuming that Skyrim uses the 0.5GB pretty quickly and moves to my paging file, which destroys smooth framerates in a game that relies so heavily on loading and unloading cells from RAM.

 

Seeing as I only have 4GB of RAM, and it's very cheap, getting 8GB of something fast would probably be a worthwhile upgrade. Unfortunately, I'm not sure what kind of RAM to look for. My motherboard is an ASUS M4N68T-M V2. What's the best DDR3 RAM it would logically be worthwhile to upgrade to? I know DDR4 is coming out next year, but that'd require a new mobo and new cpu, so I'm planning on sticking with DDR3 for a couple more years.

 

Would any of these work, and if so, which is probably the best?

http://www.amazon.com/Corsair-Vengeance-240-Pin-Platforms-CMZ8GX3M2A1600C9/dp/B004CRSM4I/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1341544096&sr=8-1&keywords=RAM

http://www.amazon.com/G-SKILL-Ripjaws-1600MHz-PC3-12800-F3-12800CL9D-8GBXL/dp/B004HZG4ZO/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1341544152&sr=8-1&keywords=ripjaw+8gb

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231314

[Illiad86]

All of those are good. I'd recommend the Gskill. I've bought nothing but Gskill RAM for the past 6 years and I have NEVER gotten a bad stick. They also have a lifetime warranty. I currently have the RipJaws X ones you posted, think that kit might be a wee bit cheaper on newegg.

[samadchaz]

Gskill is good, I have sniper 8gb. Its looks very cool

[Rennn]

Thanks.

[Erik005]

You are using a lot of ram windows shouldn't take 3.5gb maybe you should look in to that to

[Seven7Black]

Erik is right, 3.5 out of 4 GB being used by Windows/ various background processes doesn't sound right. 4GB should be plenty for simply running Skyrim without many other programs being open at the same time. Another thing to consider is that Windows caches some applications that you use often into memory so that they startup quicker. That memory is reserved but not technically in use and will be released to the program that needs it (Skyrim in your case) if necessary. Still, you should have more than 0.5 out of 4 GB of free memory when you are not doing much on the PC.

[bben46]

Any ram over 4G will be wasted unless you have a 64 bit system. The 32 bit system cannot use more than a little less than 4G no matter how much you have.

 

Your .5G for game and 3.5G for Windows sounds backwards to me. Windows should not take more than about .3 to .4 max ram. Is it possible you have some other background processes running? On a clean system (all unneeded background processes stopped ) you should have the entire 3.5G available for the game - so adding more will just get you a net of .5 more.

 

Again, Skyrim is a 32 bit game and CANNOT use more than 4G no matter what. However, if you do have the 64 bit system, any windows and background processes will go into the ram above the 4G used for the game. :thumbsup:

[FMod]

Even if Windows only reports 500 MB as "free", that doesn't mean the other 3.5 GB are used. It only means that 500 MB are not allocated for anything whatsoever.

 

Normally Windows will try and allocate as much RAM as possible so as to speed up the performance. Most of that memory can and will be made available the very instant it's requested. It doesn't even have to be dumped on the disk, as it's already on the disk, just memory-mapped or memory-shadowed. (For this reason, any programs claiming to "free up" your RAM are placebos if free and scams if not.)

 

The best RAM to buy today is, by far, Samsung, original, i.e. with Samsung chips. Their DDR3 chips overclock better than any other. For DDR2 it used to be Micron.

Avoid gaming brand names: they test and sort their chips for 2566, 2400, 2133, 2000, 1866, etc. modules, so unless you buy a 2133 rated kit, it's likely that your chip has been tested and failed to overclock to 2133. Since Samsung itself doesn't sell modules and kits rated higher than the standard 1600, each of their modules has a good chance to take 2133 MT/s or higher.

 

And in a common sense defying moment, their 8GB modules managed to take even higher clock rates than 4GB, up to 2400 MT/s and beyond. In contrast, GeIL 8GB modules run extra-cheap Elpida chips that barely manage their stock clock. G.Skill uses middle-of-the-line Microns for medium rate modules and Samsung for top clock, but they run them at their very clock limit while making you pay for every MHz of it.

 

Not getting a bad stick is hardly a strong recommendation - memory failure rate is the lowest of all components. If you want performance, you have to look for more than "it works" from the parts you buy.

 

Heatsinks on RAM are only good for looks, they don't serve any purpose and today most of them are just decorations that actually make chip temperatures higher (because of the thick pad used to glue them to the module).

 

 

I know DDR4 is coming out next year

Late next year, but it shouldn't matter to you. Servers are getting it first. Then more servers. Then... Intel's Haswell still uses DDR3, and if Broadwell is to remain compatible, it has to stick to DDR3 too (since DDR4 is point-to-point, a solution taken from GDDR5, making it deeply incompatible with DDR3). AMD won't go for a new memory type until it's cost-competitive, and that won't happen till 2015.

 

Besides, there isn't even a significant gain going up from 1600 MT/s to 2133, so new intermediate DDR3L (low-voltage, 1.35V) should keep serving desktops pretty well. Especially with 2000-2400 clock rates now achievable.

 

 

Edit:

P.S. This is the one you want: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820147094

Edited July 10, 2012 by FMod

[eltucu]

Windows should not take more than about .3 to .4 max ram.

You're talking about XP right? I have yet to see a Windows 7 (let alone Vista) PC that doesnt uses less than 1Gb of memory just to work (on 2Gb+ system ram of course).

 

Anyway, what FMod says. If you have unused ram, Windows will try to use it. If some process needs ram, Windows will free it. I have 16Gb RAM and i've seen Win7 x64 use anything from 2Gb to 5Gb of memory (with half the services disabled, Avast and Spybot).

 

Windows 32bit uses less ram (between 1Gb and 2Gb when i had 6Gb of total system memory), so, unless you have, say, Chrome with 20 tabs open in the background, 4Gb should be enough.

 

Have in mind that you'd need a new CPU (that yet doesnt exists) with a new mobo (that also doesnt exists) for using DDR4 (that doesnt exists in the market either!). The days of DDR3 and DDR2 mobos are gone since both AMD and Intel started to integrate the memory controllers (and PCI controlelrs, and HDD controlers, and... )on the CPU.

 

Phenom may have handled DDR2 and DDR3 depending the motherboard but it was a middle ground, Bulldozer (and surely anything after it) wont.