[ale] Desktop 32GB of RAM

[DJ-Pfulio]

My desktop has 3G of RAM and 3G of swap. It runs inside a VM with 2 vCPUs.

My netbook has 2G of RAM and a 4G swap. 2G of swap wasn't enough and the
system would lockup a few times a week - browsers suck too much RAM
these days.

VM servers have more physical RAM, but if you run mainly Linux VMs and
don't need geospatial DBs, 16G seems more than enough for a quad-core
i5. There is a trade-off between CPU and RAM.  After all, most Linux
servers rarely need more than 1G of RAM and often 384MB or 512M is plenty.

I suppose with 12 cores, then 32G could be useful, but none of my
systems have more than 4 cores.

I have too much RAM in a few systems - it is wasted.  My PlexMS+kodi
server has 8G and rarely uses more than 2G. That was a waste of money.

I cannot imagine needing more than 4G on a desktop. Just can't, but I
don't run bloated DEs or use much graphics.

I think 32G would be a complete waste on a desktop.


On 08/18/2015 05:02 PM, Darrell Golliher wrote:
> That’s pretty subjective to your needs right?   People who need it
> for their science work, or running many virtual machines, or working
> with huge picture and/or video files probably know how much they can
> take advantage of.   Absent any specific needs, it does seem like
> overkill.    Then again, I’ve never known anybody to complain about
> having too much RAM excepting if their operating system couldn’t
> address it.
> 
> 
> —http://golliher.net
> 
> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 4:54 PM, Chris Fowler
> <cfowler at outpostsentinel.com> wrote:
> 
>> Seems like /. posted a story about 32GB being overkill for desktop
>> systems. I'm looking at replacing my workstation and the system I'm
>> looking at has a minimum of 64GB. Am I wasting cash? :)
>> 
>>  

-- 
Got Linux? Used on smartphones, tablets, desktop computers, media
centers, and
servers by kids, Moms, Dads, grandparents and IT professionals.