Even for those hard on a PC, like me who do ALOT of multitasking, I only use about 3 GB(give or take) of RAM at any given time. So I couldnt agree more, 6 GB is far more then enough. If its one thing that annoys me its people who slap 8 GB of RAM in a computer when there not going to use but about 3 GB of it. If there going to use it, which I find hard to believe in the vast majority of cases, then I can understand it. Otherwise why waste the $100+ when you could just put it towards a faster cpu, better gpu, better mobo, monitor, etc.
While the NORMAL user may not use 6GB of ram, there are some programs that will use this much or more. Most program suites available in x64 versions can easily use 6GB of ram all by themselves. I know this is true from personal experience with Photoshop, Solidworks, and AutoDesk. Most people do not use these programs, but it should be clear that more and more of such programs will become available in the near future as x86 operating systems have become non-existant on high-end computers. 6GB is the minimum I would recomend to anyone, as this allows for a 32-bit program to use it's full 4GB potential, while leaving 2GB for the OS and multitasking. 12GB is still overkill for most everyone, although adding 3 more 2GB sticks to an I7 system that already has 3 2GB sticks will just about double the total speed of the memory (by letting two programs use the full speed of three sticks each).
Never had a need for SolidWorks but I to run 3ds x63 and Photoshop Cs4 x64 at the same time, some times with multiple images open in photoshop. Like I said before 75% is usually about the most I use. I cant see SolidWorks taking up a whole gig. Not to mention on top of 3ds and ps, at any given time firefox is always open with lots of tabs. Vista Sidebar running in Win 7 with Core Temp, utorrent, nod32, vmware, riva tunner, comodo firewall, and 4 GBs gets the job done. Just for fun i loaded up CS4, and 3 copies of 3ds, with all the always on apps above, plust mirc,several instances of notepad 2, smart ftp x64, calculator, putty, and 2 windows open and only using 80 % as we speak. Like I said the vast majority will not use 4 GB.
A lot of x64 programs will happily use 2GB each, that's simply how it is. Also don't forget vista typically draws as much from the hard disk as possible and not from the RAM when it approaches the limit of memory. It's not inconceivable to still only be using 3.5GB of RAM when you should in fact be using 6.
So here are my new specs I will be running OSX and overclocking the I7 a bit. Would you suggest using Raid 5 or 1? I know Raid 5 takes one whole hardrive which backups everything nad has slower loading speeds. On the other hand if one hardrive crashes you still have all your files. Also my friend is trying to convince me that it is sheaper to buy a pc already made, is this true, I'm pretty sure it isn't? Specs: HEC 6C28BB8S Black Steel ATX Mid Tower Computer Case - Retail 3 of the Western Digital Caviar Blue WD5000AAKS 500GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive - OEM SAPPHIRE 100234HDMI Radeon HD 3450 512MB 64-bit GDDR2 PCI Express 2.0 x16 HDCP Ready CrossFire Supported Video Card - Retail CORSAIR CMPSU-550VX 550W ATX12V V2.2 SLI Ready CrossFire Ready 80 PLUS Certified Active PFC Compatible with Core i7 Power ... - Retail GIGABYTE GA-EX58-UD3R LGA 1366 Intel X58 ATX Intel Motherboard - Retail Intel Core i7 920 Nehalem 2.66GHz LGA 1366 130W Quad-Core Processor Model BX80601920 - Retail GELID Solutions FN-SX08-16 80mm Silent Case Fan - Retail GELID Solutions FN-SX12-10 120mm Silent Case Fan - Retail COOLER MASTER Intel Core i7 compatible Hyper N 520 RR-920-N520-GP 92mm Sleeve CPU Cooler - Retail After all this talk about ram how much do you think I should get to do justice to the processor.
Of course it's not true...lol Everything looks fine there except the case, which is frankly crap - go for something like an Antec Three Hundred or NZXT Beta.
I would suggest RAID1 for 2 or 4 drives, RAID5 for 3 (but preferably not), or 5+ drives (though technically you should be using RAID6 for a big array)
What programs would that be because i cant seem to produce it on my computer using all the apps listed above. 6GB isnt super over kill, just over kill in most cases.
Big image and video editing programs will do it, but for me it's mostly games that will do it. The OS itself uses around 2.3GB if you have a few web browser windows open - run a game like Crysis Warhead, Age of Conan, GTA4 or Arma 2 and that's another 2-2.5GB at least you use, often more, so that's 5GB right there...
Don't use RAID 5 with that mainboard RAID. If you want RAID5, you need to use a quality hardware RAID card...otherwise it is more vulnrable to failure than a single hard drive. Using onboard RAID1 is almost always a reliable way to go. Onboard RAID10 is usualy very good as well, but reliability can very wildly between different boards, and even between different BIOS revisions. With this in mind, the only RAID that you should use with onboard RAID adapters is RAID1 (mirror), as no data loss occurs even under the worst failure. Xplorer - Solidworks takes up about 1GB of memory with all projects closed. Takes up much more with complex projects open. I designed a rather simple heatsink, and that was enough to use up over 3GB. I designed an external HDD enclosure with cooling fins...that brought a system with 6GB system memory and 512MB graphics memory to its knees. Considering the fact that this software is often used to design very large, complex items like cars, trucks, and industrial equipment...I immagine that it could easily use more than 12GB system memory in the right hands.
Get your Facts straight, Apple's Kernel is NOT a modified version of linux, it is based on the BSD 4.4 Unix codebase and is not even remotely close to being the same thing. Yes there are many commonalities between linux and unix but the kernel is not one of them. OS X is a modified version of Unix and the GUI is started with NextStep. True, you can do most anything on OS X that you can do on linux and is a truly flawless operating system. Gimp is a joke as a replacement for photoshop as any photoshop user will tell you. However, Adobe makes a native version to run on the Mac. As far as running windows only programs, ever heard of Parallels, Vmware, or Virtual Box. They will run most any program at near Native speed depending on your hardware specs, without ever leaving the comfort of OS X. So Stop spreading misinformation, or better yet, don't give advice about things you obviously know nothing about.
and how glitchy and crash prone the programs he listed are I am forced to use parallels and Vmware at work and it has always been nothing but a pain. Not to mention the 12 repairs across 2 imacs I have had to go through..
