- cross-posted to:
- pcgaming@lemmy.ca
- cross-posted to:
- pcgaming@lemmy.ca
You must log in or register to comment.
It seems like 32GB has been the standard for a mid range PC for quite a while now.
Depends on the definition of mid-range. I would say 16 GB is much closer to mid-range (in the global sense). 32 GB has definitely been baseline for the enthusiast gamer.
DDR4 got so cheap, you could sprinkle it on a build like parmesan cheese. DDR5 is still relatively expensive. I see a lot of people landing on 48 gigs.
I went with 48GB of DDR5 for my Framework 13 laptop. Originally intended 64 but the extra cost wasn’t worth it, for my use case at least.
I don’t know a single hanger with 16gb. Not a single damn one.
I mean, 16GB was the standard for how long? So yeah, it makes sense.
16GB might be the be standard for VRAM…
All those website apps that live out of ram making an impact I guess. Both the in browser types and electron/etc types seem to love slurping it.
I’m still at 8gb with a 1070 and an i5 8600. So far every game still works.
Based
I used my 960 for like 10 years until i built a new rig this year
I’m a nostalgia gamer, indie fan, and a Patient Gamer. I rarely buy a big game with less than five years from release, and I’m often playing games from the 2000s.
I really don’t need much. I bought a then-mid range system 5 years ago and it’s still great.
Oh good, I’m already there
How about optimizing and introduce consumer quad rank than capitalism?
I doubt we will ever get quad channel or mandatory ECC on the consumer side.
The margins on HEDT and servers are simply too high.
Welp seems like a them problem. I ain’t playing any games except them 16gb or below. Gotta jump through hoops and then some for my dolla.
All those textures that won’t fit in the VRAM of Nvidia cards have to go somewhere, I guess.
