More RAM? Yeah, yeah, never enough, but why?

[BradG]

So can somebody just give me an example of how and why more RAM will help me out here? (Hopefully because they've experienced the improvements firsthand.)

I mean, I'll do anything to give my system more processing power so I can run more plugs and maybe even (please?) lower my buffer size but when I check out memory usage in the Activity Monitor, there's alway plenty under "Free".

Setup:
Mac G5 2.5GHz w/2.5GB's RAM; OS-X.4.4; ProTools LE 7.1; 002R

[John Jeffers]

Adding RAM doesn't give you more processing power, but it can help in some situations. Here's why more RAM typically helps a computer seem faster:

When you load applications, they take up a certain amount of memory. The more apps you load, the more RAM is used. Virtual instruments can really chew it up fast as they load samples into memory. So, what happens when you try to load more than your computer actually has physical RAM for?

Well, rather than cap out and not let you load any more, the computer uses "virtual memory". Virtual memory is a special area of your hard drive that the system can use as pretend RAM. This is handy because it lets you load apps beyond your system's actual memory limit. But here's the tradeoff...it's S-L-O-W. Real RAM is way, way faster than virtual memory.

For people with small amounts of RAM, adding more can really speed things up because it means they can avoid using slow virtual memory. If you already have 2.5 GB, you're in good shape. I think 2 GB is a comfortable amount for a DAW, with 1 GB being the lowest I would want.

[YOUR KONG]

That's a great post, John, I just learned a lot. Thanks!

[mikehattem]

If you're on a PC you might want to try a program called PC SURGEON. It has a memory defragmenter. When you run it it clears your memory usage to let you use more of your RAM. I have only 512m and mine can get down to 150m or so. If I run the program it can get it back up to aroun 300. Imagine what it could do if you have 1g or more. There's also a program called MEMORY WASHER which is effective as well but I find PC SURGEON does it better. Good luck.

Mike

[John Jeffers]

Be careful with system optimization utilties like PC Surgeon. Sometimes they end up doing more harm than good. I have never used (or even heard of) PC Surgeon, so I'm not saying it's bad. However, my experience with these kinds of utilties have shown me that they're minimally useful at best and destructive at worst.

[snuffinthepunk]

analogy: RAM holds everything you're workin on, right? it's like a work table I guess. If you have a small table and lots of shit to do on that table, it gets cramped and is a pain in the ass an inefficient, ya work slower cuz you have to work around so much crap. bigger table = easier and faster to work. i like a cooking analogy too (since I like to cook). I love cooking in a kitchen with lots of counterspace cuz it's easier to move around and get things. that's how I look at it at least.

[John Jeffers]

analogy: RAM holds everything you're workin on, right? it's like a work table I guess. If you have a small table and lots of shit to do on that table, it gets cramped and is a pain in the ass an inefficient, ya work slower cuz you have to work around so much crap. bigger table = easier and faster to work.

Actually, that that analogy kind of confuses things. RAM doesn't slow down when it fills up. It can be 95% full and be just as quick as when it's 30% full. Your computer slows down when it starts to use virtual memory, again because accessing the hard drive is much slower than accessing physical memory.

I guess you could say that when the work table is 100% full and you try to add more stuff, things start falling off the sides. It takes longer to pick them up off the floor than it does to pick them up off the table. Oh, and you have severe arthritis, so bending down to pick stuff up off the floor takes forever. So, having more work table space (more RAM) means you can fit more on the table before things start falling on the floor where you have to bend down to pick them up (virtual memory).

That's not the greatest analogy in the world either, but it's a little more accurate.

[BradG]

Thanks for all the replies. I guess what I was really asking is whether or not I would see performance improvements if I upgraded from 2.5 gigs of RAM (to 4.5). Especially since it appears that my DAW isn't using even 2/3 of my RAM when it's launched.

I do use a fair amount of V-instruments but no crazy samplers, except Kontakt 2.

[John Jeffers]

I already answered that question.

If you already have 2.5 GB, you're in good shape. I think 2 GB is a comfortable amount for a DAW, with 1 GB being the lowest I would want.

I doubt you would see very much (if any) improvement going up to 4.5 GB since you said you're not even using up what you currently have.

[BradG]

I already answered that question.

Yeah, I know and appreciate it, thanks. I was really addressing some of the other posts which seemed to maybe not be getting question at the heart of my post.

[syrupcore]

worktable, take 3...

... and when your worktable is full, you have to start using stuff from shelves across the room. but you can really only work from your worktable, so first you have to put something from the table back on the shelf to make room for something new on the table. then you work with it.


with 2.5 gig, your worktable is like an executive conference table in a texas oil company. Unless you have a lot lot lot of really large samples loaded at once, there's really nothing more ram is going to do for you. With a machine like that and a table that big, your problem is likely shoddy software or system setup.


Will