this post was submitted on 05 May 2026
307 points (93.7% liked)
Technology
84397 readers
5220 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I mean. I agree. I can't imagine a modern system with less than 16gb and a competent system for any thing beyond a basic user needs 32, at a minimum. I'm on 128.
I run 200+ tabs in Firefox and have no problem with gaming. Not super high end gaming, but I could play Baldur's Gate on reasonable settings, and regularly play the Age of Empires Definitive Editions/Age of Mythology Retold/Age of Empires 4. 16 GB RAM works mostly fine for me, though I do often feel a little constrained with aoe4 specifically.
32 would definitely be my recommended minimum for any power user like myself, but for the average user, 16 GB is enough even without getting into merely "basic user" levels.
I'm still on Windows 10 though, if that makes a difference. Microsoft has decided my processor is one generation too old to be allowed to "upgrade".
My laptop is for super basic needs (i.e. not modern gaming), and I struggle to find ways to run out of its 8GB of RAM without outright fabricating the conditions to make it happen. Even when I play something like Surroundead, I'm short on graphical horsepower and still have RAM to spare.
One major detail is that I'm not using Windows.
My work machine, however, is on Win11 and only has 16 GB. And unless I turn off OneDrive, Teams and Outlook from autostarting, it will use nearly 12 GB to sit idle. It's pretty useless.
I mean I'm on ubuntu with my current machine, not running anything particularly demanding and using 37 gb of ram.
Just saying, ymmv.
I'm on Kubuntu 24.04 and with 2 FF browsers(1 with 4 tabs the other with ~12), steam, haruna, and discord, I use about 8GB. 10 with OBS and SteamVR. I did go a little overkill with 64GB ram
Used used, or just used? File caches and memory-mapped files are technically "used" but are basically free since they can be evicted if that memory is needed elsewhere.
🐖
What are you even running that used so much memories?
Just fire fox and open office at the moment.. Just a few tabs...
Damn, pretty sure there's something wrong with it. I'm on cachyos and have 16gb of ram, it used around 4gb when idling with Steam running in the background, while using waterfox with 3 youtube tab running video and 4 other tab(yt, ytmusic, protondb, steamdb), the usage goes up to 7gb but slowly go down.
Maybe docker are the one using the memory? Or maybe the idling baseline is always around 25%/30% of total ram available idk.
Yeah its basically all firefox.
Damn, that's crazy
Yeah with firefox its not necessarily how many tabs, but what those tabs are doing.
@TropicalDingdong @psx_crab unused memory is wasted memory, if you didnt have so much memory the programs would free memory
Wow
128 here too, but my machine is for gaming and serving my family with arr content. 70TB of booty.
128 for a server seems crazy unless its like, an actual server. I'm homelabbing an old laptop with 32gb and thats overkill. And my NAS has 8gb I think?
What are you guys doing with all this?
My two media servers are Orange Pi Zeros with 512 MB, and I could get away with 256 MB, I just bought what was available locally for cheap. My main 24/7 server is Raspberry Pi 2 with 1 GB of RAM. Same story here. I have some beefier machines (but not like that), I power on when I need them. My main desktop machine has 32 GB, but I use like less than 8, I see no difference after upgrading from 16. Did that simply to tick the task as done. I mean, the more the merrier, but 128 sounds insane, especially for a household use. All my ARR stack (before I removed it) was working on a Raspberry Pi. Simple serving machine (with no transcoding, but I’m still unsure why would people even use it in the first place), I tested with an IDE HDD (read: very slow reads and writes) and it was quite good for serving huge 4K Bluray Remuxes. I haven’t tested the system with a huge number of users, but if I were to help an extended family with their media needs, I think I’d go with building a set of underpowered servers for everyone. We have two cheap laptop disks, 500 and 750 GBs each, and that’s plenty to have various movies and series being there for us to watch. Even if I wanted to have it in terabytes, like a huge collection, do you really need so much ram to support this much storage? It’s a WORM scenario, isn’t it?
Apart from that, yeah, looks cool. It’s curious to learn what it is to work off a machine where you can serve everything from memory.
If they're running a media stack with that much storage it qualifies as a server for sure. If they're running ZFS for storage, the recommended RAM for that is like 1GB/TB for caching so that'll eat a bunch of their RAM too.
Argggh! Sweet
Yeah, we get it, you are rich. Go brag someplace else fat cat.
It wasn't that expensive a couple years ago. Unmecessary to go to 128, but not that expensive.
Maybe he bought that RAM before the crisis. I got a 64GB netbook last year, shortly before it became unobtainium.