2015 | Dell XPS 13 | Future Proof?

I received my Dell XPS 13 a few days ago, and have so far been pleased with the performance.

I chose the FHD model, i5, with 4GB RAM. Since the RAM is soldered to the board, which prevents any future upgrades, I am really wondering if I should return this laptop in fear that it may not be future proof to handle Windows 10, updates, etc.

What's your thoughts?

 

The last couple of iterations of Windows have been more efficient so if I had the choice I'd have gone for a 4GB machine (they only offer the 8GB here), no-one knows how long that will last but I think it will be decent for a reasonable amount of time unless needing something particularly resource intensive. Many other parts are not very serviceable either so I'm not convinced about the long term durability of the laptop anyway.

John

 

I would recommend an 8gb just to be safe. But that's just me. Most people won't use 8gb for casual use.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

I've got IE open with 12 tabs, Chrome and ITunes also open. Using 4.9GB.

 

8gb should be your minimum requirement. Say what you want, but with minimal caching, 4gb does not cut it anymore.

Return it for the 8gb version.

People still buying 4gb is the reason why Dell continues to put out that junk. Even 8gb is bare minimum and yet to prove as future proof - most likely not if this is your primary device!

 

Or more simply because people understand their ram requirements better than you do, I don't need more than 4GB of ram on a light use laptop therefore I don't want to pay for wasted memory. I strongly disagree with this '8GB ram minimum' which seems to based on the fact that ram requirements used to be constantly increasing whereas recently that trend has been going the other way. I'm not saying there isn't a requirement for more than 4GB memory but if my desktop can handle multiple simultaneous transcodes and full exports plus 1440p gaming without running out of memory then there's no way a laptop being used for internet browsing and other similar tasks needs the same amount.

John

 

Since Vista and onwards, Windows will try to allocate as much of the available ram as possible but it's rarely what it actually needs. I have a couple of browsers open and a couple of other pieces of software and I'm sitting at just 2GB of ram usage.

John

 

4GB should be fine for every day tasks. The system will use more ram if you have 8GB.
The broadwell will have a short life span. We should expect the Skylake later this year. I would not invest more than $1k in this new XPS.

I ordered the i3 for $700 after taxes. I can sell it for Skylake once it hits the market if that turns out to be worth it.

 

Tru that .. I want more ....!!
And that's why Dell makes it 8GB minimum on high end ...
If you want .."Future proof" ... go with 8GB ..

 

I'm not aware of any commonly used application software that consumes more RAM today than it did 5 years ago and have read nothing about Windows 10 suggesting that will change, so if you are not doing things today that require more than 4GB of RAM, chances are you won't in the next several years, unless you learn about and find a need for doing things you don't do with your computer today, including running virtual machines. It is true that the more RAM a Windows machine has, the more it will occupy, but that doesn't mean it won't work efficiently with less. The base model XPS13 is such a steal if you don't need more RAM or are dying for a touch screen that it would seem a waste and a shame to spend an extra $400 for nothing of meaningful benefit just out of fear that you may suddenly become a power user in the next couple of years.

 

He said FUTURE proof. 8gb is MINIMUM to get NOW for any future proof. THAT is end of discussion. Whether 16gb is needed is another story for ultrabooks.

 

My 4 year old cheap desktop has 4gb ram and i very very rearly get even close max it out.

Could I make straight comparison desktop vs laptop about ram size? If 4gb in desktop is enough it is enough in laptop because laptop use is much more lighter?

Lähetetty minun GT-I9505 laitteesta Tapatalkilla

 

Yes, and my point was applications are getting less memory intensive not more. With few exceptions I think people are saying 8 or 16gb are minimum more because they can be had, not because they're becoming more necessary, now or in any forseeable future. Am I wrong (as I often am!)?

 

I made the mistake and tried the 4GB. Don't do it. I am doing much better with 8 now. Chrome alone hogged up so much memory

 

Good pt re : Chrome ; I never use it. Plus, I would never advocate 4gb over 8 (I havent had less than 8GB since 2009!), just that some (incl Dell) are giving such great low ball entry prices if you can get by w/4gb and an i3, as many SP3 buyers are doing fine with (at least with the XPS13 you're getting s keyboard and 128gb SSD - vs 64 on the entry SP3) and for $630 with a student discount the new XPS 13 can be an awesome machine for the $. It may be worth the $400 savings for some to still get all the sweet trimmings and not pay for horsepower when an Atom w/2gb suffices for a good many "average" users. Too bad they don't offer the new model with Haswell silicon - it costs about $75 less per level.

 

I think I definitely agree with the needing 8GB.

I have 6 tabs open in IE, Excel spreadsheet, and Outlook running and it's using around 73% of my RAM. I haven't installed Photoshop yet, but I'm thinking with it already being at 73% before Photoshop...it may not run as smoothly as I would like in the future.

I'm going to return this model I have tomorrow. I'm still debating on whether to order the 8GB version or wait and see if Apple releases a new Pro or Air with a similar display compared to the Infinity display/smaller bezel design.

 

Less memory per unit of complexity.

But total complexity is greatly increasing. More and more ram will be needed with further OS updates.

 

Aha! Thanks for the clarification. Do you feel W10 will suck more memory for common applications, or that W10 will cause developers to develop new applications - including revisions of "standard bearers" - that use more memory to do more things, things faster, things more elegantly, ???? If one does not use virtual machines or high density photo/video editing, can you see a case for needing 16GB RAM in the next 3 years, just to run apps that will have universal applicability and appeal? This "futurecasting" becomes frustrating and feels silly without too many specifics. Still, not since Vista have I worried about having enough RAM, but you are making it sound as if suddenly I could get measles tomorrow in Southern California, lol!