4 GB RAM, a big deal? (vs. 3 GB)

Hey there,

I'm just about ready to buy a Dell XPS M1530, seeing how we have a 1600 DKK (~315 USD) discount here in Denmark at the moment. I'm going for the model with a 2.2 GHz C2D and a 8600M GT card, and am further upgrading it with a 1440x900 panel and 3 GB of RAM.

... or should I get 4 GB? It's 400 DKK (~80 USD) more, which isn't anything huge, but I'm wondering how much of a difference I'll notice. I'll mostly be using it for regular end-user things (web, word processing, etc. - where it obviously won't be a big deal), some graphics editing/design (Photoshop, Illustrator, etc.) and some light gaming. Would it be worth it getting that additional gigabyte of RAM?

Another possibility would be upgrading the processor to a 2.2 GHz C2D (T7500) which also has twice the amount of L2 cache. Would this be worth it for me (at 770 DKK ~= 150 USD)?

I should mention that I won't be getting both the RAM and the upgraded processor, it's pretty much either or. Which would I benefit more from, and how much of a difference would it make?

Thanks in advance! I'm hoping to order today.

 

Only Vista 64 can utilize all 4gb of RAM, and at Dell's price it definitely is not worth it. Get the upgraded processor; you can upgrade the RAM yourself if the need ever arises.

 

Yeah, right now 3gb is definetly enough. Unless you plan on doing crazy photo shopping or video editing you won't exceed the 3gb.

Upgrade to 4 later on and do it yourself and you'll find it's very cheap.

 

Yeah, Dells price for RAM silly. 2 GB is enough for most. And since a 32 bit OS can't use 4 GB it's kind pointless. Go for the processor.

 

So if you get the CPU upgrade would you still be upgrading to 3GB of RAM? If you are I'd do that. 3GB should be more than enough RAM for what you'll be using it for (unless you plan on making billboard sized posters in Photoshop perhaps lol), especially if you have a 32bit OS (not sure if you do or not). And odds are the RAM will be the same speed as the RAM it already has so you'll still end up with bottleneck. Having twice as much cache on chip will help reduce the bottleneck and likely be more effective than having a little extra RAM.
Also, if you plan on having this for a while then its safer to go the CPU upgrade because DDR2 memory gets cheaper everyday and if you did need that extra GB down the road it'll be a cheap upgrade, wheras upgrading a processor tends to be a bit pricier.
Hope this helps and is accurate.

 

That's very helpful, thanks!

Since I'm just getting the OS bundled (not upgrading), which is Vista Home Premium (32-bit I assume), I'll be going for 3 GB RAM. Whether I'm getting the processor or not is still kind of undecided. How big a difference will it make, assuming I'm not doing serious video editing and the like? Would buying it mainly be for the sake of future-proofing my computer (which I'd certainly like to do, assuming .2 GHz and 2 MB L2 cache actually means something)?

Thanks again.

(Oh, and the RAM is all 667 MHz yeah, but can a Santa Rosa[right?]-based computer even utilise 800 MHz RAM? I for some reason thought that was reserved for Montevina or whatever.)

 

you probably won't notice it unless you are doing intensive tasks or hardcore multitasking.

 

Heh, thought so. I'm gonna order a M1530 with 3 GB RAM and a standard 2.0 GHz processor now.
Thanks for all the advice!