Is 4 GB ram still enough for today?

Is 4 GB of ram enough for todays programs and for Windows 7 Home 64 bit?
My notebook can go upto 8 GB but just was wondering that if today it's recommended to have at least 6 GB or more.

 

All depends on your usage. More RAM can never hurt besides $$.

 

What Tsunade Hime says. 4GB DDR3 modules are getting quite cheap. But if you don't use your 4GB no point in getting more. But it doesn't really hurt anything. Usually heavy photo or video editing or virtual machines will consume lots of RAM, otherwise most things run great on 4GB.

 

A very long and involved debate regarding this issue can be found in this thread.

My short answer would be that for 95% of users, yes, 4GB is more than enough. Personally, I recommend general users running Win7 to have 2GB or more RAM.

 

Quick test: Throughout the day, take a quick peek at your RAM usage. See how much RAM you use. If you don't use all of your currently available RAM running programs that you typically run, then you don't need to buy more RAM.

And just FYI - 97% of people will do just fine with 4GB of RAM.

 

Generally speaking yes, specifically speaking it's down to what software you run. I know that sounds blunt but there's no magic answer, just follow your requirements and leave some headroom.

In all fairness 4GB is still fine for most stuff today. 6-8GB is for the power users out there but bare in mind I would always advise to go upgrading in SODIMM's of the same capacity. I know there's this ongoing debate about the ups and downs of synchronous or asynchronous dual channel out there. I for one am a believer that if you're going to do something you might as well do it properly and thus 8GB (2x 4GB) would be your next upgrade level, not 6GB.

If you're itching for an upgrade and need help deciding whether 6GB or 8GB is on your menu then I recommend reading the below, which sheds some more light on the topic:
What is Intel Flex Memory technology

 

Well some people say that StarCraft 2 needs more than 4 GB of ram but is that true? Or will any games run fine on 4 GB of ram?

 

4GB of RAM will be fine. Whoever told you that was misinformed.

Starcraft 2 (like all games) is a 32-bit application. At absolute most, a 32-bit application can use 2GB of RAM. And whne you consider that the Windows OS uses about 1GB by itself, you're only ever using a total of 3GB of RAM at a time. That still leaves you a full 1GB of RAM free.

The only situation where you would realistically need more than 4GB of RAM is if you are running some very specific 64-bit applications that use a lot of RAM (databases, virtual machines, photo / video editing suites, etc). The people running those types of applications on a laptop are few-and-far-between, which is why 97% of people will do just fine with 4GB of RAM.

Buying more than 4GB of RAM will pretty much be a waste of money. If you had money burning a hole in your pocket that you absolutely want to spend, then you'll see a much more tangible performance boost for your money if you were to get an SSD instead.

 

Where do you get only 2GB of RAM for a 32-bit app? Bad Company 2 can easily consume 4GB RAM, as can many other games. Starcraft 2 isn't that RAM hungry though. In either case if you're concerned, 8GB kit costs ~ $80US. Buy it and don't worry about it. Sell your 4GB for $25 on eBay and call it a day.

 

Ram is one of the cheapest things you can upgrade. Newegg sells 8 gig for less then 100. A year ago 4 gig memory was like $300 per memory chip.

 

I have 3gb in the thinkpad and 4 in the XPS and even when pushing the machine to the max 4GB is more then enough. Its only if your doing heavy memeory tasks that youll run into an issue. For instance if you work with modern cad you might as well put in 8GB or more

 

I'm not sure how that's possible, considering it cannot recognize more than 2gb for itself due to its instruction set.

 

No. 3.5GB is the amount of memory registers a 32bit windows OS can address.

 

Just because a RAM upgrade is inexpensive doesn't mean it's a good use of money.

If you have sufficient physical RAM that you never have to page out, then adding more RAM will not improve performance. It's going to be wasted money.

 

Well all I know that I can get two 4 GB sticks for my notebook for $79 right now at Newegg.com website. I have DDR3 type ram. I noticed that if I have my game running in the background like Crysis, Crysis 2 or The Sims 3 I only use around 60% to 65% of the ram so I will have 40% left so maybe I don't really need more ram. I don't run all those games at once btw. I can't say I' am a power user but I' am a PC gamer.

 

on 4 gb you can run crysis and starcraft at the same time with 8 GB you can alt-tab from one an other with no delay


in short there is no need for but if you can upgrade
in sc2 some custom games can push the ram over 3gb but even then upgrading is not really needed as there will always be an other guys who got less to slow the game anyway

 

TLDR; Getting a desktop application to use above 2GB of RAM is not easy. The work you need to put into doing that wouldn't be worth the effort.



A 32-bit OS can address up to 4GB of RAM (minus the address space it needs to access the memory on sub-components like the video card). This ends up being about ~3.5GB of addressable physical RAM to a 32-bit OS.

In a 4GB 32-bit OS, Windows will partition the memory and reserve 2GB for the kernel / OS, and 2GB for the user space (running applications). You can tweak this by telling Windows to reserve 3GB for the user space. But in order to take advantage of that extra user RAM, both your OS and the application must be specifically configured to recognize that it can use up to 3GB of RAM.

If you misconfigure or mismatch that setting between OS/application, then the application will be unstable and crash. So you will only see that little 3GB "tweak" in server environments, where the application developer can be assured that their software will be executed in very controlled environments with very specific configurations, and have very smart people there to manage the entire process. Commercial PC games are written specifically as 32-bit applications with the 2GB limit in mind, for maximum compatibility across their very diverse customer base running on very diverse configurations.

 

It's really about which programs.

For gaming, 4GB is enough. For using intense programs like Photoshop or Visual Studio it's basically the minimum

 

I'm just gonna wait for another two years. I'll buy two 8GB sticks and a SSD.

 

The OS can address 4GB, but any individual app will never get to see more than 2GB, unless you have the 3GB switch enabled, and your app has been compiled specifically to take advantage of it. So, no, there is no way a regular 32-bit application can access more than 2GB of memory.

 

I have a slightly different opinion about whether 4GB are enough for Win 7 x64 as I have experienced serious lags while I was using 4 GB and feel like resurrected since I upgraded to 6GB.

The shortest answer I can give you - if your laptop is a secondary machine you use occasionally for light browsing, skype, email - 4GB is absolutely enough.

If you however use it for more serious stuff, especially multi-tasking (numerous web-browser windows opened simultaneously, word, excel, skype and/or photoshop (and I guess gaming too) - 4GB is NOT enough.

I found that 4GB is absolutely not enough for my usage pattern, whereas 6GB is just right, being rarely reached. 8 GB would be luxury, as I would rarely see any benefit from it.

Best way to find out - disable the pagefile and use your pc normally for a few days. If you reach OOM (Out Of Memory) and depending on how often - you can definitely benefit from adding more ram.

IMPO 4GB with Win 7 x64 is NOT enough for the majority of advanced PC-users who use their laptop as a primary computer.

 

IMO it's enough, unless you're heavy photo/video editor, and/or use virtual machine on regular basis.

IF you have to upgrade - go straight to 8GB, dont bother with 6 as this is sort of half-egged upgrade ... (newegg style)

P.S.
..waiting to see how Gracy123 is having "numerous web-browser windows opened simultaneously, word, excel, skype and/or photoshop" AND is gaming at the same time, even with 8GB RAM .... LOL.

I've had all those ^ but the gaming part open in XP and with 3GB available (no page file here) all was fine. My Photoshop is not from the later versions though, and I dont have many add-ons to it. With x64 you have 4GB available but the windows itself will consume more too, so it's about same thing.

* rule of thumb - more RAM is always good thing (cough .. besides hibernation time .. cough), so if you have money to spend - go for it.

 

I have to agree with Gracy123 that 4Gb really isn't enough a lot of times. 8GB has become the new standard (it won't be long before we start seeing 12-16GB systems becoming more common)

On my HP 2730p [1.8" hdd] I disabled Page filing long ago because it was just slowing everything down more, then I was getting OOM warnings while: having a full window of Google chrome, a full window of Opera, a few folder browsers, Windows Media Player playing music, Task Manager, CUPID Hardware Monitor, and a few random programs running.

The stem of my problem was I was using Windows 7 x64 (around 1.5-2GB used up by this alone) on a computer that has Integrated graphics (can use up to 1.5GB of my ram), then add in web browsers and more; instant OOM without even touching Photoshop CS5 (with pagefiling disabled, otherwise I see lots of slowdowns, even to the point of the system becoming entirely unsuable and requiring a hard reset). I could have "optimized" Win 7 to use less ram, but I didn't want to bother; instead I upgraded to 8GB total; now -while just doing what I call light usage- I am seeing ~4900MB free ram, and the rest is headroom for when I start to do something intensive


That is really all ram is; more headroom, and it is worth it to many people to have as much as possible so everything is already set up to be used fully.

 

You do know that the point of RAM is to be used right? Windows 7 tries to use as much as possible since unused memory is wasted memory. If programs require more memory, Windows will allocate it what it needs. While it may be comforting to have this headroom, it's not necessary at all. Majority of users can and will get by with 4GB or less without ever running into low memory errors or finding that they need more unless (as stated) they have a specific task and know that more is needed.

 

Well maybe it's true that systems will soon come out with 16 GB or more ram but will the programs really use that much very soon? Since jumping from 4 GB to 16 or 32 is alot. I mean I just find it hard to beleve that programs in a year or two will use that much ram. I mean GB is alot more the MB so having 16 GB or 32 GB is ALOT. That's twice of 8 GB. I wonder that in the future computers will have soo much ram but most programs will not even use that much. Meaning you will have soo much ram left over that is unused unless maybe you are a power user but still I think that having 16 GB or more is useless. Maybe more than 5 years from now programs might need that much but still I don't think they will. Since jumping from 8 GB to 16 GB or 32 GB is ALOT. Todays games I see will need around at most is 2 GB at most but most still will use 1 GB or less. 16 GB is like wooooo I mean that's a ton.

 

Hmm I guess I misread his post.

As for 4GB I dont really see much reason to go past it unless youre doing something really serious like rendering several complex 3d files or something similar.

 

The asus in my sig uses 2 gb idle... =/
is that normal? lol

Well I guess its not entirely idle. Right now i only have firefox open with about 10 tabs and a pdf file and that's it.
Good thing it came with 6GB i suppose

 

Lots of misinformation here.

Try reading this very informative article by tom's hardware.

Teaser:

 

Yea, I know memory is meant to be used, but because of my computer, and my uses; when doing "light" work I use up a bit less than half my 8GB; but when getting down to business I use up as much as I can (heavy multitasking and large Photoshop CS5 canvases); It is nice to have the headroom when doing the light-medium work, but it is absolutely necessary when I do a lot. that's what I meant.

I'm saying that 8GB is fast becoming the standard, and it won't be that long before we start seeing more and more +8GB capable systems. It was like this all through the past "2GB is more than enough memory" now its "4GB is all you need" soon it will be "no need for more than 8GB ram". It might be a year or two off, but it is coming pretty soon (a lot can happen in a year)... or how about this one "640k ought to be enough for anybody" -Bill Gates... my how fast thing change in the computing world; always bigger and better over the horizon -well that's my point

@shinakuma9
If you disable "virtual memory" (press the windows key, and type that in the search, then follow what it says), reboot, and then check how much ram you are actually using normally, and while idling (use Task Manager, and read the amount used, and the amount free), it'll probably have ~2GB free, and ~2-3GB in use, the rest would be cached. Win7 x64 uses ~1-2GB on its own -its normal

Virtual memory (page filing) basically sets aside a few GB of your hdd in place of ram, even when not all of the ram is being used up. Because it is on your slow [by comparison] hdd; and this it can really slow things down (especially when all the ram is used up)

 

I would say for sc2 6-8 is best.... When i was useing 4. inbetween games, id like to price windows and quickly goto MSN or read a strat or watch a video online quickly. swapping back and fourth through the game, was very very laggy at 4gb..... once i went to 6-8. Smooth sailing from there.

Again it all depends on your useage. for normal everyday stuff, 4gb is more than enough, if you are gunna toggle through different programs and multi taks like I do. definatly get more than 4.

 

whether it is enough depends on how much ram you use up during the use of laptop.

 

Guys, I don't really understand why we keep having this argument over and over again - it is actually very simple:

1. It is HIGHLY individual, that's for sure! The only thing we really can argue about is statistics - how many of us do indeed need more than 4GB without knowing it - I say more than 70% of advanced users. But that's not that important.

2. The best way to find out is to disable the pagefile - If your system starts hitting OOM obviously it needs more RAM than you currently have installed, no matter what YOU think and whether you are 100% certain 4GB is more than you ever want to have -----> Let your system tell you what it needs - don't decide on its behalf!

Of course Windows 7 uses as much available RAM as possible... the question is how much of the used RAM is actually REQUIRED and what is "just" Cache to speed up the system. As you might think - even if the "extra" RAM you have is used "just" for Cache - your system is still faster this way so your money is not wasted. But again - the best way to find out - disable pagefile and continue working for a few days - say a week.

Disabling pagefile on my computer while having 4GB RAM lead to hitting OOM just within a few hours!! Since I have 6GB I keep my pagefile disabled, which made my system fly and I have hit OOM only once for nearly a month now - when I had 15 pictures opened in Photoshop simultaneously + some other programs!

Also - look at your Resource Monitor - look at the actual amount of FREE memory (Not "Available" but FREE") - if it often goes direction 0 ----> your system will benefit from more RAM.

Another good indication - Hard Faults per second in the HDD tab. If you get any of those while using already started and just minimized programs - you DO need more RAM to speed up your system!

In my case, I most often have between 500 and 1500 free MB (out of 6GB), which tells me 2 things:

1. 4GB RAM are definitely not enough as they are all used.
2. 8GB RAM is just waste of money right now.

The above mentioned - I don't really understand those of you who say - go straight to 8, don't bother upgrading to 6. Yes, DDR3 is quite cheap these days, but it is still money that can be invested elsewhere and I don't think you loose much from having 6GB IF your usage doesn't require or can't benefit from more than 6. Yes it will run in asynchronous Dual-Channel mode, which means you still do have partial Dual-Channel... but in reality you will never notice any lack of speed because of it not being full dual-channel.

If you have money to spend - go for 8, it wouldn't hurt. But if you are still on a budget or would like to invest the extra 30-40€ elsewhere - do that, you can always upgrade to 8GB at a later time.

But again - don't decide for your system just because you for some reason think 4GB should be enough! Forget the XP times - XP was singing songs of joy if it had over 1GB RAM. Those times are now over!
Let Windows 7 cry out for RAM if it needs it - that's the best way to find out - disable pagefile!

 

2gb is enough to have a fine running system for ordinary usage (web, music, videos, office stuff).

the rest depends on applications like games and similar.

but of course, the more, the better. lots of apps nowadays use more ram if they can, too.

so yes, highly individual. but yes, too, 4gb is more than enough for the basics. the rest depends on additional uses.

there's a difference between "enough" and "best", of course.

 

I didnt know sc2 took up 6 gigs of ram..what the hell?

 

2GB is fine for most people.
For all I know your most advanced web use could be viewing Youtube videos...

On the other hand, if you are creating 3D animations, do very heavy photo editing you might even need more than 8GB of RAM and rather something in the area of 32GB or more.

-> Depends on what you do.

 

No idea where you're getting your numbers but even if 70% of "advanced" users need more than 4GB, how many actual users are "advanced" users? I doubt that number is even 5% of those that use computers, hence why most people do NOT need more than 4GB.

I'm not sure why you even disable the pagefile, there is clearly a reason why the feature is there and I have yet to see any advantaged when it is disabled. For the average user, Windows 7 does a great job managing the pagefile and there is really no reason to disable it unless you have run out of HDD space.

 

I have to agree with you 100%.

I pound the heck out of my computers with multiple web browsers + tabs open at once, plus background programs (torrents, Steam, etc), while I'm gaming. And I barely ever hit 3GB of RAM usage.

You really need to be using an application that absolutely gobbles up RAM (databases, virtual machines, Photoshop) in order to need more than 4GB. And the "70% of advanced users need more than 4GB" that Gracy mentioned... he said that he runs out of memory when he has 15 Photoshop photos open + other applications. Somehow, I doubt that most people don't do that kind of work with their laptop, whether they are "advanced" users or not.

Well, Gracy is recommending that you disable the pagefile to test how much RAM your system actually uses for testing purposes.

The idea of testing how much RAM your system actually uses makes 100% sense to me. But disabling the pagefile to do it is an absolutely terrible idea. Here is why:

• How do you know when you run out of available RAM when you disable the pagefile? Your applications (and possibly the OS) will crash in ugly ways. And they will crash HARD. No warning, no alerts, no ask-you-to-save-your-work first. Just a hard, ugly crash. And when it does crash, you may lose data, or worse, corrupt your OS.
  
  Gracy mentioned that he only hit OOM once for nearly a month, when he had 15 Photoshop images open. Any guesses as to what happened to his computer when he hit OOM?
  
  
• The idea of disabling the pagefile is so that Windows keeps all data in fast system RAM, and prevents it from ever using the swapfile on disk. Guess what? If you have enough system RAM, it does that anyway. The swapfile is a way for Windows to allocate memory when you have already used 100% system RAM. You gain nothing by disabling the pagefile - only the risk of nasty ugly data-corrupting crashes.
  
  
• There are better ways to find out how much system RAM you're using... like run a (free) utility. Even Windows Task Manager can tell you. You don't need to disable the pagefile, you don't need to risk your system to any crashes.

 

He's saying to turn off the pagefile to determine if you need more RAM or not, not keep it disabled permanently.

Considering the cost of 8GB these days (newegg just had deal for $65) I don't know why people are hesitant if they question it. It's not going to hurt and good peace of mind to have it.

 

The reason is to have fewer support calls. There is no reason to enable page file if it is not needed. It is more like an 'insurance' policy, at the expense of day to day dragging your feet. It may not be noticeable(without comparison with it being disabled).

Noop. I have it disabled for a long while and never seen my machine to crash in 'ugly' way. In fact, it never crash because of this reason. I was warned that I am low on memory(when I still have 200M+ available). Usually, I choose to ignore it or just close some IE sessions. For those times I ignored it, 8/10 happened to be not a problem and for the rest, I failed to open a program or two. Once it caused the explorer to fail and restart(I mean explorer, not the OS). My inter-boot time is around 20-30 days, due to windows update.

So unless you have tried it and really experienced it, don't just imaging.

 

First of all "She"!
Second - this list shows me how less you know!!! No ugly crashes, no HARD bumps - whenever OOM is reached a polite message appears to free up some memory and save your work as the system is running out of free RAM. Even if you ignore it - Windows just closes some of the programs you are not currently using! That's what happens to the computer!

This is exactly how you know you NEED more RAM!

And yes - disabling pagefile does speed up your computer IF you have enough RAM to allow this! Define "enough RAM" by disabling the pagefile and await OOM - if none occurs along the way - you are fine with your 4GB.

Windows task manager DOES NOT tell you how much RAM is needed to ensure fast computer. It only tells you how much RAM is absolutely required in order to run your programs at all!! The number of used RAM does NOT include cache! And Cache in RAM instead of in the pagefile is what would make your computer fast and responsive!

 

Once again, you have (poorly) picked apart one single point from one of my posts with multiple points, and use that as a way to personally insult me. 1. Not cool.

3x Google Chrome (16 tabs, incl 1 YouTube tab)
Mozilla Firefox (1 Tab)
Internet Explorer (1 Tab)
Microsoft Outlook 2010 w/3 Windows Open
Skype
Elluminate Web Conferencing
3x Microsoft Word 2010
Microsoft Excel 2010
2x Jasc Paint Shop Pro
4x Command prompts
PGAdmin (PostgreSQL database admin tool - supporting a 200MB PostgreSQL database that I'm currently running)
Microsoft Virtual PC 2007 (running 1GB VM)

On a 3.5 year-old Core 2 Duo laptop and 4GB of RAM (less than 3.5GB being used) and a dual-monitor setup. I must be a "light" user.

 

Self-incrimination!!!

Please note your amount of FREE ram!!!

22MB

You are so hitting OOM right now!!! Disable the pagefile and do that again and enjoy the show )))

Or look at your "Hard Faults per sec/min" in Resource Monitor while switching between applications - you will certainly have lots of those

You just proved me right This is exactly what I'm saying - don't look at AVAILABLE - this just shows how much of the RAM can still be used while cache is being moved to the slow HDD to free up space! But you don't want that - this slows down your system enormously!!!

You need to look at FREE RAM - this is the amount of RAM not in use for anything. 22MB is a hilarious number!

Do you want to compare the RAM usage?



Now where did those over 5GB RAM usage came from.... hmmmmmmm ----> from the lack of use of the slow pagefile!!

Your computer currently uses the HDD as a secondary RAM... and do you know hom much slower the HDD in comparison to RAM is!?

 

I was gonna say something, but I figured I'd let you have the honors yourself. You need an arrow pointing at your avatar stating "THIS IS ME!!!" :laugh:

 

You are ignoring one significant fact....

-> Vista and Win7 are programmed to USE as MUCH as possible of the RAM for prefetching - I.E. the free RAM tells you very little, as theoretically 1GB of your used RAM could be prefetched stuff which pretty much equates to free RAM (it will be dumped immediately if the space is needed)

And turning of the pagefile is generally a bad idea - and you don't gain any performance from turning it off.
Try to prove it using a repeatable test than anybody can carry out - you won't find a difference.
At most your startup might be a bit quicker -> no writing to the SSD/HDD, but that's it.
Get a SSD and you gain more than fiddling with system settings that you shouldn't really touch will ever gain you.

 

Total: 4094MB
This is the amount of total physical RAM available to the OS.

Cached: 657MB
This is the amount of physical RAM used by SuperFetch (Windows application caching) for fast application loading. This is the lowest priority memory usage, and gets freed up almost instantly if any other application requests RAM to be assigned to it.

Windows will ALWAYS use as much of this RAM as possible, because idle RAM is a waste. If you have 1GB of RAM free, then Windows will use 1GB of RAM for SuperFetch. If you have 10GB of RAM free, then Windows will use 10GB of RAM for SuperFetch (as long as SuperFetch is aware of at least 10GB of commonly-used files to cache). DetLevCM stated exactly the same thing in his post right above this one.

Available: 679MB
This is the amount of physical RAM available for use by the user. This is the sum of Cached RAM (657MB) + Free RAM (22MB). This does NOT count Virtual Memory, as you stated in your post.

Free: 22MB
This is the amount of physical RAM available that isn't being used by anything else.



The actual amount of physical RAM that is available for me to use in other applications is 679MB, not 22MB. You do not count the Cached RAM number used by Windows SuperFetch when calculating RAM usage. SuperFetch always maxes out available RAM (as long as it has knowledge of enough applications to fill that available RAM), and will always free that available RAM if another application needs that RAM. You just:

"Shows me how less you know!!!"
-Gracy123​

 

I have to disagree but unless we sit together, there is no point of arguing. Noop, start up has nothing to do with page file. It is the day to day activity that I can tell the difference(again as mentioned, not to the point of annoying but noticeable). In my old 5400rpm HDD, it was very noticeable(before and after). In my current Scorpio Black, much less so(i.e. I need to 'find' it) but since I know it doesn't hurt, I still leave it disabled.

On my work machine with x25m, I reenabled it because it really comes to a point of I can no long find the difference so the 'insurance' becomes free.

 

For Kent, I don't think page filing will be much of an issue (it looks like he has a SSD), if he did have a slow performing hdd, then it would be a huge issue (as it is with me and my 1.8" hdd)

And yes when you have only 22MB free, you could benefit from more ram; though that looks like it is your max workload. I didn't need to have nearly as many programs open on my system to hit OOM warnings (I could do that with just Google chrome, Firefox, an Opera on 4GB ram -all of which are "full up" not just having 1 tab -between 20-60 tabs each, and yes I need those tabs and more, its just how I work)


In the end it is up to each user, but almost anyone could "benefit" from 6-8GB ram and page filing disabled (that "benefit" is different to each person, for me it is huge because it means I can do as much as I need to/ want to, without getting slowdowns because cache is moved to my uber slow hdd; for someone with a SSD it would mean far less cache writes/ reads to that sector of the SSD as well as having the capacity to do a lot of work)

 

Which IMO is on the low side and if you do disable page file, there is quite a chance that you would see the warning when you suddenly do something that need memory. Of course, you won't notice that now as your page file is currently being used as the supplement. Basically, it really is a preference thing, if you don't find it to be annoying, don't bother. I did.

My work pattern suggested that I need about 1.5-2GB things to be 'cached' in order to not hittng the HDD(read, write is minor issue). And in this way, my day to day activity on my home machine doesn't feel much different than my work machine with SSD. All my usually used application(Office suite, NetBean, Visual Studio, Expression 4 etc.) load just as fast as the SSD equipped.

 

The thing is... Gracy123 misinterpreted the numbers. I don't have 22MB free. In that screenshot, I had 679MB free, because 657MB of that was Cached RAM being used by Windows SuperFetch.

The way SuperFetch uses RAM is analogous to how background CPU programs like SETI@Home or Folding@Home. They will use all available RAM / CPU cycles not being used by other programs, and will always free the RAM / CPU cycles it uses to other applications that request it.

That is why you can't look at your CPU usage when running SETI@Home / Folding@HOMe, and think "OMG! I need to upgrade my CPU, because 100% of it is being used!" Just like you can't look at your RAM usage with SuperFetch turned on, and think "OMG! That n00b kent1146! He's using all of his RAM!" you need to look at your CPU usage minus SETI@Home / Folding@Home to figure out your actual CPU load, just like you need to look at RAM usage minus SuperFetch (Cached RAM) to figure out your actual RAM load.

 

@kent,

I see that your commited RAM is 4956 which is already higher than your physical RAM, it suggests that you are actively using the page file for about 1G or so.