How Much RAM Do Gamers Need? 8GB vs. 16GB vs. 32GB vs. 64GB

I believe one of the primary reasons keeping games memory efficient is current generation console hardware. Frankly even back then when they were first announced I was surprised they "only" were speced for 16GB.

Being a software developer, 32GB was already standard for me. 8GB for contemporary Windows is highly discouraged. We had a normal user who logged an abnormally high count of Microsoft 365 user sign-ins and it turned out Windows struggled with just 8GB and kept swapping processes and re-signing in.
 
Sure, but now, add in all our modern tasks, like streaming/screen capping, + discord/voip, + peripheral software, + fancy dynamic wallpaper, +personal waifu...

I'm sure I'm missing something, but 32gb is a minimum for multitasking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lostinlodos
AnilD said:
Right, because bottlenecking the test system at the CPU or GPU level would throw us the kind of data we need to measure RAM usage.
Click to expand...
This is so false that it is breathtaking. You are talking about capacity alone, which 16GB will cover you in 99% of gaming cases, even at 2160p. I am surprised Steve didn't make a chart because there is virtually no difference in average between 16GB and 32GB, so his conclusion about having to host 32GB for gaming is a joke... If you have capacity, you are going to be fine, and most games are developed on consoles and ported to PC anyway.

surprise surprise...

HOWEVER... in CPU bottlenecks... you can gain performance over faster and better timed memory modules... making your statement obviously ignorant... hell, that is the main reason why Intel wanted to have fast memory against AMD with 13th and 14th gen to maintain the gaming crown, which by OV their chip memory controllers and COREs, made the whole degradation problem a reality. Relying on Upscaling is the same as lowering the resolution which is putting system closer to bottlenecks anyway.

There is definitely a better use case for this data than for capacity alone. Most of you don't even play at 2160p anyway, so this is a non issue.
 
Last edited:
"probably once the AI bubble bursts, resulting in a global financial crisis, at which point buying DRAM will be the least of your worries. Plenty to look forward to."

Thanks! Happy New Year too! :joy:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hotdog1n
If your bish ahh friends want you to host modded Minecraft servers for them cause they're all scared about port forwarding themselves and super hard headed then 64 is a good option.
 
I love that you said "Buying Dram will be the least of your worries" the article was well written great job. I also like that you put it in a way that let people feel good about themselves, that was kind of you, thank you.
 
If RAM prices keep going up AAA game development is going to be in serious trouble. If only rich people can afford to buy proper machines and software developer survival's going to be difficult. $1000 games? That's not going to work.
I have 32GB and a large collection of old(er) games so I won't really be affected except that it's saddening to see this happen.
H*ll people may go back to watching video, perhaps even read *GASP* books!
I would prefer to see the AI bubble pop, perhaps flooding the market with useless servers and parts (yum!).
 
Nobina said:
You're gonna need 32GB if you like to listen to something in the background while playing certain games because browsers are massive RAM hogs these days. I have 16GB and I'm on the limit sometimes.
Click to expand...
My most recent build has 32GB. 16 worked on the older box but it wasn't always smooth and I suffered the occasional bluescreen when running apps in the background. With 32 everything's smooth and I have ZERO bluescreens (Win10). I don't even bother closing apps or my zillion open tabs browser when I start something else.
It may not be future-proof though and I'm sorry I didn't get 64 or 128GB...
 
Squid Surprise said:
While interesting, this article only applies to users with a 5090 and 9800X3D…
Click to expand...
Squid Surprise said:
The system performs differently with a different GPU and CPU even with the same RAM… regardless of gaming…
The bottlenecks aren’t the same - and aren’t mitigated by using a max CPU / GPU
Click to expand...

The main part of article is about conditions as ideal as possible with available technology:
CPU of choice is the Ryzen 7 9800X3D, paired with the GeForce RTX 5090.
Click to expand...

But there are results from using GPU with 8GB and GPU with 16GB.
2026-01-07-image-16.jpg

2026-01-07-image-17.jpg


Just ...
Melkor Unlimited said:
Read the whole article before make fool of yourself.
Click to expand...
 
My main PC got 64GB when they announced the production cuts, and the 32 GB went into the media PC. That PC had 16 GB and it was getting pretty small with how modern browsers chug RAM.
 
Simple. If you have the money, fill up your Mobo with as much memory as you can. It maybe useless, but at least you can feel satisfied. The money spent at a fine dining per month can be spent on RAM when it's worth the value, which can last you for years.
 
Squid Surprise said:
Maybe read my previous posts before spouting inanities….
Click to expand...
I did. (The whole article and all post under it. Not only yours)
Did you?

PS:
Almost every article on this web doing some benchmark has a paragraph or two about how to do the test to get relevant data. Some of them even get a chapter with "more reasonable setup" (read as cheap choice). To show why they chose the test bed as they did.
Yet there are some posts demanding to do the tests "The Only Right Way" ... They Way.

I did not made fool of you.
You did.
 
Last edited:
Melkor Unlimited said:
I did. (The whole article and all post under it. Not only yours)
Did you?

PS:
Almost every article on this web doing some benchmark has a paragraph or two about how to do the test to get relevant data. Some of them even get a chapter with "more reasonable setup" (read as cheap choice). To show why they chose the test bed as they did.
Yet there are some posts demanding to do the tests "The Only Right Way" ... They Way.

I did not made fool of you.
You did.
Click to expand...
Ok - so you read.. just didn’t UNDERSTAND what I wrote instead…

My bad…
 
1. 8GB RAM
✅ Minimum for modern gaming
Most casual or older games run fine
Might struggle with modern AAA games, multitasking, or streaming
Best for budget builds
2. 16GB RAM
✅ Recommended for most gamers today
Runs modern games smoothly
Handles gaming + background apps (Discord, browser, music)
Great balance between performance and cost
3. 32GB RAM
✅ For heavy multitasking or content creation
Useful if you stream while gaming, edit videos, or run multiple apps simultaneously
Not necessary for most games, but future-proof
4. 64GB RAM
🔥 Overkill for gaming alone
Only really needed for professional video editing, 3D rendering, or massive simulations
Won’t give noticeable FPS boost in most games
Quick Advice
8GB → Bare minimum, only casual gaming
16GB → Sweet spot for most gamers
32GB → Future-proof + heavy multitaskers
64GB → Extreme use cases

💡 Tip:
If you’re building a gaming PC, 16GB DDR4 or DDR5 is the most cost-effective choice right now. You can upgrade to 32GB later if needed.
 
Great breakdown! 👍 For most gamers in 2026, 16GB is still the sweet spot—smooth performance in modern titles and enough room for background apps. If you’re streaming or doing creative work alongside gaming, 32GB definitely adds comfort, but 64GB is overkill unless you’re also doing heavy tasks like 3D rendering or video editing.

It’s good to see recommendations that balance performance and value rather than just going for the highest spec every time. Thanks for the clear guide!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

TechSpot
Forza Horizon 6 GPU Benchmark: 8GB vs. 16GB VRAM
2
Replies
45
Views
299
PierreJG
PierreJG
TechSpot
Flagship Rematch: Ryzen 7 5800X3D vs. Core i9-12900K
2
Replies
27
Views
304
Loadedaxe
Loadedaxe
TechSpot
Nvidia RTX 5070 Ti vs AMD Radeon 9070 XT: Massive 52 Game Benchmark
2 3 4
Replies
87
Views
612
Hecate91
H

Latest posts

Back