53 minutes ago, Virtual-Chris said:

Do you think 64GB is necessary, or 32GB is plenty?

16 is probably enough. But memory is cheap so why wouldn't you? My machine is definitely better for going from 32 to 64 but I do 1001 other things with it apart from MSFS so it was not a difficult decision. 

14 minutes ago, St Mawgan said:

16 is probably enough. But memory is cheap so why wouldn't you? My machine is definitely better for going from 32 to 64 but I do 1001 other things with it apart from MSFS so it was not a difficult decision. 

There’s cheap, and there’s a waste of money 😛 I’m all for cheap upgrades, but if there’s no benefit, it’s a waste, then I’d rather spend that on a good bottle of wine 🍷

2 minutes ago, Virtual-Chris said:

There’s cheap, and there’s a waste of money 😛 I’m all for cheap upgrades, but if there’s no benefit, it’s a waste, then I’d rather spend that on a good bottle of wine 🍷

Hmmm, lets not get into the good wine/waste of money discussion 🚽

 

3 hours ago, pmplayer said:

.....After thinking and pondering for a long time about whether I should do this or not, I can tell you now, after a year of using AMD, nothing else, I'll never go back to Intel, I would never have believed it either, but it's true. And I would recommend (if at all possible) a graphics card with 24 GB of VRAM, you're always on the safe side. With anything under 24 GB of VRAM, you always run the risk of it being too weak with today's Simulators, but that's just my opinion.....

I seriously doubt that I would have any problems with 16GB VRAM @ 1080p resolution.

1 hour ago, Christopher Low said:

I seriously doubt that I would have any problems with 16GB VRAM @ 1080p resolution.

Everyone as they like, but I can tell you from experience that it doesn't depend so much on that 1080p resolution - good luck !

cheers 😉

8 hours ago, Virtual-Chris said:

Do you think 64GB is necessary, or 32GB is plenty?

I think the cost:benefit ratio is worth the 64Gb depending on what resolution you will be running at.

8 hours ago, Virtual-Chris said:

Do you think 64GB is necessary, or 32GB is plenty?

Yes to 64 GB, as you can see from my metrics, I exceed 32GB RAM.  Get too close to RAM limit and you’ll start swapping to disk which will be very slow and a source of stutters.

Future or existing DLC can easily push above 32GB RAM usage.  Add yourself a buffer.

With 2x 4K and settings high/ultra + PSXT Live Traffic + AIG / FsTraffic the used RAM never exceeds 21 Gb of my total of 32 Gb.

If you do things like Photo Editing it might help to use 64 Gb.

Same as Galden. 

My sim is only for MSFS and nothing else. I severely restrict what runs in the background the hardware  and OS is fully optimized and the only addon that has to be started up with my sim is AIG. I'm nowhere near my 32GB limit and do not experience stuttering to speak of. I'm not opposed to getting 64gb of ram but i have to see the sim encroaching on that last 10% buffer for me to be convinced. 

That has yet to happen. 

33.4 GB RAM used.  But agree, if you manage your graphics setting, add-ons, etc. one should be able to stay below 32GB 

9 hours ago, Virtual-Chris said:

Do you think 64GB is necessary, or 32GB is plenty?

RAM is notoriously fussy when the DIMM's aren't purchased as part of a kit. That leads to problems adding more RAM later.

As RAM is modestly priced compared to other components, I'd recommend 64GB if you're buying new.

I bought 64GB cause there was a good deal on it, so why not. I would still say 32 GB is plenty, but if you aren't on a tight budget and/or you're getting 64 GB at a good price.. 

My PC is used for many things (3D stuff, video editing, coding) so it was easy enough to justify. 

But no, you don't NEED 64 GB for a good experience, certainly not.

I ran 32 GB for a long time and had no issues. Now that I have 64 GB, I see my PC sometimes using 32-34 GB if I'm multitasking while running MSFS, but that's more because the ram is there so Windows uses it. 

11 hours ago, SayAgain said:

And 1MB of RAM was enough in the 80's

One of my first jobs was to install RAM chips on a stack of AST SixPak's - an exapansion card for IBM PC's. Each card took 6 rows of 9 chips  at 64 KB a row (total 384KB). Added to the 256 KB on the motherboard, you reached the DOS maximum of 640 KB.

I got told off for throwing away a chip I'd bent the legs on, and found out we sold a 64KB kit for £120. You can now work out how much 64 GB RAM would have cost in 1984 🙂

51 minutes ago, SayAgain said:

33.4 GB RAM used.  But agree, if you manage your graphics setting, add-ons, etc. one should be able to stay below 32GB 

TLOD 50-200 ( AutoFPS )

OLOD 100-50 

1/3 settings on Ultra ( eg Clouds , RayTracing )

2/3 settings on High

FT Amsterdam Schiphol

Amsterdam Landmarks 

AIG/FsTraffic 28-30 Live aircraft 

—> all those on 2x 4K

Nowhere near 30 Gb …..

 

 

 

6 hours ago, Christopher Low said:

I seriously doubt that I would have any problems with 16GB VRAM @ 1080p resolution.

20 hours ago, Bert Pieke said:

I wish that some 5060ti users would share their experience..  

I've just got a 5060Ti 16 GB, and also fly at 1080p. The biggest improvement I felt was using the Fenix in 2024: I went from 5-15 FPS (due to VRAM exhaustion) to a solid 29 FPS native (locked via RTSS). I apply 2x FG in sim and then another 2xFG with LS , so make it 116 FPS in screen (for filling the 120 Hz in my monitor). I no longer reach VRAM limits, but I have my texture resolution in Medium, and I still have over 8 GB VRAM used. I didn't try running my GPU with FPS unlocked to see how does it fare.