How Much Memory (RAM)?

[Highbow]

I continue to use Dell desktop , my current one is 64GB ram Precision T3610 it's quite a machine but still running Windows 10, need to upgrade before long for Windows 11 but not looking forward to that.

 

[alecdann]

Software bloat? I assume that would be more of a storage issue. Or are you referring to the individual programs becoming larger, codewise?

I'm considering a new computer for photography endeavors only, and will be using LightRoom Classic and Photoshop, along with many Topaz add-ons such as Denoise, Sharpen, Photo AI and the sort.

One of my big hang ups in making the decision isdeciding how much RAM is should choose. (My options are 32GB, 64GB, 96 GB and 124 GB, each higher amount costing more money.) My two current computers have 32 GB and 64 GB of RAM, and the one with 64GB is considerably faster, but this can be partially attributed to the improved processor speead and increased number of processor cores.

I've looked online and see conflicting reports of how much RAM that the applications I'm using can actually benefit from. Does anyone here have an opinion or advice as to how much RAM is useful for them?

 

[alecdann]

64. GB ram should be sufficient for some time. The biggest issue I see my students running into is lack of Graphics memory and/or processing speed. Adobe runs all their AI processing off the graphics processor (GPU) . That includes all the new selection methods and many of the removal tools so it's important to pay attention to buying a new machine. Adobe's new machines, including the iMac, unify the memory across the CPU, GPU, and neural engine. 64 GB should be sufficient, but if you have the money I would invest in more core in the GPU.

Here is what Apple says about the new processing set up: "M-series chips include high-performance unified memory, which is more efficient than traditional RAM. This single pool of high-performance memory allows apps to efficiently share data between the CPU, GPU, and Neural Engine — so everything you do is fast and fluid. This means you can do more with unified memory than you could with the same amount of traditional RAM."

 

[Whiskeyman]

I agree with the idea of future-proofing a computer by buying bigger than you need right now. The problem with that view in the MAC world is the price goes up dramatically when you start adding features. A fully specced out Studio gets into 8 grand territory which is a far cry from the base model price of 2 grand. With these steep prices i think it is important to choose wisely when you decide which feature to add and it is sometimes difficult to predict where things might go.

You are correct, such decisions are not easy. Determining a future proof configuration at a reasonable price is hard.

I've purchased several future proof computers over the 40+ years that I've owned a computer. None of them really has been future proof. They've been more of an immediate future proof purchase, at best!

 

[ccirelli]

As others may have mentioned here, very first question is Mac or PC. The M-series Macs require much less RAM than comparable Windows PC's.
* I promise this is not a Mac vs PC reply, please no rioting just offering basic info / my experience (which includes 20+ years in the IT world).

My primary photo apps are Lr Classic, Photoshop, and DxO PureRAW (v3). I have a newer 14" M2 MacBook Pro (16 / 1TB), and an entry-level M1 MacMini (8 / 256) that's pushing 5 years old now. The Mini still does absolutely fine processing 45mp RAW files from my Z8. Of course the MacBook Pro is faster for heavy-lifting tasks, building previews, DxO batches, etc. That said, my old no-frills Mini still remains my primary workstation for editing.

For photos only, with the M-series Macs, you're wasting money on RAM going any higher than 24gb. Some would argue 16gb, but I like to future-proof a little. At 32gb you are 110% more than covered for photo & video, 4k-8k. If you do a LOT of 8k, and like to keep a handful of heavy apps running simultaneously, then maybe a case could be made for 64gb.

Hope this is helpful in some way.

 

[Whiskeyman]

As others may have mentioned here, very first question is Mac or PC. The M-series Macs require much less RAM than comparable Windows PC's.
* I promise this is not a Mac vs PC reply, please no rioting just offering basic info / my experience (which includes 20+ years in the IT world).

My primary photo apps are Lr Classic, Photoshop, and DxO PureRAW (v3). I have a newer 14" M2 MacBook Pro (16 / 1TB), and an entry-level M1 MacMini (8 / 256) that's pushing 5 years old now. The Mini still does absolutely fine processing 45mp RAW files from my Z8. Of course the MacBook Pro is faster for heavy-lifting tasks, building previews, DxO batches, etc. That said, my old no-frills Mini still remains my primary workstation for editing.

For photos only, with the M-series Macs, you're wasting money on RAM going any higher than 24gb. Some would argue 16gb, but I like to future-proof a little. At 32gb you are 110% more than covered for photo & video, 4k-8k. If you do a LOT of 8k, and like to keep a handful of heavy apps running simultaneously, then maybe a case could be made for 64gb.

Hope this is helpful in some way.

Yes, it is helpful, as are the other replies. I'm a dedicated Mac user at home, but don't look down at PC users at all. My son works in the Data Science/Programming field and won't have a Mac, because the PC is what suits his needs the best.

I'm using, at the moment, Lightroom Classic the most, with a bit of Photoshop, and a lot of Topaz photo applications within the first two. Photos only, but some are stitched panoramas, which can become quite large files.