16 GiB of RAM is the minimum today

using an 8 gig laptop right now

thought about upgrading to 16 but i have about 50 tabs open right now and I'm not even using half, like 3.5 gb

don't see the need to upgrade desu senpai

File: 1419045135588.jpg (34KB, 500x332px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 500x332px

>>59045894
>You jump from tab to tab and instantly see all fully loaded images.
>Using only one tab is self torture.

8gb with an SSD is fine for shitposting duty

File: Zaznaczenie_002.png (19KB, 934x146px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 934x146px

>>59045905
What web browser?
What websites do you have in your tabs.
Chrome is terrible.
The only reason I use it occasionally for 4chan is if I need to see all full sized images in a thread.

Only chrom has this plug-in.
And I'm using chromium because fuck google.

Check out my stats no joke.

>>59045940

I am using chrome, I have about 10 chan tabs open, about 10 okcupid tabs open, email, sms via web open, 5 indeed.com tabs open and about 20 porn spankbang/xvideo tabs open

everything is fast and instant to navigate

also I have a few firefox tabs open for reasons

>>59045894
>>59045894
Really?

I don't see major difference.
I use XFCE and IDE for programming while listening to youtube music with opened around 3-4 tabs and 3-4 tab of 4chan and telegram running incase my gf is not bitching about I don't have a time for her.

My RAM usage is around 2.7GB MAX of 4GB.

Prove me why would I listen you if everything works fine and I don't play gaymes anymore.No time for that bullshit especially for gf meme.

>>59045917
Yes if you only brows one page you can even use a 2000 computer.

I'm saying chrom is this level of shit that it bloats instantly.
Also a lot of full sized images make a massive impact.

>>59045974
>Also a lot of full sized images make a massive impact.

bro I have literally 50 tabs open using 3.5 gb of ram and images are not an issue

what is wrong with your computer if you are even bringing up "full size images"

OP take half the ram out of your computer and see if you notice much difference

i bet you wont when just browsing and shit

>>59045971
Do a test for me can you.
Get
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/4chan-image-expander-save/ggomljifiniejngdniedfkabakfipbkm
This plug-in for chrom.

Go to
>>>/wg/

Open every thread in there in a new tab and expand all images in every tab.

See if the computer will even be usable or not massively lag.

Mine works silky smooth.

>>59046009

that would have far more to do with your internet speed than the RAM in your PC you dummy

also an SSD pagefile is pretty fast for just photos and shit

File: dsf.png (380KB, 1280x1024px) Image search: [Google]

380KB, 1280x1024px

>>59045971
In case I am not lying.

Two 1080p videos are loading and three 4chan page that I need.

>>59046009
>>59046033
You got me OP.

I don't have needs like that so it works in my work machine with 4gb ram.

>>59046026
LOL no.
I'm talking about the computer becoming unresponsive(this lag not INTERNET lag).
Not internet lag.
Of course it will take time for the images to download however after they do you can see.

I have a HDD and RAM is always faster then a SSD.
So better get more RAM.

>>59045894
>Using only one tab is self torture
I dunno, I don't have that many tabs, every time I get bored of thread I just close the tab.

>I’m on a 16 GiB machine and For only browsing 4chan it uses 8 GiB.

You have a shitty computer with problems, and using Chrome is just one of them along with your idiotic browsing methodology.

You're also a stupid fucking person.

>stupid fucking people will be the death of us all

>>59046033
Can I see the htop output or some resource monitor?

>>59046033
decent desktop you have
What's the theme?
How taskbar is vertical?

>>59046047
>I'm talking about the computer becoming unresponsive(this lag not INTERNET lag).

I am telling you 8gb is fine and my computer is not unresponsive and I have multiple tabs with partially loaded 100mb porn vids in them and god knows what else open and I am streaming netflix in the background

no lag

I am currently using 4.5 gb of ram

do you have an SSD hard drive?

>>59046033

>OH GOD MY EYES
>not even using 4chan with HTTPS
>GTFO you idiot

>>59046071
>>OH GOD MY EYES
wtf?

>>59045894
>triying this hard to justify being a cuck

>>59046047
>I have a HDD and RAM is always faster then a SSD.

this is where you are fucked up, you need an SSD, yes RAM is faster than SATA however you are having to make up for not having an SSD with all that ram

trust me, you need an SSD and you are wrong about our computers being laggy

I have a good job and could load up on ram on a whim if I felt like it, but I don't need it my computer is super responsive with 8gb and me abusing it by keeping 50 tabs open and just clicking restore tabs every time i restart

File: tfw didn't fall for the 16GiB RAM meme.png (241KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

241KB, 1920x1080px

>>59045894
Mmm, yes, very interesting.

File: 1353716485832.gif (2MB, 450x450px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 450x450px

>>59046062
>Can I see the htop output or some resource monitor?

do you not see where it shows how much RAM he is using?

File: weqqw.png (304KB, 1280x1024px) Image search: [Google]

304KB, 1280x1024px

>>59046062
You can see in screenfetch ram usage that should be enough for you.

Here you go it is lower usage and you can see in network tabs that I am running three youtube videos in 1080p and Netbeans IDE.

>>59046045
Good for you.
Use what works for you :D.

If you have 5~9 windows opened 4 GiB is god.
Also getting anything else then chrom works miracles.

I'm simply addicted to the instant browsing of images and only mother fucking RAM bloat chrom has this plugin.

You really need to give it a try, while other pages load in separate tabs you can instantly brows full resolution images with no loading time.


Also you all need to try this out, instant browsing of images, its heaven.

>>59046121

i've tried it, i don;t like every shitbox frog image displayed in full res, it fucks up the thread, ill click on what i want to see

>>59046067
>>59046111

Wanted to have process count for completeness.
All running process and all the jazz.

Was only interested.
I did see RAM usage.

File: 1361307126309.jpg (88KB, 700x467px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 700x467px

>>59046047
>I have a HDD

2017

stop bragging about your ram if you are not using an SSD boot disk

File: fghfgfhgf.png (72KB, 644x363px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 644x363px

>>59046067
I use Raleigh and etude.
I made vertical taskbar in panel options.
I made it visible for OP so he can see I am running other programs.

>>59046056
>your idiotic browsing methodology
pleb.
>muh only use one tab browsing
>muh wait minutes for images to expend to full size
>muh waiting for things to load
You are literally cancer.
>No one will need more than 637 kB of memory for a personal computer
Kill yourself.

>>59046178
>>muh wait minutes for images to expend to full size

why do you think low RAM and not your internet connection would cause images to take minutes to load?

>>59046121
Well if that is your need I am not in position to say anything.

I am fine with 4gb ram and chrome is known for being bloatware.

>>59046178

buy an ssd faggot

seriously you don't know what you are talking about

nobody is saying anything except that 16gb is overkill for browsing, and that is true

>>59046090
Na.
SSD is only a cheap fix.
Not dumping RAM to memory is the superior option.

I rather get more RAM then a SSD.
Also doing this will kill your SSD faster, while RAM is practically eternal and has life time warranty.

>>59046211
>SSD is only a cheap fix.

it's the solution

not a cheap fix, you are wrong about assuming an SSD equipped PC cant be very snappy with as low as 4gb of ram and shitloads of tabs open

>>59046009
>I do retarded nonsense shit, therefore 16GB is the minimum for everyone
Go be a sped somewhere else

>>59046211
Why are you even here you subhuman piece of shit

>>59046090
>50 tabs
Of what?

I can open 100 tabs of short text and not go over 2GiB on some relic of a computer with ancient browser.

Do my test.
No seriously I want you to test your system and see if really your configuration with a SSD + 8GiB will work.

Nah, I would say 8GB is the minimum

16 is good to have if you're a developer with multiple instances of VS and SQL Server and whatnot

>>59046087
The output is real.
So my OS is a cuck?

>>59046241
>>50 tabs
>Of what?

see:

>>59045964

I just "restore tabs" when I reboot my personal computer and leave the porn in the background till i feel like watching it, i do this for months on end and my computer is very snappy

8core cpu, SSD, 8gb ram

>>59046094
Can anons even count above 3?
I did tell you to open all threads in separate tabs on /wg/ not 2 tabs only.

>>59046241
>Do random shit that nobody does for the sole purpose of stressing ram
Why not just run a forkbomb?

>>59046241
>No seriously I want you to test your system and see if really your configuration with a SSD + 8GiB will work.

what is your test

my pc works fine for my needs even when i abuse it

>>59046275
If I tell you to kill yourself will you do it

>>59046155
SSd are shit.
I rather have more storage + instant responsiveness for less money.

>>59046315
>SSd are shit.

if you say so, but you are wrong

I have an SSD to boot and a terabyte hdd for saved media

the SSD is the best upgrade I have ever made for the money

>not being able to figure out how to use a boot drive and either NAS or an HDD

2017

>>59046191
Yes however its the internet.
And if you already opened threads in new tabs they can get preloaded.
Also your internet speed means shit if the other server is not sending in time or is limiting output.

Here is where uforing works and this translates to opening every peace in a new tab.

File: 1358483404414.jpg (106KB, 598x800px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 598x800px

>>59046315
>I rather have more storage + instant responsiveness for less money.

good ssds are cheap now bro

>>59046339
>Yes however its the internet.
>And if you already opened threads in new tabs they can get preloaded.
>Also your internet speed means shit if the other server is not sending in time or is limiting output.

you really don't know what you are talking about

i bet you are 17

congrats on having a fucked up system that uses 8gb of ram to browse the net

>>59046207
>nobody is saying anything except that 16gb is overkill for browsing, and that is true
Except I'm literally having the OS report to me that it uses 8GiB now.
With a good browsing session opened.

Also do the test.

>>59046367
>Except I'm literally having the OS report to me that it uses 8GiB now.

something is wrong with your shit

>>59046237
>I do retarded nonsense
Like using a graphical web browser?
How about a GUI?
Go back to your text terminal and only writing in vim.
While I do retarded shit like using web browsers and multitabing.

File: 1484738650163.png (184KB, 783x423px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 783x423px

if you have lower than 128gb ram you are a pleb

>>59046281
>what is your test
Ah glad to have a intelligent person between the shit posting.

Here is my test
>>59046009

>>59046280
>Why not just run a forkbomb?
A forkbomb dose not allow me to fap if I want to fast brows all pictures on /s/ with no interruptions.

8gb (or even 4gb) is fine for most users

>>59046254
>8GB is the minimum
Kind of true.
I like to have a load of free RAM if something decides to take more RAM.

If you go over the 8GiB you will have a bad time.

File: memory.png (75KB, 659x594px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 659x594px

Running Firefox with 10 tabs open

What's everyone obsessions with having so much RAM? I had 16GB just because sometimes I need to run multiple desktops, other than that it never goes beyond 8GB for browsing or even gaymes.

too much is the same as not enough

>>59046365
>I'm to retarded to understand how Internet network connections work
>I got so butt blasted with facts I'm going to ignore your points and shitpost about yours stem wasting RAM in a desperate attempt to divert attention from my fucking up about the communications speeds being determined by both server and client.

>>59046489
>What's everyone obsessions with having so much RAM? I had 16GB just because sometimes I need to run multiple desktops, other than that it never goes beyond 8GB for browsing or even gaymes.

if you are booting from an old style spinning HDD it's the only way to make up for the lack of speed

most people have moved on though

>>59046496
>>I'm to retarded to understand how Internet network connections work

you are the one saying your ram makes downloading photos load faster

>>59046489
>gaymes
No gaymen today will ever go over 4GiB do to geymers having shit systems with tiny RAM modules.

>run multiple desktops
Literally no impact on ram its on the same level like having multiple terminals opened or opening a load of folders in separate windows.
you run out of PIDs before you run out of RAM.

>>59046545
>>run multiple desktops
>Literally no impact on ram

you are literally retarded

>>59045894
>I’m on a 16 GiB machine and For only browsing 4chan it uses 8 GiB.
>I don't know how caching works.
>/g/
kys please

>>59046489
>What's everyone obsessions with having so much RAM?

For years I was stuck on a 32 bit system with the max of 4GiB RAM do to the fact that I'm a greedy jew.
And waited for years to get my new 64bit computer with the max of 32 GiB of RAM.

For years I did have the browser chock on itself when there was to much RAM used.
Now this never happens and I'm happy.
And making threads to post my satisfaction of having 16GiB or RAM.

16GB would be useful for VM and such

>>59046513
1) you wrote that internet speed will make photos load faster.
Explain how this is possibly if the server is shit and limits uploads.
Want me to give you examples of modern servers who pull this shit?
Or do you admit you fucked up hard?

2)
>you are the one saying your ram makes downloading photos load faster
Bullshit.
If you open 2 tabs and both tabs are opening full photos after you finish browsing tab 1 every photo in tab 2 has loaded.

Is this to difficult for you?
Now tabs cost RAM and this is where more ram helps with more tabs.
Got it?

>>59046634
>max of 32 GiB
Why not 256 GiB of RAM, or a TiB?

>>59046552
Are you talking about Virtual desktops?
You know the CTRL+ALT+Right_arrow shit?
This literally costs nothing.

Or what?
VM?
If you did say Virtual machines then its a different subject.

>>59046593
>caching
>I like to wait minutes for a response time
>No one needs fast computer experience
>I think I'm smart
Euthanise yourself.

>>59046642
True.

>>59046687
>Why not 256 GiB of RAM, or a TiB?
1) They don't sell these computers(not fucken servers you sysadmin fuck) when I got mine.

2) I'm a greedy jew

3) Do to (2) I got a computer with 32 max (max at that time) and installed 16GiB with 2 more slots for 16GiB more. This way i max out the RAM without throwing away RAM sticks.

4) See I'm a greedy jew

>>59046751
>They don't sell these computers(not fucken servers you sysadmin fuck)
Should've checked dell.com
They sell desktop workstations with 256 GiB :)

File: 823.jpg (32KB, 501x585px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 501x585px

>>59046790
It was 2 years ago.
can you link to their best offers?

Also I did do a entire chart of price efficiency to cost ratio.

You simply underestimate how greedy of a jew I am.

>>59046858
You could buy workstations with 512 GiB two years ago.
Just saying that 32 GiB hasn't been the maximum for a long time.

File: JY8d9yh.jpg (119KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 1080x1080px

I use one 8gb stick because I'm poor.

Only thing I can't do is run Rust since that shit eats 6+Gb.

>YOU HAVE TO HAVE 16GB OF RAM OR YOUR SURFING WILL BE SLOW
>everyone points out this is not true, from experience
>IM STILL RIGHT

idiot

File: ddc.jpg (76KB, 501x624px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 501x624px

>>59046889
Link plz.
I'm browsing dell.com and I only see 16GiB machines
I was never about maxing out the RAM.
It was a complicated price to output over time analysis.
This is why i did not get a SSD, getting 16GiB was cheaper so i did it.

Le happy anon is me.

>>59046923
>This is why i did not get a SSD, getting 16GiB was cheaper so i did it.

you chose poorly

poorfag

>only one way to use computers exists AAAAAAAAAAAAAND THAAAAAAATS MIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINE


The sooner you kill yourself the sooner the world becomes a better place.

>>59046909
If you define waiting for images to load not to be torture and a wast of time.
Sure knock yourself out.

>>59046945
>If you define waiting for images to load not to be torture and a wast of time.

the time it takes images to load is related to your network speed, not how much ram you have

unless you are using such a slow HDD that the HDD write speed has become the bottleneck....

>>59046923
>I'm browsing dell.com and I only see 16GiB machines
Right here.
http://www.dell.com/us/business/p/precision-t7910-workstation/pd?oc=cup7910w7p_4&model_id=precision-t7910-workstation

You can upgrade it to 1 TiB of RAM.

File: 27f.jpg (69KB, 542x615px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 542x615px

>>59046939
>poorfag
I'm a greed fag RAM is faster and will never die on me (lifetime warranty).
So getting this ram was the optimal solution to maximize output needed with price minimization.

I simply got the biggest bang for my buck and I'm happy.
Also I have a lifetime scenario for my machine.
Where I will replace it with a system in 2019 that must have a minimum of max 256 or 512 GiB RAM and the RAM modules need to be configured So that I don't throw away RAM and only add until I get the max.

PlZ get on my level and join me in /merchant/

>>59047005

RAM and the hard drive are different things but work together

you have blown out your ram and ignored your hard drive, your system is not balanced in a modern way

save up for an SSD and and then you will see

your logic is "I did this so it was the best possible thing" But I am telling you as someone who assembles computers and workstations for pro business use that using a spinning HD and a shitload of ram is not the making of a balanced smart system.

you would have been better off with 8gb of ram and a small boot SSD in terms of how snappy the box feels

http://searchstorage.techtarget.com/definition/tiered-storage

>>59046961
I explained this.
in
>>59046679

Also you fail networking forever.
Get off /g/ or explain how you can get something faster if the server is limiting you in the speed it sends to you.

Explain this gentoman to me.

>>59047038
>Get off /g/ or explain how you can get something faster if the server is limiting you in the speed it sends to you.

the server is rarely the limiting factor in real world situations on major websites like 4chan

there is no reason to even bring it up

regardless, if 4chan is serving up images slowly all your ram wont make it faster

File: 1419998374963.jpg (35KB, 529x532px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 529x532px

>>59047036
>your logic is "I did this so it was the best possible thing" But I am telling you as someone who assembles computers and workstations for pro business use that using a spinning HD and a shitload of ram is not the making of a balanced smart system.
>you would have been better off with 8gb of ram and a small boot SSD in terms of how snappy the box feels

this

learn to admit when you are wrong op

File: 68d.jpg (116KB, 680x497px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 680x497px

>>59047036
Interesting yet I did a cost to output analysis.
Do you do this for your computers?

My calculations (might be flawed they are only on paper after all) showed a imbalanced system is better.
Also the more esoteric things where calculated
SSD + HDD costs more
SSD will die do to use RAM is immortal.

I'm also waiting for this dell link of the 256 GiB workstation.
I think its not showing it to me because I live in greedy jew land so I only get the cheapest options.

>>59047073
you have fallen for the SSD MEME try to run your entire system on RAM only, literally load the OS into RAM with no SSD/HDD parts.

And then tell me how snappy SSDs are.

>>59047100
>SSD will die do to use

HDDs will die due to use faster than a modern SSD

christ you are new

>>59047119
>you have fallen for the SSD MEME try to run your entire system on RAM only, literally load the OS into RAM with no SSD/HDD parts.

now you are just changing the subject entirely

>>59047062
>>Get off /g/ or explain how you can get something faster if the server is limiting you in the speed it sends to you.

>Literally can not dig himself out of this disaster.
>B-b-b-b-b 4chan is not limiting its speed

And 4chan is not the Internet.
You dun goofed anon.

>mfw 40 tabs opened and i still use photoshop abelton zbrush

lol?

>>59045894
Well RAM usage is out of control these days, but it's an efficiency issue and nothing else, owed both to browsers and the use websites make of it.

If you were to code a dedicated imageboard browser with native GUI, it'd eat barely 20MB RAM to actively display a thread with thumbnails, could cache hundreds ready to be displayed, and require mere MB to keep and update thousands.

But with a modern browser and javascript everywhere, don't count on it.

>>59047133
No I did do it on my machine.
Did you?

With no baseline comparison you can not say how snappy SSDs are VS pure RAM.
You want snappy? Get a fuck tone of RAM load the OS into RAM only and try it out.

If you ever try pure RAM you are never going back.
Literally the consequences will never be the same, everything changes, literally everything.

>Be me
>Decide to create a VM
>Take RAM only system
>Download iso (is in RAM)
>Create VM (in ram)
>installing OS on the VM
>RAM2RAM literally the installation is instantaneous
>Only limiting factor is how fast you can click NEXT, NEXT, Time zone, keyboard layout, computer name, user name, password
>write this VM to the HDD
>Finished

>>59047197
True.
Do you know a way to make
>with native GUI
on 4 chan?

>>59047212
What I'm talking about is straight C/C++ in MFC/Qt/KDE. Basically a desktop "app".

>>59045894

128 GB Samsung 830 SSD boot
WinXP
2.5 GB DDR RAM
2 x 2 TB HDD for media storage

Usually run firefox with 12-18 tabs open, sometimes ~5 & sometimes ~20/25.

PDF reader, music player, text editor, image editor open, often opening and closing them as needed.

RAM use doesn't exceed 1 GB most of the time, hits 1.2 to 1.5 GB or so, common spike. Not sure I recall seeing it exceed 2 GB.

System light & fast as fuck for, web browser and most all basics 95% of any given day. I ain't even trying all that hard to keep use down, just sort of do whatever and once or twice a month I maybe experience enough slowdown to do some tab and application management. 10 minutes later I'm back up to speed.

What the fuck do you use that exceeds 4 GB?

Sounds like user retardation.

>>59045894
I have a 4gig laptop (linux mint) and I'm doing fine with several tabs open
I don't get why would you need more
my game computer does have 16 gig but developing with unreal engine and blender needs those

>>59047244
I know.
OS native GUIs.
However is there even a way to do it today?

On the other hand I take my bloated web that everything can access to the old days of only desktop programs for windows and linux has nothing.

Or some nightmarish scenario where everything is in the apple/google/windows appstore and switching is super hard.
However web devs are retarded + they include code from other servers (gg ajax fags) and loads 30 other servers who only spay on you.

Also chrom is the worst web browser imaginable i swear to god the next release of this shit stick will have every tab be its own 4GiB VM running a copy of WinXP.

if someone knows a fierfox plugin that works like
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/4chan-image-expander-save/ggomljifiniejngdniedfkabakfipbkm
this or better I'm opened for suggestions.

I only use chromium if I need to grows all images on 4chan.
I'm a fierfox fag.

>>59045894
I have a macbook air with 4GB and its fine unless I have over 9000 tabs open across 3 browsers + multiple youtube tabs + office and probably some image software.

Just bought a thinkpad. running ubuntu. I'm using about 2.5GB. But Its not quite my main laptop yet so I dont have all the same stuff open on it at any given time.

Have 32 on my Desktop.
no shits given

>>59047313
Do my test
>>59047265
Do my test
>>59047306
Do my test

Here it is:
>>59046009

literally do it and post the results ITT!

File: idk lol.jpg (64KB, 864x717px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 864x717px

>>59045894
I have never had more than 2GB of RAM
somebody please tell me what I'm missing out on

>>59047329
>see if you can use a lot of ram on purpose and then see what happens

if I want to view 100 high res pictures quickly, I'll download them.

>>59045894
8 gigs is the minimum, 16 gigs is the minimum for (you)

>>59047312
>However is there even a way to do it today?
Of course there is, that shit still exists.

Just pick some HTTP server lib, like libcurl or even MPL (Mozilla's network lib), GET shit from the chans and POST replies, display it on a basic UI, use libpng/jpeglib/CImg for pictures, ffmpeg for webm, implement captcha somehow (unsure you could have something long-term enough without javascript support though), and you're done.

That's not even that hard, that's some student-grade project desu.

>>59047351
>somebody please tell me what I'm missing out on

>>59046009
Go to 4chan open every thread in new tab.
Have plug in who auto expands all images to full.
After you finish browsing the first thread every other thread has all images loaded.

Literally like browsing images on your SSD/HDD.

Also try doing the test
>>59046009

File: Zrzut ekranu z 2017-02-21 12-15-41.png (302KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

302KB, 1920x1080px

>>59047329
the results are in, and OP is a faggot
>inb4 i was only pretending

File: 1484490806715.png (1MB, 900x1200px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 900x1200px

>>59045894
>Have 8 GB on most of my devices
>Now want to upgrade them all to 16 GB for no reason

Screw this thread.

>>59047393
Dose it exists like in i can download some shit and use it now and use it without problems.

I know its possible to write however is it available?

>>59047399
Thank you for doing the test.

>Using fierfox
I told you chrome is bloated and the problem see.
Also get the plug-in for chrome and expand all images, wait for it to load and give the results.
Use chromium like I do.
You have it on ubuntu right?

I told you I'm using 8GiB because chrome is bloated shit right?

>>59047448
>If I create this entirely ridiculous scenario that nobody will ever encounter beyond doing it to satisfy my autism, it'll prove I'm right!

File: 1485262515835.jpg (76KB, 1065x859px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 1065x859px

>>59045894
>Have 8GB
>At somewhat normal usage levels right now
>Even have a video open
>2.5GB used
>5.1G just for caching shit
Not everyone is using shitty bloat like you, OP.

File: memory.png (72KB, 1040x611px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 1040x611px

8GB is perfectly fine.

>>59045894
> is the minimum today
Not sure you use that word in a correct way.

>>59045894
>automatically caching CP if anyone decides to post it
enjoy your party van

>>59045894
For me, it's the McChicken. The best fast food sandwich.

>>59045917
>8gb with an SSD is fine for shitposting duty
this.

>>59045894
I hardly ever use over 4GB and I have 8 available. Firefox doesn't eat that much RAM even with 20 open tabs.

>>59045894
Only if you use Chrome. I'm using Firefox and run 3 VMs in the background while gaming and only use 6 to 7 GB of RAM, I don't really need my 16 all that often.

>>59046386
See if you can spot the difference:
>using a graphical web browser
>using a graphical web browser to load an entire board's worth of webms at the same time
If you can't, I'm sorry to say it but you're mentally disabled.

>>59047329
>>59046009
>>59047306
done, my laptop wasn't usable
but this is probably a corner case, a stress test only for its own sake
I have never had a single problem in 6 years with this laptop
then, again, I do have a much well performing computer. but it needs to be better
for normal internet browsing and office tasks you don't need more than 4

>>59047591
>Firefox
>>59047593
>Firefox
>Only if you use Chrome

True and I'm a fierfox user most of the time!
However here is the thing only chrom has this plugin!
So i have 2 options
1)Get more RAM and use chrom for the fast image browsing power
2)Not do (1) and brows without caching pages sluggishly.

I did (1) for 4chan only(this plug-in works only here). I value my comfort more then the price of 16GiB of RAM.

Don't get me wrong chrome is a peace of shit and normally use Fierfox however its a fact it will cost you about ~8GiB to brows 4chan like this on chrome.

I'm also opened for suggestions from people who have alternative plug-ins for fierfox.

>>59046713

>still using a mechanical boot drive in 2017

hellp pajeet

>>59047595
>Can not see difference between waiting for images to load and having them instantaneously.
WEW lad, you are torturing yourself and are to retarded to know it.

>What is the problem with taking 1 minute to open one folder?
>I don't see a problem

>>59047005

>caring about a fucking RAM stick lasting your entire life from now

You're so fucking dumb. Please don't post on this board again.

>>59045894
>16 GiB of RAM is the minimum today.
>There is no debating around it.
>>59047674
>because you absolutely have to load every image in every tab you're not even looking at

Kill yourself you fucking cunt.

>there are people who bought i7 just to surf the interwebz
>who then brag about not needing more than 8gb of ram

>>59047643
>done
Thank you.
>my laptop wasn't usable
Exactly what I expected, classic shit chrome.
>I have never had a single problem in 6 years with this laptop
Its not your laptop its chrome.
>normal Internet browsing
Yes however I crave the instant image lookup that caching gives me.

To get a idea how this works you need to compare it to google fiber
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bGJtitiz-k
Images are like on disc (because they are, duh).
Also I get images even faster then this faggot on google fiber.
This shows 5 things:
1) Do to intelligent optimization I'm browsing 4chan faster then if I get google fiber!!!!
2) You literally need google fiber to even compete with my resource allocation (caching)
3) And you still fail
4) Yet all of you are wetting yourself about getting google fiber.
5) It takes the cost of 16GiBs of ram + knowhow to get this

>>59047743
>>because you absolutely have to load every image in every tab you're not even looking at
Or you can be a pleb and wast your time waiting for images to load.
2001 is over its time to use the RAM you have for this.

Pictured you
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSKBRWoGvL0

ProTip I'm outcompeting google fiber.

File: 57277029.jpg (23KB, 184x184px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 184x184px

>>59045894
I only have a power led, but that ram would make me go full retard. So pretty.

I have 16gig. I just realised I haven't checked how much I was using since I got it. So that's nice.

>>59045894
>16 GiB of RAM is the minimum today.
>There is no debating around it.
>I’m on a 16 GiB machine and For only browsing 4chan it uses 8 GiB.
interesting how I have 2gib with 10 tabs on average and ff uses about 350mib
really boils your noodle

% free -h
              total        used        free      shared  buff/cache   available
Mem:            31G        512M         29G        209M        1.5G         30G

Mistakes were made

>I’m on a 16 GiB machine and For only browsing 4chan it uses 8 GiB.

That's because you have a literal botnet and a dozen other malwares installed.

>>59047834
>waiting for images to load
Images literally unironically load instantly. Unless you load every single one on the entire website at the exact same time maybe.

>>59047929
4chan's image hosting servers are infamously slow

File: 53b.png (508KB, 651x481px) Image search: [Google]

508KB, 651x481px

>>59047783
This is so true.

What idiots they literally overplayed for that 0.001% more power on their CPU.

>>59047851
Ah fuck me.
I should have written that I have a special use for chrome.
continue reading.

>>59047874
I left chrom opened all of this time while we where chating from 8GiB to 9GiB.
~3GiB free, time to get me some +16GiB of RAM to get my full 32GiB.

I regret nothing.

>>59047942
>I need more RAM because the server side is slow

>>59047966
That's not what I said

>>59046438
Just use downthemall to grab all the images and start a slideshow.

>>59047929
1)
HAHAHAHA
2)
Prove it!
go to /wg/ and screen record yourself opening for the first time one image.

I'm waiting.

>>59047966
>>59047973

He is so but blasted that he desperately tries to prove he is right.
He will only try to divert attention from his failures and change the subject.

Also
>>59047966
>What is pre loading
the post

>>59048007
I've never waited for an image to load, I honestly don't see your point.

>>59045964
>>59045894

The reason why chrome is using 8gb of ram is because it can. When there are other programs running that need ram chrome will use less.

>>59048039
Prove it!
go to /wg/ and screen record yourself opening for the first time one image.

I'm waiting.

It literally is noticeable.
The time it takes the picture to go to the end like in
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSKBRWoGvL0
(not to this extent unless you have 1995 internet)
Maybe you are used to this levels of pleb shit and judging how hard this fag
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bGJtitiz-k
jizzed himself you must have it to.

Or are you on google fiber?

>>59045894
Still rocking 4

>>59048097
Still using lynx to access this site.

>>59048048
What exactly is it doing with it though?

>>59048093
>Prove it!
If I record myself opening an image and it loads instantly you're gonna yell "lies, you preloaded that image, I was right all along". So no, thank you. I'm not interested enough in your autism.

>>59048124
Its possible to fake it.
Like the text only outputs in htop.
However I suspect you realizes how wrong you are and are trying to desperately back paddle.

Also what is your internet? google fiber?

>>59048162
>trying to desperately back paddle
Fine, you're right, a lot of my free time is wasted on loading 5MB wallpapers on 4chan.

File: What-is-this-A-Center-For-Ants-Zoolander.gif (496KB, 499x281px) Image search: [Google]

496KB, 499x281px

>>59048257
Also if you want to have some fap material from /s/
Click to expand is a wast of time if you have your dick in your hand.
Unless you enjoy tiny pixelated preview images.

>>59048323
See >>59047976

>>59047976
HOW did I not see this!?
Must google and check this out!

How do I optimally configure it?

I always knew my solution was uber wasteful I simply did not mind chrome bloating 8GiB of RAM.

>>59048423
It's a Firefox extension, not sure if Chrome has anything as good. Just right click the page, select downthemall and set filter to images.

>mfw 8gb ram and 8gb vram graphics card

This is the true masterrace combo of symmetry. Prove me wrong.

>>59048472
>Chrome has anything as good.
Chrome is complete shit and i hate it.
I only use it because of this one plugin for 4chan.
If I find a replacement I'm removing chrome forever and never locking back.

>set filter to images
Any other tips and tricks with it?

It looks great however i need to set target location, this might take longer then the chrome plugin.
It has its benefits and downsides.
Hard to say, my time is valuable and I have 8GiB to blow for chrome so...

Anything that 100% work like this plugin?
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/4chan-image-expander-save/ggomljifiniejngdniedfkabakfipbkm
In FF?

>>59046009
>4chan-image-expander-save/
Firstly scrapeing in against the rules. Secondly opening everything is a wast of the servers bandwidth. Thirdly, you're a waste. Fourthly opening isn't browsing, that's systematic. Fifthly thanks for creating the need for is.4chan faggot. Sixthly GTFO.

>>59048536
>Firstly scrapeing in against the rules
Literally identical to me clicking expand on all images.
It saves me clicking and you get the same load if I opened them manually.

>>59046489
I'm a student and I often have at least 3 excel/word/pdf and like 30 tabs open at the same time. I like to watch some youtube clips and play some games too during my study breaks. 8GB is just BARELY enough. Of course I could just close some stuff, but I recently found out that having everything open and ready at anytime is super comfortable for me and I cannot work any other way.

Yes it is. 8GB for static huge pages for Windows VM and the rest for host. 32GB would be ideal.

>>59047448
>Not opening 5000 tabs with 4k videos is maxing out your 8 GB RAM
>being reasonable

It's like you don't want to be retarded

>>59047980
1)2)3)4), 1)2)

I'm waiting

File: 1313714621002.png (450KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

450KB, 1000x1000px

>>59048611
>super comfortable
My man, its all about comfort of use.

All these self torturing plebs don't know the comfort of using shit loads of RAM.

>>59045894
>’m on a 16 GiB machine and For only browsing 4chan it uses 8 GiB.
No it doesn't.

>>59047704
The point still remains. 16GiB is not the minimum, you're just doing something outside the norm which obviously consumes a lot more RAM. No one is saying you shouldn't do that, but that high consumption is because of a completely voluntary choice of yours.
>loads a metric fuckton of webm and high-res wallpapers
>"16GB is the mininum guys, I'm just browsing!"

File: Zaznaczenie_003.png (19KB, 1247x127px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 1247x127px

>>59048673
>No it doesn't.
True chrome bloated(I did not even open new tabs or use it) and the total is now 10GiB.

This is why we need 16GiB children.
Also i do other things besides 4chan, use VMs

>>59048734
>Also i do other things besides 4chan, use VMs
Then it's not just browsing. The only way to hit 8GB while browsing 4chan is to do some retarded shit like "I'm going to load every image on this board" and call it browsing.

File: file.png (44KB, 412x459px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 412x459px

>they can't handle only having 2GB RAM
git gud

>>59048726
>I'm just browsing!
Its true, prove me wrong that its not browsing.
ProTip you can not!

Think of it this way when GUIs first did come along they took loads of RAM and processor power.
From my perspective everyone who is not using their computer to brows like this is identical to people only using the command line.

I like to see all the previous in my picture folder when I'm browsing this helps me be more productive instead of seeing only the text names.

And you don't really need more then 64 MiBs of RAM for text browsing or folders in the command line.

>he fell for the 16GiB of RAM meme
6 4 G i B
4
G
i
B

>>59048793
>I have a unicorn in my room, prove I don't!
You're so dumb.

>>59048111
Caching.

>>59048782
Yes its ~8GiB for only chrome browsing.

>"I'm going to load every image on this board" and call it browsing.
Yet its still is browsing under the definition of browsing.

So are you command line only?
Do you think people who use GUIs that display thumbnails of video/images are retarded?
>Look at all the MiBs they are wasting!
This helps me outcompete google fiber levels of internet connections.
Buffering is a powerful thing and its optimized for me the human not the machine.

The computer power is here time to use it.
Or you can dick around in the command line and not see previous of all the photos.
Have fun figuring what IMG_13563 is.

>>59048793
>Its true, prove me wrong that its not browsing.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/browse

>>59045894
posting from laptop with 4gb ram without any problems. i also have an old desktop pc with amd duron and 512mb ram and can post from that too.

>>59048882
See
>>59048868
About command line and time saving/comfort for the human.
You can web brows with 64MiBs no problem.

>>59048868
>Yet its still is browsing under the definition of browsing.
In the same way that doing a forkbomb and running it to crash the OS is "just using the command line to run a single command".

>So are you command line only?
>Do you think people who use GUIs that display thumbnails of video/images are retarded?
No, I'm not, I can load images just fine. You're pushing this retarded rhetorical strawman where everyone who doesn't agree with you uses CLI text browsers and is stuck in the 80's, and you're doing this because everyone is explaining to you that 16GB isn't the minimum, you're just using a fuckton of RAM on purpose. Whenever you're ready to have a discussion without resorting to "well if you don't agree with me then you're [unrelated thing]" let me know.

>>59048912
>forkbomb
forkbombs don't improve the efficiency/comfort for humans.
>crash the OS
do to me having 16GiB nothing bad will ever happen.

The GUIs eat loads of MiB yet seeing what the actual photo contain is super helpful.
So is shortening the time a image loads.

You literally bitching at me for finding a way to brows 4chan and see images faster is
>It eats so much RAM!

The answer is YES and I understand it yet like the GUIs back in the day.
It also gives you benefits.

People used computers before they did have 1MiB of RAM.
You can do it!
The question is will you want to?
And what will you need to cut out?

I'd say 8 is the minimum but 16 definitely is worth the upgrade price. Especially if you play games.

I never understood how the custom PC crowd simultaneously has a fetish for the overpowered but at the same time will never fork over more than is ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY.

>>59048984
>You literally bitching at me for finding a way to brows 4chan and see images faster is
No, I'm not. If I had 16GB of RAM I'd probably do the same. What I wouldn't do would be crying on 4chan announcing 8GB as dead because I voluntarily decided to load every image on a board.

Let's try this one more time, slowly now:
There is nothing wrong with loading every image to reduce opening times.
Yes, it does improve the browsing experience.
No, it's not necessary.
No, it's not at all "like using a text browser".
No, 8GB is not dead because you voluntarily installed a Chrome extension.

>>59048902
i use firefox and have no reason to load over 100 10mb images in my browser. 90% of the images posted on any board are shit so theres no reason to waste all those resources on them.

>>59047201
enjoy crashing every 10 minutes because you're not using ecc ram

not that you're actually telling the truth anyway, you retarded faggot

>>59045894
>I’m on a 16 GiB machine and For only browsing 4chan it uses 8 GiB.
?! i have 16GB in my machine and using vivaldi to browse 4chan and running some other programs (mail, irc, mediaplayer) never got me over 4,5GB so far.

>>59049074
He's using a plugin to load every image on /wg/ at once.

File: 004.png (33KB, 1007x93px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 1007x93px

>>59049043
>Yes, it does improve the browsing experience.
Thank you.
>No, it's not necessary.
TRUE!
However it is more comfortable for me.
>No, it's not at all "like using a text browser".
HOLD on.
Look at the picture I gave you.
If I say using the CLI I'm talking about using ls VS seeing previous of pictures.
This is browsing of the file system not the internet.
>No, 8GB is not dead because you voluntarily installed a Chrome extension.
TRUE.
And 1MiB is not dead because you voluntarily installed a GUI on your OS.

Look at the picture I have given to you.
Its looking up files on is in a GUI and the other is in the CLI.
The GUI helps you more.
And it costs more RAM.

>>59049178
Ok, now you're just shitposting. Kindly fuck off.

>>59049178
>And 1MiB is not dead because you voluntarily installed a GUI on your OS.
Yes it is. There are no user-oriented operating systems running on 1MiB.

>>59049204
>There are no user-oriented operating system
Yes there is, Linux.

And you can write txt files in it like its 1990 and do e-mail in the terminal, there is even a Internet browser who will work under these conditions.

You can even take your distro and uninstall all the GUI crap to run it of the terminal.
Even today.
However you are better off starting with a distro that is command line ready and for legacy computers.

You need to understand I'm talking like it was in the days when GUI where coming out and some MiBs where a load of memory.

>>59045894
>For browsing I mean I have every thread open in a separate tab
> in chrome
>with the auto image expander plug-in that immediately gives me full sized images.

Well I can't argue with that. 16 gigs is in fact minimum for retards.

>>59049272
>Yes there is, Linux.
Linux is not a user-oriented operating system. You can't run a command on Linux.
>You can even take your distro and uninstall all the GUI crap to run it of the terminal.
That is still a fuckload more than "Linux, the kernel" and it runs on a lot more than 1MiB.
>there is even a Internet browser who will work under these conditions.
There is no Internet browser that will work with the kernel alone, you mong. This isn't possible, at the VERY least you'd need libc. And I can assure you it would use more than 1MiB.

I don't even know why I'm still replying to you, you're proclaiming 16GB dead because you installed a plugin to load an entire board at once, and you're suggesting people who don't do the same to be stuck in the past. Go DDoS /wg/ with your plugin dude.

>>59049319
In the same vain looking at your pictures on the HDD is for retards.
After all GUIs use up a lot of RAM and a CLI ls look up on a CLI only OS is so much more efficient,
Who needs more then 1 MiB?
200MiB is in fact minimum for retards.

16 gigabytes is almost not enough for me
I open many tabs plus use a virtualbox

>>59049359
>Linux is not a user-oriented operating system. You can't run a command on Linux.
I'm sorry GNU+Linux.
Where you use bash to be your CLI.

Also you are implying that old CLI only OSs like MS-DOS are not user oriented.
Something that is proven wrong with the fact that MS-DOS did have users.

>That is still a fuckload more than "Linux, the kernel" and it runs on a lot more than 1MiB.
Is this true? I'm not keeping up with minimalistic CLI only distros. There are historic Unix systems (YES real unix not the unix clone from GNU) who operated under these conditions and nothing is stooping you from using them for writing your novels in txt files.
Not to speak of all the other operating systems like MS-DOS in the past.

>you installed a plugin to load an entire board at once
Like you installed the GUI who loads all image previews in the folder you are in?

You are literally debating yourself.
On one hand you are criticising me for using over the norm computer power to get a superior experience.
On the other you collapse into hypocrisy if i point out how in the past when GUIs where coming out they where also incredibly resource intensive and you can still do all the things people did back in the day on old computers.

I see myself like the pioneer of modern times, plebs are torturing themselves and moaning
>4GiB is enough I don't need to do these advanced things

Same when GUIs where coming around, loads of plebs moaning how resource intensive they are and how you don't NEED to do these things.

I'm perfectly self consistent
1) I value my comfort
2) Not waiting for images to load is comfortable
3) it costs 16GiB
4)So I use it

At the same time I respect the past, knowing how historical people worked with computers on the CLI and how we don't need to actually do a lot of things like GUIs.
However they are comfortable things and technology has cough up to the point where you can do these things.

>>59045894
>8 GB to browse 4chan
How? I'm on Firefox with 50 tabs open and I'm at 1.1 GB of memory usage right now. It's not that often that I even see it go past 2 GB, and I've only seen it go past 4 GB maybe twice.

Update.
I'm closing chrome one tab at a time (trust me its a good experiment).
Jesus fuck you people I have 12GiB of RAM used by chrome only.
The best part is that chrome is not dropping its RAM use.
I bet its a memory leak.
Fucken chrome!

Also thanks for the suggestion about the FF plugging.
Its good however not really for active browsing of threads where all uploaded images automatically are full size.

File: firefox_2017-02-21_08-18-26.png (54KB, 1184x765px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 1184x765px

>>59046009
Use 4chan X retard.

>>59049828
>How?
Chrome.

>>59046080
hes from reddit just ignore

File: 00067what.png (272KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

272KB, 1920x1080px

24 GiB of RAM is the minimum today.
There is no debating around it.

I’m on a 24 GiB machine and For only browsing 4chan it uses 12 GiB.

For browsing I mean I have every thread open in a separate tab in safari with 4chan X that takes full sized images and scales them down to thumbnail sizes with thumbnails 300% the size of normal 4chan thumbnails because I have a 5120x2880 display.

Its the only way to brows.
You jump from tab to tab and instantly see all details in images before you even hover over them
Using only one tab is self torture.
My time and satisfaction is more precious then the cost of some RAM sticks.

File: 0NEIZIA.png (13KB, 429x441px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 429x441px

8 gb is the minimum.

doesn't mean that 16 isnt better overall.

>>59049945
I cam manage 16gb

File: desktop.jpg (2MB, 5120x2880px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 5120x2880px

>>59046033
In case I am not lying.

Two 1080p videos are loading, one playing and eight 4chan page that I need.

Dude, I run assassin's Creed IV black flag with these specs.
>Intel core 2 duo
>Ddr2 3gib ram
>Nvidia gt-610 2gb
>No SSD
>500 GB hard disk.
And the average frame rate is 60 fps.

>>59049834
WEW only after the last window of chrome was shut down did my RAM return to 6GiB usage.
Fucken chrome.
I bet it clamps RAM and never releases it.

BTW I'm massively tabling on FF and using it to post here.

>>59050331
System is back to 4,5 GiBs

>>59047783
yeah that is annoying,personally for me my i7 is overkill but the extra speed helps in sony vegas

Your OS and programs will use the RAM that is available because there's no reason not to. If you have 16GB you will often use over 8GB, that doesn't mean that you actually need >8GB to do whatever it is you are doing.

>>59045894
depends, on my surface pro 4 I can work just fine with 8 GB but for my desktop systems I need at least 16 to get everything done

>>59050523
I'm actually at 5GiB (4,5 <-> 4,6 GIB) right now.
Only chrome is this level of shit it craps all over itself.

>>59050598
A program using a lot of RAM doesn't mean it's shit. In fact it can mean high levels of optimization, because everything you put in the RAM is faster to access than anything you don't put in the RAM.

File: tfw you fall for the 16GiB RAM meme.jpg (578KB, 1894x1008px) Image search: [Google]

578KB, 1894x1008px

>>59045894
>>59046033
>>59046094
>>59046116
>>59046166
>>59046392
>>59046465
>>59046392
>>59047399
>>59047524
>they fell for the 16 GiB ram meme

>>59050623
True however chrome started taking up more ram after siting idle.
Even after I started closing the tabs it did not drop. Only after chrome was fully killed the situation eventually returned to 5GiB.
Explain this!

ITS ALL PREFERENCE

YOU ARE ALL RETARDED

HOLY FUCK, GET LIVES

OP IS A FAGGOT

EVERYONE ITT IS A FAGGOT

INCLUDING ME NOW BECAUSE FOR SOME REASON I FEEL COMPELLED TO TELL YOU FUCKSTICKS THIS

FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK

>>59050656
16gb is almost not enough

>>59050687
>ITS ALL PREFERENCE
ok dude, suuuuuurrrrrrrrreeeeeee
but im still right

>>59050656
/g/ fags are to stupid to use their computers.
Not my problem all they do is only brows facebook in one tab.
All of them are gaymers who bitch
>16GiB is meme
>Because my AAA+ geym only uses max 4GiB

Also I reported on my adventure an from 8 for no reason chrome started growing so it began to eat up RAM (not my doing) and did not release it after tab closure.
After the last tab was killed and chrome turned of the RAM returned to normal.

>>59049828
Chrome is too retard to manage memory right. They also make each tab a separate process.

>>59050866
And apparently if one tab starts leaking its for the lifetime of the browser.
So you have the worst of both worlds.
Go team google retard!

File: print.jpg (46KB, 884x436px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 884x436px

I don't know, op, I think I'd be ok with 2.
10 tabs open on firefox, one is youtube, spotify and emacs.

Which is better, 8gb at 3200 or 16 at 2133?

>>59051967
Depends on whether you actually need more than 8GB.

>>59051967
16 at 2k

File: 2017-02-21 14_00_53-2017_02_21_14_00_23_TaskManagerMain.png - Paint.png (101KB, 1645x789px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 1645x789px

>they didn't fall for the 32gb meme

>>59045894
I think you mean GB

>>59045894
I'm on a 8GB machine and I have 3 browsers open. One has 78 tabs open, another 32, and chrome has 8. That and OS is using 4GBs.

8 is the minimum.

>>59052854
Go open some 50mp tiffs at 300dpi and show me usage again sweetie ;)

>>59046315
>2016+1
>not having an SSD for you OS and programs and using a HDD for data
wew
e
w

File: 2017-02-21_16-18-13.png (649KB, 2560x1440px) Image search: [Google]

649KB, 2560x1440px

>>59045894