Thinking about adding RAM but not sure if it is worth the upgrade? Current specs are i9-12900KF, 3080 with 10GB, 64G ram…thoughts please. Thanks Roger
If youu upgrade, get DDR5 RAM. You d need a new Motherbboard aswell, but anything other than that would be a waste of money.
And no, theres absolutely no use for more than 64GB RAM. Just ditch it and get 32GB DDR5.
1 Like
I think you have plenty of ram I advise you to try this. sorry for being so heavy advising this settings but it really works
1 Like
Users shouldn’t need to use workarounds … There is a memory leak somewhere which I suspect is caused by a mod conflict rather than the sim itself.
Otherwise 32GB is plenty and once Direct Storage is fully implemented in MSFS it will probably be excessive
I am with you with that of the users, we should not use alternative solutions. but it is very clear that we have a problem and for me I have solved it like this The one who wants to try it should try it and the one who doesn’t should continue looking for another possible solution… meanwhile and in another place I will continue with my long and stable flights
I agree it’s a good temporary fix, I said as much in the other thread.
However I would not be impressed if I lost performance should MS decide to incorporate a ram cleaner in the sim.
The only way you will even need your current 64GB is VR, or multiple (more than 2) 4K screens.
128GB is def overkill in the current game. Most people are happy with 16GB or 32GB.
Save your money and trade the 3080 on a 4090 .
5 Likes
This game doesn’t seem to use very much physical memory, but rather virtual memory. I think it may have used more physical memory in the early days before the Xbox version was introduced.
1 Like
True however it has nothing to do with downgrading but just a more modern way of data handling, in particular in garbage disposal. As I see it rather than flushing the whole of ram data is being split into many smaller chunks that are discarded on a rolling basis. I’ve said it before but I believe that guinea pig MSFS is already using elements designed for Direct Storage (but obviously not at the speeds associated with NVMe).
1 Like
Their “more modern way” of memory handling appears to suffer performance issues spread all across this forum. Good on you to keep pushing direct storage; and good luck with that.
It’s all for our benefit in the future, you should know that 
(disclaimer: the future is an infinite number)
The more RAM the more lags.
RAM is most helpful when you work with large files or have multiple apps running at the same time. I’ve done a few RAM upgrades at my work for those reasons. But I just went from 16 to 32 GB on my laptop (now maxed) and my performance didn’t change one bit. I could be wrong, but it seems to me that the loads are mostly on the CPU and GPU for this sim.
1 Like
Yes and no: Do you sim in 4k on ultra with high LODs and traffic? Are you using Navigraph, Airmagic, Vatsim etc. they all need to use memory. 16gb is fine if you don’t but remember your system will start preparing to page once ram is about 60% full and the dev mode counter only tells you what MSFS is using.
1 Like
Hi Roger.
At this point, do not do a single thing. You’re good-overkill on ram capacity, if anything. It makes little to no difference between DDR 4 or DDR 5 in MSFS, based on the specs you have provided, for the same generation of CPU. The Alder Lake platform supports both, depending on the MB you are using. If you are on a Z690 MB, you are already using DDR5.
On the other hand, if you are using a board which supports DDR4 only, the answer is the same. Synthetic benchmarks may tell a different tale, but for MSFS exclusively, you will see diminishing returns by upgrading to a board that supports DDR 5. The cost and effort is simply not worth it, unless you have money to burn, and absolutely want the latest and greatest.
Also someone mentioned “more ram more lag”. This is not entirely true. Yes it can incur a slight latency penalty, IF you are overclocking your RAM past it’s XMP profiles, or trying to push you CPU past 5.1-5.2Ghz on more that 2 power cores. This is because the memory controller resides in the actual CPU.
The takeaway here, is if you are trying to push your hardware further up the frequency scale, as far as it will allow you, (and that is not by much on Alder Lake) simply remove two sticks of RAM from each channel. Which again since you are in excess of, won’t cost you a dime.
3 Likes
Thank you!
1 Like