On Wednesday, 4 September 2013 at 08:43:53 UTC, Chris wrote:
On Wednesday, 4 September 2013 at 05:04:00 UTC, Jonathan M
Davis wrote:
Only $49 difference? I'd definitely go for the more memory. Of
course, I always
go for high performance over price unless the difference is
really pricey, and
I wouldn't want as little memory as 8 GB either. I always use
the maximum
memory that my motherboard will support. And memory is cheap
these days, so
out of all the things that you could do to improve your
computer, it's not
particularly expensive. But I guess that it all depends on how
mch you're
willing to spend.
- Jonathan M Davis
You are right of course. I prefer to spend a little bit more
money and have a better machine. I was only wondering, if there
is a real difference between the two. If there is a real
difference, I would even go for the 16 GB Dual Channel DDR3
SDRAM at 1600MHz - 2 X 8 GB ( + $139.00 ), but that would break
the bank. Also I wonder if I could get it cheaper somewhere
else and add it afterwards.
Honestly, 4 is "usually enough", but a bit more never hurts. 8 is
"*more* than enough".
Getting anything more than 8 is really just wasted money, unless
you have a *very specific* use case that requires it:
Specifically, the only one I can think of is having a VM farm
server. Or maybe some *super*heavy* image processing or video
editing.
Other than that, no, I would not cough up an extra +90$ for the
+8 Gigs (I suppose +139$ is compared to the base 4 Gigs?).
Especially when you can get a 128 Gig SSD at that price.
BTW: About the "hybrid" drives. AFAIK, they used to be "better
than not hybrid, I guess but still leaps and bounds inferior to
an SSD". That said, their algorithms get better every day, so I
don't know. I think the real choice depends on what kind of
storage volume you *need*. I'd *default* back to a hybrid, if
having a single SSD didn't fit my volume needs. But even then,
external 2.5" drives are dirt cheap nowadays, so...
