"...8GB will only be useful if you run specific memory hungry programs."
I read this statement in an article recently. My setup is a MacBook for live
performance. When I use BIAB in performance all other programs are closed
except Text Edit which is used for lyrics.
My question is, would BIAB be considered a memory hungry program?
Where would I see an improvement between 4gb and 8gb?
With 4gb that I have now song files in jukebox mode now load in 6-8 seconds, would this improve?
In a one hour performance currently there are no hesitations or glitches
running the program. I am just curious where the benefits would be.

Is Band-in-a-Box computer memory hungry? No, not when you're only using the program to play a song. The program is a 32 bit program and will use far less than 4 GB of ram.

However if you use effects while playing a song, the effect will also use memory. The background tasks will use memory. The display graphics will use graphics.

The best way to answer the question is to turn on Task Master, click on the "Processes" tab and view how much cpu and memory the BBW.exe process uses while you're simulating using the program as you would in real use.

The biggest advantage to upgrading from 4 GB to 8 GB of ram is your computer will be not have to access the hard drive to move data as often because there is more room to store data. That means there is less chance of an audible glitch caused by audio interrupted by data transfer.

Jim, thanks for the quick reply.
The reason for the original question was that I purchased a laptop that
is identical to my "performance" computer. I plan to use it as a backup and the only difference between the two is the memory sticks.
It sounds like it will be OK to use without modification.

IMHO, You can't have too much RAM.

Insights and incites by Notes

I've been running a 4GB ROM DAW forever and never have any issues.

Of course, more is better in 99% of the cases.

One of the biggest improvements in performance I have seen came from an upgraded processor.

Going from my duo core chip in the Dell lappy ( I think that lappy was 2GB ROM)to the Intel i5 quad core with a higher speed made a huge improvement.

In the lappy, I was running projects in Sonar that were pushing the processor to 75% and that would result in some issues on playback. Especially if I had some of the memory hog plug ins running in real time. Ozone and Melodyne in multiple tracks with several synths and a bunch of audio tracks would do that.

Once I got the i5 quad running, that same project dropped back to below 25% on the processor.

All that said, I think the speed of the processor has a larger influence on performance. Memory does play a part as well so the computer has room to swap things around as needed.

20gb here. I can run Logic Pro X, multiple instances of Izotope plug-ins, Amadeus Pro and BiaB with no issues including latency. And I can review User Forum songs with Safari, SC and YT while all of the aforementioned is running. I did the memory installation and the cost was very reasonable. FWIW.

Bud

You can't be too pretty, too rich or have too much RAM!

4GB RAM is the hard limit for a 32-bit operating system. If you are running a 64-bit operating system, you can (as your computer will allow) install more than that and it is all accessible.

In Windows, when you launch a 32-bit app (such as BIAB), the O/S carves out up to a 4-GB virtual memory space for that app (depending upon how much you have and how much is already in use). If you launch another 32-bit app, it carves out up to another 4-GB virtual memory space. So a computer with 32-GB of RAM can theoretically run 8 32-bit apps with all of them having access to to a full 4-GB of RAM. Your processor then becomes the limiting factor, not how much RAM the program uses.

With just 4-GB on your computer, all the concurrently loaded apps effectively share that same 4-GB of space, just like they did in 32-bit Windows.

Hi John,

Yes, you are correct about 32-bit systems limited to 4 Gig of RAM. I have a quad-core CPU, Windows 10 64-bit OS. Wouldn't that allow the the processor to better accommodate the resource demands of other apps running in the background, thus not requiring your processor to put a higher demand on the initial 4 Gig of RAM. Hope I didn't confuse you with that. if I did, let me know and I'll try another approach. I've learned a lot from reading your posts to the various members. I appreciate that!

Alan

Windows will give you virtual memory space for each application. If you don't actually have RAM available to accommodate the needs of the program, it will cache out memory to disk to make it seem like you have all the memory you need, but performance will suffer drastically when that happens. It is better performance-wise when everything can run in actual RAM, not swapping out to disk.

I have some sound libraries that are multi-gigabyte that load into RAM. So having the RAM available makes for a better performing experience.

Since the days of the Commodore, Sinclair, Texas Instruments and their competitors, it has been a fact that you cannot have too much RAM, and I think that still holds true.

Run out of RAM on a modern microcomputer? The computer will start writing and reading from the hard drive, and that's a snail's pace in comparison.

Insights and incites by Notes

Yep; that's called thrashing (for a reason).

Thrashing. Thanks. I didn't know what it was called. But that's what it sounds like.

Notes

And depending on the app, that can lead to the "C" word that rhymes with thrashing.

Technically, it IS possible to have too much RAM. If you have a 32 bit operating system, anything over 4 GB is too much.