Use Mactracker to see what can be done. Paul Moortgat On 21 Jul 2007, at 18:57, Zane H. Healy wrote: > At 12:58 PM +0100 7/21/07, Stroller wrote: >> On 21 Jul 2007, at 08:06, Zane H. Healy wrote: >>> >>> You want 64GB of RAM in your Desktop system?!?! >> >> ?!?! indeed. >> But it would be cool, though, wouldn't it? > > As electricity costs go up, I'm better learning to differentiate > between cool and necessary. The more RAM, the more that system > costs to run. I'm even having to start to look at the number of > HD's spinning. > >>> What on earth are you running that you need that much RAM? Some >>> kind of massive simulations? I'm curious to know, why anyone >>> would need 64GB of RAM on their desktop at this point. >> >> I'm pretty sure I read this week that medium-format is still in >> use in the most-glossy kinds of modelling & advertising >> photography. Digital backs for these cameras come in at c 22 >> megapixels, IIRC, and the RAW files must be pretty large. One >> might surmise that an owner of such a camera or a Photoshopper >> working on such images could put 16gig RAM to use. > > Good point, *HIGH* end Photoshop use always pushes the limits :^) > I'm would assume high-end systems for working on HD Video streams > also benefit. Other than these two areas though most things that > need massive amounts of RAM seem better suited to other platforms. > > Zane