Microsoft has quietly retracted its own documentation that suggested 32GB RAM is the “no worries” upgrade for gaming, and 16GB RAM is the baseline. This support document was likely written using a large language model, and Windows Latest first spotted it before it was taken down. Microsoft also nuked a document that recommended Copilot+ PCs for gaming.

Microsoft has a “Learning Center” where it publishes guides and marketing articles to promote various Windows features, and these rank well in search results. It’s mostly used by Microsoft to push a narrative and also make it easier for users to make a choice when they search the web.

In the first week of April, Microsoft quietly published a support document titled “Gaming features: What the best Windows PC gaming systems have in common.”

At first, the document might appear to be about Windows 11’s gaming features, but it goes a step further and builds a narrative around the memory requirement.

In the support document, Microsoft clearly notes that:

“For most players, 16GB RAM is a practical starting point. Moving to 32GB RAM helps if you run Discord, browsers, or streaming tools alongside your games. That extra memory also gives newer titles more breathing room as memory demands continue to rise.” – Microsoft.

“16GB RAM is the baseline; 32GB is the ‘no worries’ upgrade,” the company concluded in the support document, which was first spotted by Windows Latest.

This was later picked up by other outlets and the gaming community, and it didn’t go well with gamers.

  • cobysev@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 days ago

    I always build my computers with a minimum of 64 GB RAM, so at first I didn’t see what the fuss was all about. But the article claims the Windows OS technically only needs 4 GB?!

    And I see the push for more RAM is most likely to accommodate AI/Copilot, which needs a lot of resources to function. “Gaming” is just the excuse Microsoft is using to get people to upgrade.

    This reminds me of a video I saw recently about how old computers didn’t have the space to waste code, so every line of code was micromanaged to perfection. But today’s computers have so much room on their hard drives, programmers don’t care how efficient the code is, as long as it runs. Which leads to your computer seemingly performing as slow (or slower!) than computers used to back at the turn of the century.

    Our computers are more powerful than ever, multitudes more than the beginning of the Internet Age. And yet, we have so much wasted code because we have room for it, so our modern computers crawl. Imagine how fast our computers could perform if modern coders programmed like they did in the '90s and earlier.

    • JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Windows 11 has a minimum ram requirement of 4GB. 32-bit Win 10 required 1GB, 64-bit 2GB. You won’t be doing much of anything with that little RAM, but they will boot and “work”.

      Imagine how fast our computers could perform if modern coders programmed like they did in the '90s and earlier.

      And as someone that has spent countless hours shaving bytes and bits off microcontroller code to fit functionality to few KB of storage and optimizing routines to shave off a few cycles from loops, it’s kinda sad to think about it. Today you do the same things by running Python code often under a full blow Linux distro…

    • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      Then we would still have the feature set and security and adaptability and price of that old tech.