mxsuprastang Posted July 17, 2005 Share Posted July 17, 2005 I have 256mb of RAM (probably 2 128mb sticks) and I plan on buying a 512 Ram stick. Any know how much this upgrade will help my computer speed/gamin experience? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emperor Devon Posted July 17, 2005 Share Posted July 17, 2005 Yep, it'll definitely improve it. If it (for some reason) doesn't improve your gaming, at least you'll be able to download more mods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RevanA4 Posted July 17, 2005 Share Posted July 17, 2005 Originally posted by mxsuprastang I have 256mb of RAM (probably 2 128mb sticks) and I plan on buying a 512 Ram stick. Any know how much this upgrade will help my computer speed/gamin experience? speeking from a techincal side it will increase you computers ressponse time because it won't be constently paging to your harddrive and it will also reduce the wear on your harddrive and If you are buying a 512 stick of ram I would sugest if possible to leave the other 2 sticks in there and If it is not possible just leave on of the 128 sticks in there. note this only works with me and above because 98 and below can only handel 64MB of ram Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palpatine_dc Posted July 17, 2005 Share Posted July 17, 2005 ^^^ No, even win ME can't handle more than 500 MB of RAM, you have to have win XP, else your pc won't even start. It happened to me once. Other then that you're right. If you allready have XP I would recommend upgrading. You'll have shorter load times an slightly smoother gameplay in games. Allthough the latter is largely dependant on cpu and video card, more ram helps. Edit: @Jedigoku: Sorry, didn't know that. I do know win ME can't handle more than 500MB Ram Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RevanA4 Posted July 17, 2005 Share Posted July 17, 2005 um actually 2000 can handel 2GB of ram 2000 sever can handel 4GB of ram and FYI the only reason xp boots faster is that it doens't start all the services that you want at start up:p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Kenobi Posted July 17, 2005 Share Posted July 17, 2005 Hemm....512MB RAM helping varies depending on how much you use your PC for what thing I'd have I'd say. If you've anything short of a 512 ram chip in there already it will help TONS. If you do already have 512 unless you are doing something really taxing (video editing, photoshop, etc) you won't see all that much improvement. The first thing I'd recommend upgrading is your video memory to 512MB or at least 256MB. You will get tons more graphics features on the higher end cards and such. Force powers in the games all look MUCH better I think. I'd recommend for most systems a 512 chip or a 512 chip with a 256 and a high end graphics card of at least 256MB. Also a factor in game speed is your PC's processor. I'd recommend at least a P4 2.4Ghz or better processor. I have one HT processor and a standard P4 and gaming isn't much different on them from what I see. Hope that helps a bit, DM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Kenobi Posted July 17, 2005 Share Posted July 17, 2005 Originally posted by Palpatine_dc ^^^ No, even win ME can't handle more than 500 MB of RAM, you have to have win XP, else your pc won't even start. It happened to me once. Other then that you're right. If you allready have XP I would recommend upgrading. You'll have shorter load times an slightly smoother gameplay in games. Allthough the latter is largely dependant on cpu and video card, more ram helps. The startup issue could have been related to the "speed" of the RAM itself. Sometimes even though faster ram can work in older machines if they are mixed bad things can happen. I've seen many a machine not start at all with a bad ram mix or just 1 chip and that being the wrong speed. If the RAM is the correct speed Microsoft Windows of any version is a memory HOG and will take ALL you can give it in most cases DM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REDJOHNNYMIKE Posted July 17, 2005 Share Posted July 17, 2005 how long before P4 2Ghz is completely obsolete? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Kenobi Posted July 18, 2005 Share Posted July 18, 2005 Originally posted by REDJOHNNYMIKE how long before P4 2Ghz is completely obsolete? I'm sure it will be quite awhile. That's a pretty powerful processor from my view. Intel could come out with a P5 tomorrow though but I'd say you'd be good with a P4 for a few more years. DM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Det. Bart Lasiter Posted July 18, 2005 Share Posted July 18, 2005 Intel probably won't come out with a P5, unless they just like the brand name, but it's architecture will be completely different (probably native 64-bit core), so it will only be similar in name. But at the rate Intel has been going, (especially dual-core wise), AMD is the only choice, unless you're looking to build a cooler running computer. But back to the topic at hand, the memory's speed makes a bigger difference. Just as an example, 4 Gb od EDO (an old, old, old RAM type) would be far worse than 128 Mb of DDR-500 or for Intel, DDR2-800. So depending on you board, either go with high-speed, low-latency DDR or DDR2. Actually at Newegg.com, you can pick up a 2 Gb dual channel set of DDR-400 RAM with a CAS latency of 2.0 for like $250. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stingerhs Posted July 18, 2005 Share Posted July 18, 2005 Originally posted by Darth Melignous The first thing I'd recommend upgrading is your video memory to 512MB or at least 256MB. You will get tons more graphics features on the higher end cards and such. Force powers in the games all look MUCH better I think. I'd recommend for most systems a 512 chip or a 512 chip with a 256 and a high end graphics card of at least 256MB. actually, you can't just go out and buy more memory thats dedicated to video (unless you use some advanced features in the BIOS at the cost of system RAM). how much video memory you have is dependant on the video card. currently, the standard in video cards is 128MB of dedicated, on board video memory, although 256MB seems to be gaining ground. currently, the only card from the two big companies is an ATI Radeon X800 XT with 512MB of onboard RAM. however, testing has shown that since games aren't designed for that much video memory, performance gains over a 256MB card are minimal at best. basically, you'll get more gains in overall system speed if you just upgrade the onboard RAM. the performance gains by going from 256MB to (presumablely) 768MB should go over quite well on a Windows 2000/XP system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Kenobi Posted July 18, 2005 Share Posted July 18, 2005 Ooh oops I meant upgrading video card @Stinger Do you think there's a "huge" difference between 512MB and 2GB of RAM memory in a machine? (I mean other than for programs like photoshop)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stingerhs Posted July 18, 2005 Share Posted July 18, 2005 well, from studying various tests from different sources, there is usually a signifigant increase in performance by going from 512MB to 1GB. but depending on what kind of memory formant your motherboard uses, you could see anywhere from moderate performance gains to none at all by going from 1GB to 2GB. basically, the lower bandwidth RAM seems to get the larger performance gains, while the higher bandwidth RAM seems to get the lower/no performance gains. the biggest reason there is that 2GB of RAM is about as much as a 32-bit processor can handle. if you have the new Windows XP-64 and an Athlon 64 (or an Intel Itanium), you'll see more performance gains if the application your running is a 64-bit threaded application. otherwise, you'll get about the same results. as for the lower bandwidth RAM getting more perforance gains, well, i look at it this way: higher bandwidth memory nets you more speed to begin with, so just because it doesn't speed things up doesn't mean it doesn't perform as well (it actually performs much better). hope that helps (if you can get past the tech stuff). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Kenobi Posted July 18, 2005 Share Posted July 18, 2005 Yep Thanks for the heads up. DM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChAiNz.2da Posted July 18, 2005 Share Posted July 18, 2005 Originally posted by stingerhs currently, the only card from the two big companies is an ATI Radeon X800 XT with 512MB of onboard RAM. well, there is the "NVIDIA GeForce 6800 Ultra PCI Express 512MB DDR3 (SLI)"... (I've got two bridged via SLI) Nvidia also has a 6200 model with 512mb onboard.... and the QuadroFX 4400 512 MB... and... Plus the new 7800 Nvidia has released has already made me start to drool stingerhs is right though, unless a game or application is specifically designed for the memory (and assuming you can create a proper profile for it)... you're not going to see a major difference.. maybe less lag, but rainbows aren't going to shoot out from your monitor .. hehehe If you're into the upgrades for gaming, get a decent 128mb or 256mb video card, 256mb-1gb of RAM and you'll be fine for several generations (in pc terms, that's loosely 1-2years) PCI express is great and all (especially for my profession), but AGP is far more easy, readily available and not dissapointing when it comes to benchmarks or FPS.... funny enough, your card isn't your biggest worry... it's the bottlenecking your system's frontside bus causes when it's trying to process all of these Uber-components... Until mobo (motherboard) technology plays "catch up" with the 3rd party upgrades world... we're only going to be as fast as our slowest component Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mxsuprastang Posted July 18, 2005 Author Share Posted July 18, 2005 Since we've sprung to the topic, what is a good, recommended video card (for KotOR and related games) in the 100-150 dollar price range? Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stingerhs Posted July 18, 2005 Share Posted July 18, 2005 nVidia GeForce 6600 GT- $150 (AGP only) ATI Radeon 9800 Pro- $126 (AGP only) ATI Radeon X600 XT- $102 (PCI-E only) note: these are prices from http://www.newegg.com, which means that these same cards will more than likely be more expensive somewhere else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RevanA4 Posted July 18, 2005 Share Posted July 18, 2005 Originally posted by stingerhs well, from studying various tests from different sources, there is usually a signifigant increase in performance by going from 512MB to 1GB. but depending on what kind of memory formant your motherboard uses, you could see anywhere from moderate performance gains to none at all by going from 1GB to 2GB. basically, the lower bandwidth RAM seems to get the larger performance gains, while the higher bandwidth RAM seems to get the lower/no performance gains. hope that helps (if you can get past the tech stuff). erm I've went from 512 to 1.5GB because I was taxing my cpu and paging:eek: alot also with more than one card it will use them both and they will remain cooler:p and with my upgrade of ram I've also noticed that the speed of my programs have increased and I can run a messanger and a game at the same time also being a programmer I tend to use alot of ram with out trying and FYI most people don't need more than 512MB or up to 768MB of ram or else they need to consider all the spyware and viruses on their computer. from jedigoku PC Specialist:D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stingerhs Posted July 18, 2005 Share Posted July 18, 2005 true: most people don't need more than 1GB. but from a gamer's perspective, 1GB of RAM is going to give you the best possible performance on just about every current-gen game on the market. and remember: i'm a gamer first, then a computer hardware analyst, so i take things into perspective accordingly (that also means that i don't know everything computer-wise. ). as far my previous post, most benchmarks out there for memory like to increment the RAM by doubles so that things are on a 2x scale. thats why i compared upgrading from 512MB to 1GB to 2GB: its how people benchmark. and referring back to mxsuprastang's question: 768MB of RAM is going to give him/her a considerable gain in performance over 256MB, even if the extra RAM isn't really needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RevanA4 Posted July 18, 2005 Share Posted July 18, 2005 well I'm a gamer first a programmer second and a PC Specialist last So I know hardware and software as far as ram does go it all is limited by the ram's speed as to performance increase as for processor speed my 1.8GHZ amd XP out performes my brothers 2.4GHZ pentium 4:p so um who ever posted a 2.4 P4 needs help:p and FYI I'll run 3 or 4 instances of a program that recomends 512MB of ram at the same time when programming so it isn't just gamers that need it;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Kenobi Posted July 18, 2005 Share Posted July 18, 2005 Originally posted by jedigoku So I know hardware and software as far as ram does go it all is limited by the ram's speed as to performance increase as for processor speed my 1.8GHZ amd XP out performes my brothers 2.4GHZ pentium 4:p so um who ever posted a 2.4 P4 needs help:p I'll do ya one better Network Engineer/Graphic Designer/Gamer and I have over 3,000 2.4,2.6 etc. P4 Processors and they are just fine ......so in conclusion uuuuummmmm....no help needed there bud Your performance from the lower end processor machine could have been related to many many factors from the amount of HD space you had left vs the other one, if that HD was faster at starting up, less items in the startup or items, as I said tons of things can make a difference. You can have two exact machines sitting beside the other, drop the same image on one as on the other. One will have options checked by default the other will not when you start them up. Point being pc's are different even from the same model pc to the same model pc. In the end the performance gain would depend on your specific machines configuration and the like. I've personally seen a PII 600 Mhz out perform a P4 1.8 just by having a bigger ram upgrade. In Short: "PC's go figure" DM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RevanA4 Posted July 18, 2005 Share Posted July 18, 2005 um I do networking to and maintain the servers:xp: and actually I run more stuff than my brothers and it still out performs their 2.4P4:p and amds usually do out perform intel chips Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Kenobi Posted July 18, 2005 Share Posted July 18, 2005 Originally posted by jedigoku um I do networking to and maintain the severs:xp: You know I had to do it jedi "Servers" Yep I agree AMD seems to work better in gaming machines from what I can tell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RevanA4 Posted July 18, 2005 Share Posted July 18, 2005 so my brain is moving faster than my fingers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Kenobi Posted July 18, 2005 Share Posted July 18, 2005 Originally posted by jedigoku so my brain is moving faster than my fingers I have the same problem but in reverse "Sometimes my fingers move but my brain seldom does."...lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.