Adding 512mb stick for a total of 1gb.

[FFactory0x]

Basically after searching i found another twinmos ch-5 stick so now im sitting at 1gb or ram
2100+@2.3 ghz 200fsb
geforce 6800 regular

What should i expect to see while gaming. I mean what options are memory dependant such as shadows etc. What should i be able to do now in games i wasnt able to do before

 

[ponyo]

I just noticed everything being lot smoother at high resolution and max details. Also levels seem to load faster.

For example, when playing Farcry with 512mb at 1600x1200, I used to get jerkiness when I was shooting. With a gig of ram, I don't get that anymore and everything is smooth.

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Dual channel mode, I assume?

Far as what options, turn up the details and find out.

- M4H

 

[NTB]

Originally posted by: NausticaFor example, when playing Farcry with 512mb at 1600x1200, I used to get jerkiness when I was shooting. With a gig of ram, I don't get that anymore and everything is smooth.

I must be missing something - wouldn't a jerky picture have more to do with your video card than system memory? Apparently not, if adding more ram fixed it, but I'm not quite sure how that works...

Nate

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: NTB

Originally posted by: NausticaFor example, when playing Farcry with 512mb at 1600x1200, I used to get jerkiness when I was shooting. With a gig of ram, I don't get that anymore and everything is smooth.

I must be missing something - wouldn't a jerky picture have more to do with your video card than system memory? Apparently not, if adding more ram fixed it, but I'm not quite sure how that works...

Nate

If there's too much data to fit in RAM, it's gotta get pulled from the hard drive. Shooting maybe not as much, but in "seamless environment" games you'll get hammered hard on loading a new area without gobs of RAM. I noticed it in EVE-Online - when warping into a highly populated belt, the extra 512MB made the difference between staring at a pair of warp trails and watching a half-dozen missiles shreak towards my quarry.

- M4H

 

[FFactory0x]

is there any benchmarks that people have run for games showing 512mb and 1gb ram

 

[Machine350]

I'd like to see some benchmarks also. I've read on several sites that 512 is plenty, but all the postings in forums say otherwise.

 

[ponyo]

I don't think it makes a difference in most benchmarks. I just notice it when I'm playing certain games like Farcry.

 

[XBoxLPU]

I just recently upgraded from 512mb to 1gb. And I did notice the difference. Games load faster, exit faster (IE system doesn't take seconds to regain its responsive ), everything is smoother.

Now a days, I think 1gb is a must

 

[FFactory0x]

im using 2-3-2-6 timings. Is that good

 

[magratton]

Originally posted by: Naustica
I don't think it makes a difference in most benchmarks. I just notice it when I'm playing certain games like Farcry.

This is so very true. 512mb is really the absolute minimum for which I would attempt gaming. Many games (BF1942, BFV, Doom3, etc.) all played alright on my 512 system, upgraded to 1GB and they all ran much smoother with much less stutter and lag in loading. My friends are all amazed at the load times I get on BFV when we compare (we are on Roger Wilco). In the past, on other systems, I have also found that 768MB is a good midpoint if you have a spare 256 hanging around.

 

[terraphile]

let me take this a little further, Is there any difference between 1-2 gigs? I also heard something about the worst timings only being 10% slower than the fastest timings. And what's better, faster timings or more ram? I'm confused.

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: terraphile
let me take this a little further, Is there any difference between 1-2 gigs?

2GB would obviously not be *worse* than 1GB, but I doubt you would see anywhere near as big a jump as you do from 512MB->1GB (and that jump is much smaller than 256->512). I don't know of any games offhand that would see a significant performance boost going from 1GB->1.5/2GB, but I could imagine that some MMORPGs would have to go to disk less often when loading (for instance, if you went from one area to another and then back, with >1GB of RAM, the first area is probably still cached in memory and doesn't need to be loaded from disk again).

I also heard something about the worst timings only being 10% slower than the fastest timings. And what's better, faster timings or more ram? I'm confused.

This is basically true, although even 10% is pushing it. Check some of the AT memory articles for benchmarks -- on games that are not totally CPU/memory bound, the difference is more like 5%, and gets smaller as your RAM gets faster. At least up to 1GB, it's FAR better to have more RAM than faster RAM -- and it's almost always better to have a higher FSB than tighter timings (to a point; 200Mhz with 2-2-2-5 timings is probably better than 205Mhz 3-4-4-8).

 

[sandorski]

Initial Game Loading will be much better and there will be far less lagging within Game Play due to having more resources Pre-loaded into RAM. Depends on the games played though, Freecell won't notice anything.

 

[Comparisonman]

When I played Doom3 with 512mb on Ultra, it was good until I changed areas, that's when it lagged. After I got another 512mb stick, the loading time dropped big time. 1gig of RAM definitely makes a big difference over 512mb, and I would say that 2gig vs 1gig is a big difference if all of settings are maxed and the games are at the highest res.

 

[terraphile]

The reason I wonder is because I'm getting 2 sticks of ddr400, that are one gig each from my dad, but had no idea what the timings were, or If I they were slow I should upgrade. But I guess not...

 

[Chronoshock]

You'll love the extra ram. 1 gig is the sweet spot right now where 512 isn't quite enough and 2gig is too much (and too expensive). Generally speaking, things will be smoother since you won't be paging from the HDD nearly as frequently

 

[howdyduty]

Tribes Vengence uses every bit of 1MB ram. You will notice a smoother game play with these new games.