Is there a noticable difference in BF2 with 2 gigs of ram vs 1 gig of ram?

Is it worth it to upgrade to 2 gigs of ram instead of 1?

 

up we go

 

[SEAL62505]

I was wondering the same thing...

 

[spacelord]

The only thing that seems like it might be faster is while loading a level. Although it doesn't seem too bad with 1GB dual channel. I havn't noticed any swapping.

 

Originally posted by: spacelord
The only thing that seems like it might be faster is while loading a level. Although it doesn't seem too bad with 1GB dual channel. I havn't noticed any swapping.

My 74 gig raptor helped wtih load times, thats for sure.

 

[imported_Pipes]

1600*1200@75 with everything on high I gotta believe yes, but I don't know and I'm wondering the same thing. Anybody with a 2gig supercomputer there to answer this?

 

[Auric]

Task Manager Performance tab shows Peak usage. Personally, mine is less than 900MB after running the game. So additional capacity would have no affect. Another 128MB VRAM would be beneficial however.

 

[CTho9305]

1600*1200@75 with everything on high I gotta believe yes, but I don't know and I'm wondering the same thing. Anybody with a 2gig supercomputer there to answer this?

Resolution and refresh rate only stress the GPU more.

 

[apoppin]

Battlefield 2: You won't need a new PC

To our surprise, we found that the game does not need an especially powerful CPU, and can run okay in 512MB of memory. We were able to run the game acceptably on a CPU underclocked to only 1GHz. What Battlefield 2 does need is a decent graphics card, and plenty of main memory bandwidth. That latter characteristic means it responds very well to front side bus overclocking. The results of the memory and CPU tests are towards the end of this article.

this is an excerpt there is a full review on several systems

 

[ryanv12]

:thumbsup: that sounds good apoppin. Now I dont feel pressured into moving to 2GB

 

[blurredvision]

2GB will help you maintain a high texture resolution, and will also help tremendously in some of the large-as-hell maps. You shouldn't feel pressured into getting 2GB's of RAM, but you shouldn't be put off by it either.

 

[ryanv12]

Yeah, I just checked the demo's top memory usage on the 16 bot game, and it went to about 1.15GB tops. I imagine if there were 32 players on a bigger map, the use for 2GB's would be more clear....I got a couple of stutters in game running high texture resolution, so I think I'll make the jump at some point this summer

 

[JBT]

Originally posted by: Auric
Task Manager Performance tab shows Peak usage. Personally, mine is less than 900MB after running the game. So additional capacity would have no affect. Another 128MB VRAM would be beneficial however.

wow your the first person I have heard that had thier peak usage under a GB when running this game. Mine is always about 1.1GB I have even seen it as high as 1.3GB. I pretty much always play on 64 player servers and have all the settings set to high and the resolution @ 1920x1200

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: ryanv12
:thumbsup: that sounds good apoppin. Now I dont feel pressured into moving to 2GB

You might want to read the whole article . . . it's pretty interesting
:thumbsup:

and now i am confessing my ignorance

is there a Single Player or it is "all" MP?

 

[MangoTBG]

single player is like multiplayer but with bots...to answer your qestion, yes.

 

[imported_Pressure]

I plan to only play in servers with 64 players (128 if they allow it). Would it be benificial to me to have 2GB or quality 1GB?

 

[Pr0d1gy]

Originally posted by: blurredvision
2GB will help you maintain a high texture resolution, and will also help tremendously in some of the large-as-hell maps. You shouldn't feel pressured into getting 2GB's of RAM, but you shouldn't be put off by it either.

False. Video card=texture resolution.

You don't need a new computer or any upgrades unless your video card is dated.

 

[dripgoss]

Trust me - 2GB will help alot with texture loads. I didn't even suggest 2GB in HL2 or D3, but this game will eat it up...

 

[bob4432]

in my experience that is limited by my gpu, i only run at 800x600, high w/ 2AA and no shadows since they looked like sh!t i get a decent 35-99fps and my total ram never goes over 950MB, usually 600-700MB but i only play on the smaller ~32player maps.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: MangoTBG
single player is like multiplayer but with bots...to answer your qestion, yes.

thanks!

i wasn't sure . . .

now, since i only have dial-up and MP is ueless for me . . . is it worth it?

(i guess if it's like Unreal Tournamentss SP game with 'bots, it is not)

 

[CVSiN]

glass smooth here on high at 1600x1200
with 2 gigs

no lag at all..

 

[Auric]

Originally posted by: JBT

Originally posted by: Auric
Task Manager Performance tab shows Peak usage. Personally, mine is less than 900MB after running the game. So additional capacity would have no affect. Another 128MB VRAM would be beneficial however.

wow your the first person I have heard that had thier peak usage under a GB when running this game. Mine is always about 1.1GB I have even seen it as high as 1.3GB. I pretty much always play on 64 player servers and have all the settings set to high and the resolution @ 1920x1200

Welp, I am not so fortunate to be running such high viddy settings and am using medium @ 960 with 2xAA on 64 player intarweb servers. Don't know which affect system memory requirements... but I wouldn't be surprised if larger maps did not push it over the edge, if not the high settings once I get a viddy card that can manage 'em.