Quake 4 doesnt need more than 1 gig of RAM and 256MB of video memory

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: TheSnowman

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
It was probably total system usage. Mine is pegged at 1.3 GB when playing fear. So, with the OS and all memory resident programs running (anti-virus etc.etc.) plus FEAR running WILL result in disk thrashing (page file swapping) which causes massive stuttering. I switched to 2GB and FEAR is as smooth as butter with all options maxxed of course. 1280x960 on a 7800GTX. With only 1GB the game bordered on unplayable at the settings I desired because of the VERY annoying and constant stuttering. 2GB is the answer for this game. At the very least 1.5 GB.

With a clean running system, what little else you have on in the background windows will place comfotably on your swap file. so if the game itself doesn't use any more than the 900mb I have seen it take then a well managed system will run it just as well with 1gb as it will with 2gb or more. It is only when the actively working processes need more ram than you physically have that you will see swapping.

No, it will not. Even with the cleanest windows XP install, and just antivirus (everyone should have antivirus no matter what) Windows will utilize anywhere from 100 to 125MB of system memory and that's being conservative. Add the 900MB for FEAR, and your right over the 1GB mark.

Snowman, I know this because thats exactly how I had my system because I got real tired of the stuttering. I took a fresh hard drive (400GB) and Installed WinXP and Antivirus. Then FEAR. FEAR stuttered less than before, but still stuttered almost every damn corner I turned and every new room I entered. It even stuttered just before enemies appeared, so I knew when they were coming using the stutter as a signal. I couldn't take it anymore and stole 1GB of my music studio PC and installed it into my gaming rig. No more stuttering, at all. Not even once. Most pleased.

Please don't try to tell me that I did not experience this. That would be just silly.

 

[secretanchitman]

i get like 20-30 frames on Q4 with my geforce3 OCed to Ti500 speeds...

running on 640x480, low quality, but all the advanced settings are on, without AA or vertical sync.

 

[M1CH43L]

hey i have a question, you guys determined how much system RAM particular games were consuming. How did you do this? Did you use CTrl+Alt+Del and then go to processes or what? Thanks

 

[BFG10K]

People are still forgetting that a single timedemo does not make the whole game. I've seen Quake 4 use as much as 1.6 GB and as for 128 MB vs 256 Mb VRAM, that's not even up for debate.

you guys determined how much system RAM particular games were consuming

Look at the peak Commit Charge in Task Manager after playing the game for a few hours. This'll tell you how high it spiked.

 

[Ackmed]

A benchmark doesnt tell the whole tale. 1gig in F.E.A.R. produces no more frames than 2gigs in the benchmark, for me. Yet 2gig is smoother. Just like BF2 is smoother. No stuttering, faster loading, etc. Simple timedemo do not show this, they just show the average frames. No they wont be higher, but in some games, gameplay is surely smoother. Thus overall better.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Ackmed
A benchmark doesnt tell the whole tale. 1gig in F.E.A.R. produces no more frames than 2gigs in the benchmark, for me. Yet 2gig is smoother. Just like BF2 is smoother. No stuttering, faster loading, etc. Simple timedemo do not show this, they just show the average frames. No they wont be higher, but in some games, gameplay is surely smoother. Thus overall better.

Agree 100% :Q

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: TheSnowman

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
It was probably total system usage. Mine is pegged at 1.3 GB when playing fear. So, with the OS and all memory resident programs running (anti-virus etc.etc.) plus FEAR running WILL result in disk thrashing (page file swapping) which causes massive stuttering. I switched to 2GB and FEAR is as smooth as butter with all options maxxed of course. 1280x960 on a 7800GTX. With only 1GB the game bordered on unplayable at the settings I desired because of the VERY annoying and constant stuttering. 2GB is the answer for this game. At the very least 1.5 GB.

With a clean running system, what little else you have on in the background windows will place comfotably on your swap file. so if the game itself doesn't use any more than the 900mb I have seen it take then a well managed system will run it just as well with 1gb as it will with 2gb or more. It is only when the actively working processes need more ram than you physically have that you will see swapping.

No, it will not. Even with the cleanest windows XP install, and just antivirus (everyone should have antivirus no matter what) Windows will utilize anywhere from 100 to 125MB of system memory and that's being conservative. Add the 900MB for FEAR, and your right over the 1GB mark.

Check the bold.

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003Snowman, I know this because thats exactly how I had my system because I got real tired of the stuttering. I took a fresh hard drive (400GB) and Installed WinXP and Antivirus. Then FEAR. FEAR stuttered less than before, but still stuttered almost every damn corner I turned and every new room I entered. It even stuttered just before enemies appeared, so I knew when they were coming using the stutter as a signal. I couldn't take it anymore and stole 1GB of my music studio PC and installed it into my gaming rig. No more stuttering, at all. Not even once. Most pleased.

Please don't try to tell me that I did not experience this. That would be just silly.

I'm not trying to tell you that it didn't happen on your settup, I'm telling you what can be done.

 

[Polish3d]

Originally posted by: TheSnowman
If you could take HL2 and add real time volumetric lighting and stencil shadowing, vitrual displacement mapping for all the decals, and the mass amouts of particle effects Fear has, I'm sure HL2 would run a hell of a lot slower than it does now. Granted, it is hard to say exactly how well adding all that stuff to HL2 would turn out; but do I know that if I turn all that stuff off in Fear the game runs as least as fast as HL2, so I don't rightly see the point of your comparison.

Too bad they forgot to make it look good

 

[ArchAngel777]

Originally posted by: TheSnowman
Heh, actualy please pardon my dyslecxica as I apparently wound up swapping the "do" and the "I" when rephrasing my comment. But as for my statment, I know Fear runs pretty damn fast when I turn off all the stuff listed above; have you ever tried running the game like that?

No, I havn't turned off much except for shadows in the game. Even that made the game (for the first time) pretty lame. I normally turn the shadows off in all games, but with F.E.A.R. they definitly look good.

We would really have to benchmark the two to get an idea... I am pretty certain what the result would be, but it would be nice to have the data to back it up.

 

[kylebisme]

I'm not sure what you would want to use for benchmarks to compare. I mean, clearly Fear's included benchmark is a very different situation that what is run though in the Source video stress test. I suppose you could come up with custom demos that you felt were nearly equal in repersenting acutal gameplay, but that would come down to personal opinion.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: TheSnowman

I'm not trying to tell you that it didn't happen on your settup, I'm telling you what can be done.

[/quote]

I know bud. Just trying to add my info and experience with it. Trying to help folks make it better.

Cheers.

 

[ArchAngel777]

Originally posted by: TheSnowman
I'm not sure what you would want to use for benchmarks to compare. I mean, clearly Fear's included benchmark is a very different situation that what is run though in the Source video stress test. I suppose you could come up with custom demos that you felt were nearly equal in repersenting acutal gameplay, but that would come down to personal opinion.

If two levels were created that were similar... I doubt that has been done, but even a simple level could be created with several items and similiar options on them. But you did raise a good point, it would be very difficult to find a map or stress test in a similar fashion.