• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Reducing game map loading time

I

imported_x1

Junior Member
I saw the AT article on raptor vs. every one else and it seemed that loading time wasn't that improved by switching HDs. My question is what if I went extreme and got a Ultra320 SCSI RAID card on PCI-X and 2x Solid State drives in RAID 0 (after I win the lottery) and installed far cry on it (sort of silly example, but..), would maps load in 5 seconds or is there some kind of cpu limited calculations going on.
 
the faster the harddrive, the faster it will take to load the game. as long as ur comp is well enuff to handle teh game smoothly, then if u got scsci, it'll be fine. if it loads well already with 7200 rpm hd, then it wont be any limitations cpu wise.
 
From My expierence gaming, total Ram changes your loading time more than hard drive speed. WHen i had 512mb in my machine using a 7200 IDE hd it could take like 20 seconds for the big levels in Unreal Tournament 2004 to load. When i stuck another 512 in there those same levels will load in like 7 or 8 seconds and i will have a commit charge of about 850mb.
 
If you have adequate memory (>=1GB) and a fast CPU, then your HD will be the bottleneck as far as load times. The rate at which your HD can transfer data will determine the rate at which the memory receives data and consequently the speed at which data is processed by the cpu. So yes, given an already good system, a faster hd can make a noticeable difference in load time.
 
Yes it's true. Very true actually. After I upgraded my system from normal ide to sata, the difference was significant. I highly recommend upping your hdd if levels are killing you. I agree with the other guys though when they talk about more ram and a good cpu.
 
To be honest, when my friend went from his 80 gig 8mb cache 7200 rpm WD drive to a 74 gig 10K rpm Raptor drive, I didn't really notice that much of a difference in map loading times in UT2K4. Well, I guess because in both cases the maps loaded up very fast.
 
Go cheap and get a RAID 0 set up, they will increase the loading speed....I know it did on mine. Even when i had the slowest CPU 1.3Ghz P4 of the group my RAID 0 set up would at times beat the other systems. 2.8+'s non RAID.
 
I run SCSI and I'm one of the first into the maps on UT2K4. In case you don't know it, there is a delay countdown on a new map. I spawn in, and it says "Waiting for more players." So a few more can show up. Then the game starts and I'm usually first into the map. I feel sorry for everyone else, so I let them have the vehicles. But I can easily snatch them if I want. It was the same thing back in the Q2 days when I also ran SCSI. It was fun because I'd get the powerups before everyone else. Slow load times is why I built my new system, my old one took 30 seconds to load the map. Now I'm in first.

You pay double for the price of the drive, and then you need $200 for the Adaptec controller, but it is worth it.
I e-mailed Anand asking them to compare the Raptor to the 15k Seagate Cheetah to settle this argument once and for all.
Review sites usually don't care about Scsi because they never benchmarklevel loading times. So to them, a fast hard drive is rarely used. Look at most reviews, and you see a standard 7200 rpm 40 gig drive on the machine. Here are the parts you need to pull it off, and this is what I have.
http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=16-103-159&depa=0
http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=22-111-138&depa=0
 
Originally posted by: NoGodForMe
I run SCSI and I'm one of the first into the maps on UT2K4. In case you don't know it, there is a delay countdown on a new map. I spawn in, and it says "Waiting for more players." So a few more can show up. Then the game starts and I'm usually first into the map. I feel sorry for everyone else, so I let them have the vehicles. But I can easily snatch them if I want. It was the same thing back in the Q2 days when I also ran SCSI. It was fun because I'd get the powerups before everyone else. Slow load times is why I built my new system, my old one took 30 seconds to load the map. Now I'm in first.

You pay double for the price of the drive, and then you need $200 for the Adaptec controller, but it is worth it.
I e-mailed Anand asking them to compare the Raptor to the 15k Seagate Cheetah to settle this argument once and for all.
Review sites usually don't care about Scsi because they never benchmarklevel loading times. So to them, a fast hard drive is rarely used. Look at most reviews, and you see a standard 7200 rpm 40 gig drive on the machine. Here are the parts you need to pull it off, and this is what I have.
http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=16-103-159&depa=0
http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=22-111-138&depa=0
Click to expand...


Out of curiosity, what mobo do you have? I only know of the intel server or serverworks chipsets that support PCI-X and none that also have agp. I have also heard of boards w/ agp and on-board ultra320 scsi, but they are for xeons and have only fsb "533".

EDIT: gigabyte has them, nevermind...
 
See my sig. I don;t even have a 64 bit slot, and I can load a far Cry mission in almost 5 seconds. (I may see if I can try a stopwatch tonight on that, but its FAST) . SCSI raid0 with 5 drives ? I get 1ms access. I don;t trust the benchmarks for my setup, and this is the reason why. I have another XP3200+ with just a 80 gig fast Maxtor 133 ATA, and its 2-4 times slower loading Far Cry missions. Maybe I will reply after running a stopwatch on both (hours from now)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top