4gig ram

james32 said:
4gb of ram will get you higher scores in all benchmark programs
i tested this, and that was only using windows XP wich only
showed 3gb i would imagine 4gb fully will show better
results in a 64bit vista

it took 1 second of super pi 1m run and 2 mins of 32m run
all benchamark programs like 3dmark 06, metabench, fritz chess benchmark,
sciencemark.


Really?

Ok - I'll have a few runs in a bit
 
I would have thought going from 2GB of RAM to 4GB of RAM is something most Vista 64-bit gamers will be doing, there has to be an improvement somewhere down the line. There is a huge difference in real world gaming performance going from 1GB to 2GB in Windows XP and like the original poster, I'd like to see a smoother ride in Oblivion although its already good on my system. 4GB can only make Crysis smoother surely when it appears.

Ah, the catch up game, you get a performance rig then slow it down with a new OS and bigger games!

I wonder if we'll still be able to buy another pack of Geil 2GB to double up to 4GB with the same type and brand or whether they'll stop making that type of RAM after a while? Knowing my luck I'll ending up having to mix two types of RAM!
 
The Old Man said:
I wonder if we'll still be able to buy another pack of Geil 2GB to double up to 4GB with the same type and brand or whether they'll stop making that type of RAM after a while? Knowing my luck I'll ending up having to mix two types of RAM!

I woul;d think that they will keep it as a product line for quite some time as it has been a huge success for everyone concerned.
 
btw - I just tried Vista with 2gb versus 4 gb.

The 'feel' of windows is much more responsive with 4gig... it's like moving between 512mb and 1gb in xp!
 
Aghh! This thread has made me think of spending more money on RAM than I wanted. :(

Originally I was going to upgrade to 2GB for Vista. Seeing as I have 2 x 512MB sticks installed already the max I can have is 3GB without spending even more money.

How much performance gain will I see between 1GB and 3GB?
 
Lysander said:
Aghh! This thread has made me think of spending more money on RAM than I wanted. :(

Originally I was going to upgrade to 2GB for Vista. Seeing as I have 2 x 512MB sticks installed already the max I can have is 3GB without spending even more money.

How much performance gain will I see between 1GB and 3GB?


HUGE
 
Lysander said:
Aghh! This thread has made me think of spending more money on RAM than I wanted. :(

Originally I was going to upgrade to 2GB for Vista. Seeing as I have 2 x 512MB sticks installed already the max I can have is 3GB without spending even more money.

How much performance gain will I see between 1GB and 3GB?

Tastyweat said:

With Vista 64, yes. With Vista 32, a bit less.
 
well i have not tried games yet but i can confirm that 4gb+ Vista 64 absolutely flies.

i have created a gadget on my desktop to monitor mem performance and it never goes over 20% usage even using Aero.
 
Confusion said:
well i have not tried games yet but i can confirm that 4gb+ Vista 64 absolutely flies.

i have created a gadget on my desktop to monitor mem performance and it never goes over 20% usage even using Aero.

So you're only using 800Mb of your 4Gb? So is 4Gb overkill? Is 2Gb overkill?
 
well for the most demanding games....maybe BF2 which uses no more than 800mb or FEAR which can use about the same then if Vista only uses a maximum of 800mb then 2Gb is plenty for the now!

When I run BF2 full settings...mucho..mucho grapics effects then I am using about 766Mb just for this application...another 320Mb for windows running...leaving me loads of room with 2GB.
 
finally got WOW working.

40% max ram usage. :)

i need to try more testing games like Oblivion but the 8800gtx drivers suck.

on the other side, i do not seem to be able to overclock now :(
 
toxic said:
well for the most demanding games....maybe BF2 which uses no more than 800mb or FEAR which can use about the same then if Vista only uses a maximum of 800mb then 2Gb is plenty for the now!

When I run BF2 full settings...mucho..mucho grapics effects then I am using about 766Mb just for this application...another 320Mb for windows running...leaving me loads of room with 2GB.

Interesting thanks for that. Can I ask how you are working out the memory usage for the game and that which Windows Vista is using? Are there more detailed performance stats available in Vista that display this information? Many thanks!


[Hey! The postie is knocking on the door with my copy of Vista - gotta go!]
 
The Old Man said:
[Hey! The postie is knocking on the door with my copy of Vista - gotta go!]

I would wait before installing it - about 6 months should do it I think. It's very, very different in terms of how things work. It can be hideously frustrating trying to do the simplest things. And LOTS of software still doesn't run under Vista 32, let alone under Vista 64.
 
The Old Man said:
Interesting thanks for that. Can I ask how you are working out the memory usage for the game and that which Windows Vista is using? Are there more detailed performance stats available in Vista that display this information? Many thanks!

while playing BF2...Ctrl+Alt+Delete out of the game back to dessktop...click on tyhe processes tab....and look at the memeory usage! BF2 application using 700-800Mb Ram. You can do that on most games. I was on about windiows XP. Confusion stated earlier that in Vista he never uses more than 800Mb RAM....so put them both togther and you have 1.6Gb approx:)
 
Going to be installing Vista 64 premium this aft.
Rig currently only running with
GeIL 2GB (2x1GB) PC6400C4 800MHz Ultra Low Latency DDR2

From the comments im reading here its advisable to invest in another 2GB?
 
Hey...Confusion, how is the overclocking going....

Just hovering over the order button for Vista 64, a bad axe2, a Conroe and some ram....I want 4Gb but I keep getting different answers.

Some say that 4 sticks will slow down the system.
Some say that it will work fine.
Some say it will limit your overclocking ability.

Just wondered how you got on ?....wanna push this button.... :D
 
jgreen726 said:
Some say that 4 sticks will slow down the system.

On an Intel Bad Axe 2 this is wrong as the board can only run 2T. On an NVidia system, where you can program 1T, then 2 sticks will be faster.

jgreen726 said:
Some say that it will work fine.

They will almost certainly work fine.

jgreen726 said:
Some say it will limit your overclocking ability.

In the past, when RAM was sold as single sticks then you would get better and worse RAM sticks and the worst stick in the pack would limit the overclock. Today, when RAM is sold in pairs, you will get the same problem - if one pair is slower than the other then it will reduce the overclockability of the faster pair. This is one area where Crucial Anniversary may well be your friend as each stick is tested to a certain standard and each 'pair' is two individually boxed single sticks.

jgreen726 said:
....wanna push this button....

Buy in haste, repent at leisure....
 
Thanks that makes a lot of sense.....

I realise this is a noob thing to say but I really have an issue with buying an Nvidia chipset...don't know why but I do hence the Intel board....always had Gigabyte or Abit boards...Bought an Asus for a mate and wasn't too keen on the finish..personal thing i guess.

I think i am going to start again with my new spec as there are soooooo many options!

All roads lead to Crucial! well for me anyway!
 
Back
Top Bottom