Corsair researches performance increase of 4GB over 2GB of RAM

Permabanned
Joined
19 Jun 2007
Posts
10,717
Location
InURmama
QUOTED :


" DRAM juggler Corsair has just released a document in which it detail internal testing regarding the difference in PC performance when 4 or 2GB of RAM is installed. Named "Gaming Performance Analysis – 4GB vs 2GB," the PDF file includes a small description of the differences memory usage with 32 and 64bit operating systems and, most importantly a test that looks into gaming and multi-tasking performance plus load times when 2 and 4GB of RAM is used in a high-end system.

Corsair conducted the test using Windows Vista Home Premium 64bit with a system consisting of an Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9650, an Asus ROG P965 motherboard (an odd/old choice to say the least), a 320MB GeForce 8800 GTS/ 512MB 8800 GT and 2/4GB of Corsair XMS2 memory. In short, the 4GB system came out on top in practically every test with the biggest difference being seen with task switching and game loading times. As for the conclusion, Corsair states that "4GB of memory is now an essential upgrade for gamers." Not limiting this to gamers, 4GB of RAM is certainly a plus which is becoming more and more relevant and, whether you buy Corsair's memory or not, it almost a must these days. All we need is the money for it. "



Corsair_2GBvs4GB_performance_01.jpg



May help end the countless 2GB v 4GB threads. ;)
 
Soldato
Joined
13 Jan 2003
Posts
21,130
Those graphs are pretty meaningless marketing BS.

It's marketing what most people know already with Vista (and OSX).

Leopard with 4GB gets to the point the hard drive shuts down due to inactivity..
 
Caporegime
Joined
20 Jan 2005
Posts
42,673
Location
Co Durham
I agree about the graph makes everything look better but 20% gain in company of heros and a 50% gain in crysis minium framerate is good even if it makes no difference to the average framerate.

However I have one problem with that figure and that is if the minium framerate is up 50% then why is the average the same?

Does that mean with 4gb your maximum framerate decreases? It would have to, to be the same average.

However, if true, I would rather see and av of 30fps with the min of 15fps and max of 45fps rather than have an av of 30fps with a min of 10fps and a max of 50fps. Makes for smoother gameplay and less slowdowns.
 
Permabanned
Joined
19 Jun 2007
Posts
10,717
Location
InURmama
Thanks, but its only a copy/paste job lol.

I remember the days and not that long ago and even on 1GB of DDR400+last gen CPU's, the PC could take a good 20-30 secs to recover after closing a high end game if lots of AA/Af and 1280x960 (and no there was nothing at fault with the PC, just the HDD going like the clappers).

Sometimes my Desktop was messed up till it cleared.
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
15 Jun 2007
Posts
891
Location
Manchester
However I have one problem with that figure and that is if the minium framerate is up 50% then why is the average the same?

Because that minimum will be at one of the few points the hard drive gets accessed, it may go from say 2 to 4 fps but for 99% of the game the fps will be identical, leaving the average pretty much the same.

Far from an "essential upgrade" when you consider Crysis and FSX are two of the most system-taxing games..

They should've picked something like SupCom with a load of units, probably show more favourable results.
 
Top Bottom