Hey there.
About 6 or 7 months ago I upgraded my computer to 512 RAM from 256 RAM. I noticed a good change in loading. On 256 it took up to a minute to load a map, but on 512 it takes about 20 seconds tops? I can now, with 512, usually load a random arena game about 10 seconds before it starts, with the rare occasion of the game starting before I load up the screen.
Now, I've been considering upgrading from 512 up to 700ish(Don't know exact number). My question is; Will the upgrade in RAM significantly upgrade the loading speed of my Guild Wars game?
Heres some of the specs I know (Using different PC, well Mac atm)...
512 RAM(Current)
Nvidea 5500 Gfx Card. (either 128 or 256..not entirely sure)
1.79 Ghz Processor. (Don't know the name from the top of my head)
--
That's all I know, so please try and answer my question.
Thanks alot for reading and hopefully answering.
Asheigh
Upgrading RAM=Faster speed?
Ashleigh McMahon
tijo
Upgrading your ram will increase your computer's overall performance, not only GW's performance, you'll should get a lower loading time (i got 1.5gb atm with shared video graphics and loading time is under 10 secs). Upgrading from 512mb to 1gb would be a better choice imo.
Wrath Of Dragons
I went from 512 to ~1274(1 gig + 256)
the step was huge. Im pretty certain that there will be a really noticeable difference from 512 to ~700, but not as much as from 256 to 512
the step was huge. Im pretty certain that there will be a really noticeable difference from 512 to ~700, but not as much as from 256 to 512
Loviatar
add a 512MB stick to total 1 gig or dont bother.
the difference from adding only 256 MB will not make a difference.
doubling it at only a tiny cost increase will make a difference.
how much ? who knows
EDIT
this is from personal exerience.
there was a small increase but not much
the difference from adding only 256 MB will not make a difference.
doubling it at only a tiny cost increase will make a difference.
how much ? who knows
EDIT
this is from personal exerience.
there was a small increase but not much
Ashleigh McMahon
Ok thanks. How much will a 512 stick cost me in store?
Thanks
Thanks
synthjeno
Upgrading your RAM is always a good idea. Id say go for the 1gb or more. This will prolong the gaming experience of your pc with newer games. Ofcourse your processor and gfx card will become/are a bottleneck too for newer games.
Who knows what the specs of the upcoming GW are, or even Aion.
Point is, that your pc is kinda outdated. RAM will have a positive effect on low spec games like GW. So upgrade as much as you can, or buy a new pc (yeah theyre really cheap i know
) Just remember there are different kinds of ram, so look at the one u have now. The chance might be that if you have the wrong ram speed, it will work not efficient.
Who knows what the specs of the upcoming GW are, or even Aion.
Point is, that your pc is kinda outdated. RAM will have a positive effect on low spec games like GW. So upgrade as much as you can, or buy a new pc (yeah theyre really cheap i know
) Just remember there are different kinds of ram, so look at the one u have now. The chance might be that if you have the wrong ram speed, it will work not efficient.
Ashleigh McMahon
Thanks - I know I have the right RAM stick as the people I bought them from in the past sold me the computer. I'll see if I can upgrade to 1gig if I can afford it, otherwise I'll go for 700.
I just hope it'll do me some good on 700 ; I'm sick of waiting endlessly for stages to load.
I just hope it'll do me some good on 700 ; I'm sick of waiting endlessly for stages to load.
tijo
Your best bet would be to add 2 sticks of 256mb running in dual channel (that's if you have 2 ram sockets available) you'll get better performance than a single 512mb stick.
sh4d0whunta
my computer is awesome i got 2 gig ram
Tachyon
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by sh4d0whunta
my computer is awesome i got 2 gig ram
|
Kuldebar Valiturus
For the money, increasing the amount of RAM offers the greatest performance gain, followed by video card in second place. CPU, is probably a distant 3rd.
Also, larger amounts of RAM tend to prolong the operational life of a PC significantly by allowing an "older" PC to run newer programs effectively.
My home built PC was built 3.5 years ago but the 2 gigs of RAM I originally chose to install has helped to keep my old clunker viable. I did choose to upgrade my video card, but only after my old one died.
Don't let the PC snobs get you down.
Also, larger amounts of RAM tend to prolong the operational life of a PC significantly by allowing an "older" PC to run newer programs effectively.
My home built PC was built 3.5 years ago but the 2 gigs of RAM I originally chose to install has helped to keep my old clunker viable. I did choose to upgrade my video card, but only after my old one died.
Quote:
|
Computer Operating System Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition OS Service Pack Service Pack 2 DirectX 4.09.00.0904 (DirectX 9.0c) Motherboard CPU Type AMD Athlon XP, 2200 MHz (11 x 200) 3200+ Motherboard Name Asus A7N8X-E Deluxe (5 PCI, 1 AGP Pro, 1 WiFi, 3 DDR DIMM, Audio, Gigabit LAN) Motherboard Chipset nVIDIA nForce2 Ultra 400 System Memory 2048 MB (PC3200 DDR SDRAM) Display Video Adapter Radeon X1300 Series (256 MB) Monitor LG Flatron L1920P (Digital) [19" LCD] (140432772) Multimedia Audio Adapter nVIDIA MCP2 - Audio Codec Interface Audio Adapter nVIDIA MCP2 - Audio Processing Unit (Dolby Digital) Storage Disk Drive Maxtor 6Y080P0 (80 GB, 7200 RPM, Ultra-ATA/133) Optical Drive SONY CD-ROM CDU5211 (52x CD-ROM) Partitions C: (NTFS) 78152 MB (53861 MB free) |
Tyrnne
The upgrade to 1GB sounds like it should work for you.
Guild Wars, while having beautiful graphics, isn't a resource hog. My system has Athlon 3000/1 GB RAM/GeForce 6800 (a nice system but far from state of the art) and it runs GW super fast.
Guild Wars, while having beautiful graphics, isn't a resource hog. My system has Athlon 3000/1 GB RAM/GeForce 6800 (a nice system but far from state of the art) and it runs GW super fast.
Dex
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kuldebar Valiturus
For the money, increasing the amount of RAM offers the greatest performance gain, followed by video card in second place. CPU, is probably a distant 3rd.
Also, larger amounts of RAM tend to prolong the operational life of a PC significantly by allowing an "older" PC to run newer programs effectively. My home built PC was built 3.5 years ago but the 2 gigs of RAM I originally chose to install has helped to keep my old clunker viable. I did choose to upgrade my video card, but only after my old one died. Don't let the PC snobs get you down. |
If your system has plenty of RAM for what you're doing, adding more is going to make exactly zero difference in performance. If your CPU isn't keeping up with your game or application, upgrading the video card isn't going to make much of a difference either. Having plenty of RAM does take some of the strain off of your CPU and hard drives when it comes to swapping and caching, but enough RAM is enough....adding more than your software will use won't help.
That being said, 1GB is the sweet spot for games under XP right now. 2GB is great if you're a power user and you keep a lot of apps open. More than 2GB in Windows XP is a waste of time.
Kuldebar Valiturus
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dex
RAM bottlenecks are nasty, but I don't think that you can make a blanket statement about what is going to provide the most improvement to your system performance. The upgrade that's going to make the most difference is the upgrade that improves the situation wherever your performance bottleneck is. For some people this may be RAM, but for others it could be their video card or CPU. You really have to determine what your weakest link is before deciding what's going to make the biggest performance difference.
If your system has plenty of RAM for what you're doing, adding more is going to make exactly zero difference in performance. If your CPU isn't keeping up with your game or application, upgrading the video card isn't going to make much of a difference either. Having plenty of RAM does take some of the strain off of your CPU and hard drives when it comes to swapping and caching, but enough RAM is enough....adding more than your software will use won't help. That being said, 1GB is the sweet spot for games under XP right now. 2GB is great if you're a power user and you keep a lot of apps open. More than 2GB in Windows XP is a waste of time. |
Cost(s) versus performance gain(s) over time.
When discussing practicality it's usually implied that the finer points of technicalities are set aside when they don't apply to the question at hand.
Question:
I have $250 I can spend on a 3 year old PC. What is the best way to improve performance?
Answer:
Generally speaking, upgrading system memory is the most efficient way to increase the application speed.
An old PC is an old PC, bottleneck issues will exist to a greater or lesser degree depending on the age and type of gear.
Most users will not be upgrading a Motherboard, CPU, Video Card and Memory because of expense. They will need to prioritize. Triage upgrades are the norm for people who don't purchase brand new PC's every 14 months.
Obviously, it is more cost effective to build or purchase a new machine if all those items are to be replaced.
So, if costs are to be considered, upgrading system memory is an obvious choice. If the system already has a healthy amount of RAM then a video card upgrade should be considered.
Lastly, a CPU upgrade to the fastest processor that the existing MOBO can support is an option, but one with the least amount of gain.
Dex
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kuldebar Valiturus
A healthy generalization works perfectly here. Yes, 10 years from now, no amount of RAM will make a 15 year old PC viable, but in a span of 5 years the strategy holds.
Cost(s) versus performance gain(s) over time. When discussing practicality it's usually implied that the finer points of technicalities are set aside when they don't apply to the question at hand. Question: I have $250 I can spend on a 3 year old PC. What is the best way to improve performance? Answer: Generally speaking, upgrading system memory is the most efficient way to increase the application speed. An old PC is an old PC, bottleneck issues will exist to a greater or lesser degree depending on the age and type of gear. Most users will not be upgrading a Motherboard, CPU, Video Card and Memory because of expense. They will need to prioritize. Triage upgrades are the norm for people who don't purchase brand new PC's every 14 months. Obviously, it is more cost effective to build or purchase a new machine if all those items are to be replaced. So, if costs are to be considered, upgrading system memory is an obvious choice. If the system already has a healthy amount of RAM then a video card upgrade should be considered. Lastly, a CPU upgrade to the fastest processor that the existing MOBO can support is an option, but one with the least amount of gain. |
The same goes for the video card. If your CPU isn't up to the task of running your game, upgrading your video card isn't likely to improve the situation either. Just because you're not ready to buy a new computer doesn't mean you should just start throwing money into your old machine without any sense of whether or not it's going to improve your situation.
Here's my point: throwing money into older technology yields diminishing returns. If someone is looking for better framerates in games, then a RAM upgrade is NOT the best choice unless they're severely deficient in the RAM department. A video card upgrade is only a good idea if their CPU isn't already a major bottleneck, and a CPU upgrade is almost never a good idea, because as you said, it's typically only going to be a clockspeed upgrade which isn't likely to net a big performance increase for the money.
All I'm saying is that it's better to (have someone help you to) identify where your bottleneck is, decide how much of a performance increase an upgrade is going to net you, and then decide if it's worth dropping the money on your old technology or if you should just put the money in a jar toward your "new computer" fund. I hate seeing people wasting money on upgrades that they don't need or aren't worth the money.
In the OP's case, I agree that upgrading his RAM to 1GB is worthwhile. Beyond that, his best bet for a performance increase that's really worth his money would probably be to wait to update his entire platform (i.e., new computer), unless he could get a REALLY good deal on a video card upgrade (<$100). Even then it's not going to extend the (gaming) life of that machine for very long. Considering that he could get a decent new box that's a much better platform for ~$700 I can't see throwing $200 on his existing system. He'd be better off saving it up toward the purchase of some new tech.
eggrolls
Well, memory prices are dropping now, ~$40 for 512MB is a pretty good deal imo. If you don't mind spending ~$80 for 1GB, go for it, although I don't recommend spending too much on outdated technology though.
synthjeno
Reading all this makes me realise again how wonderful a game GW is. Its can be played on (snob term 
) last gen pcs, has no fee and looks like a gem. Just had to say it ^^
Please tell us how ur findings are when you have ur new ram
) last gen pcs, has no fee and looks like a gem. Just had to say it ^^Please tell us how ur findings are when you have ur new ram
easyg
Ah, yes, increasing the amount of RAM is generally a good way to increase overall performance.
But another thing you should defintely do is optimize your OS by disabling uneeded autoruns, trashing useless startup items, repairing and defragging your registry, etc etc.
But another thing you should defintely do is optimize your OS by disabling uneeded autoruns, trashing useless startup items, repairing and defragging your registry, etc etc.
Lord Sojar
Ok, time for my fare warning... so listen up OP.
Upgrading the amount of RAM is fine and dandy. Be aware though, that depending on what you are doing, more RAM isn't always better. If you are not using most of that RAM, it will slow down your PC. Why you ask? Well, here goes!
The CPU (Central Processing Unit) aka, your processor, is in charge of every single task that occurs whilst the PC is running. You CPU can decide whether it wants to perform that task itself, or if it wants to delegate it to another hardware component, i.e the video card, sound card, etc etc (so many controllers, not bothering to list more). Anyways... So, let's say that Guild Wars, Firefox (or IE), iTunes (winamp, w/e), Word, and Quicktime were all open at once. You are playing Guild Wars, and the game sends a graphics directive to the processor. Your AMD/Intel knows that it would be more efficient for the graphics card to process that data. So, it sends it to the graphics card... but wait... processors cannot send data directly. It must first be sent to the RAM, and then to the video card. Now, let's assume you had 1GB of RAM (2x512MB) That directive can now be put into stick#1 which is already a very active RAM module. The data can be retrieved by the video card quickly, because the RAM is well organized. Now, scenario#2 comes along. You have 4GBs (1GB ea module) Now, the CPU decides to send the script to stick#1 again. But WAIT! Stick #1 is much larger! So now, there will be what we call latency. What that basically means is that it will take longer for the GPU to find that data because of a "deeper" module. So, more RAM in larger size sticks = slower speed, but more power. The same story is true of increasing the RAM's speed. In order to do that, you have to raise the CAS latency, RS Latency, etc. When you raise the timings of the storage, hash, read, and write functions, you raise the latency of the RAM. So, despite the RAM moving faster, it is taking longer to perform each task.
I tried not to get too technical there, hope it made some sense.
Anyways, 512MB is an awfully small amount. I would recommend getting 2x256MB more or 1 512MB depending on how many slots you have open atm. Remember, 2x256 will be faster then 1x512 stick. Good luck!
Upgrading the amount of RAM is fine and dandy. Be aware though, that depending on what you are doing, more RAM isn't always better. If you are not using most of that RAM, it will slow down your PC. Why you ask? Well, here goes!
The CPU (Central Processing Unit) aka, your processor, is in charge of every single task that occurs whilst the PC is running. You CPU can decide whether it wants to perform that task itself, or if it wants to delegate it to another hardware component, i.e the video card, sound card, etc etc (so many controllers, not bothering to list more). Anyways... So, let's say that Guild Wars, Firefox (or IE), iTunes (winamp, w/e), Word, and Quicktime were all open at once. You are playing Guild Wars, and the game sends a graphics directive to the processor. Your AMD/Intel knows that it would be more efficient for the graphics card to process that data. So, it sends it to the graphics card... but wait... processors cannot send data directly. It must first be sent to the RAM, and then to the video card. Now, let's assume you had 1GB of RAM (2x512MB) That directive can now be put into stick#1 which is already a very active RAM module. The data can be retrieved by the video card quickly, because the RAM is well organized. Now, scenario#2 comes along. You have 4GBs (1GB ea module) Now, the CPU decides to send the script to stick#1 again. But WAIT! Stick #1 is much larger! So now, there will be what we call latency. What that basically means is that it will take longer for the GPU to find that data because of a "deeper" module. So, more RAM in larger size sticks = slower speed, but more power. The same story is true of increasing the RAM's speed. In order to do that, you have to raise the CAS latency, RS Latency, etc. When you raise the timings of the storage, hash, read, and write functions, you raise the latency of the RAM. So, despite the RAM moving faster, it is taking longer to perform each task.
I tried not to get too technical there, hope it made some sense.
Anyways, 512MB is an awfully small amount. I would recommend getting 2x256MB more or 1 512MB depending on how many slots you have open atm. Remember, 2x256 will be faster then 1x512 stick. Good luck!
EternalTempest
Windows XP loves 1gb of ram. You will notice the system will be "snappier" all the way up to 1gb of ram. Anything past 2gb you won't really see that much improvement unless you are doing 3d modeling / autocad rendering.
Now Vista loves 2gb of ram and runs well on 1gb so if you plan up wanting to run Vista nicely (but does well at 1gb), go for a 2gb upgrade.
This is under the assumption you have decent cpu / video card. If not, these will be the components will holding you back. I running an higher end video card (7600) on an old single core cpu (amd 754pin Athlon XP 64bit 3400+). The cpu is two "generations" behind the current socket.
Now Vista loves 2gb of ram and runs well on 1gb so if you plan up wanting to run Vista nicely (but does well at 1gb), go for a 2gb upgrade.
This is under the assumption you have decent cpu / video card. If not, these will be the components will holding you back. I running an higher end video card (7600) on an old single core cpu (amd 754pin Athlon XP 64bit 3400+). The cpu is two "generations" behind the current socket.
Ashleigh McMahon
thanks guys, just found out my system specs.
In more detail, anyhow.
AMD Athlon Xp 2200+
1.79Ghz, 512 RAM
Nvidia Geforce FX 5500
--
I've just been over to the shop today about RAM. I'm planning to buy it tomorrow, hopefully adding up to 1gb in total. (adding 512 to my current 512)
The only problem I (may) have is I don't know how many RAM slots my system has - currently I believe it has 2 x 256. If my system only has 2 slots, then I guess my best bet is to get the current 256's removed and then add 2 x 512's.
Just a few questions.
1: Is the difference dramatic between 2x 512 and 1 x GB? Or 2 x 256 and 1 x 512??? Will it make a huge effect on loading?
2: Currently with my specs, My computer tends to jump about abit (screen freezes, music jumps) when I load a screen in GW or join mass action. (NOT LAG I don't think. I never really have internet issues) Will an increase in RAM cancel out/dramatically reduce this problem? I hope so, as on some occasions in RA when I load the screen, combat starts fast and some times I don't have time to react because my computer is jumping about.
Thanks Alot
Ashleigh
In more detail, anyhow.
AMD Athlon Xp 2200+
1.79Ghz, 512 RAM
Nvidia Geforce FX 5500
--
I've just been over to the shop today about RAM. I'm planning to buy it tomorrow, hopefully adding up to 1gb in total. (adding 512 to my current 512)
The only problem I (may) have is I don't know how many RAM slots my system has - currently I believe it has 2 x 256. If my system only has 2 slots, then I guess my best bet is to get the current 256's removed and then add 2 x 512's.
Just a few questions.
1: Is the difference dramatic between 2x 512 and 1 x GB? Or 2 x 256 and 1 x 512??? Will it make a huge effect on loading?
2: Currently with my specs, My computer tends to jump about abit (screen freezes, music jumps) when I load a screen in GW or join mass action. (NOT LAG I don't think. I never really have internet issues) Will an increase in RAM cancel out/dramatically reduce this problem? I hope so, as on some occasions in RA when I load the screen, combat starts fast and some times I don't have time to react because my computer is jumping about.
Thanks Alot
Ashleigh
EternalTempest
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ashleigh McMahon
1: Is the difference dramatic between 2x 512 and 1 x GB? Or 2 x 256 and 1 x 512??? Will it make a huge effect on loading? 2: Currently with my specs, My computer tends to jump about abit (screen freezes, music jumps) when I load a screen in GW or join mass action. (NOT LAG I don't think. I never really have internet issues) Will an increase in RAM cancel out/dramatically reduce this problem? I hope so, as on some occasions in RA when I load the screen, combat starts fast and some times I don't have time to react because my computer is jumping about. |
Make sure you buy a pre-packaged "pair" of the memory in one package if you go the 2x512 route. If you buy 2 mismatched memory stick, the pc runs at the slower memory timings between the two.
I would go 1xgib if you are planning to go to 2 gb in the future and you only have 2 slots. It may actually be cheaper to buy a high speed 1xgb stick
2. Good chance you will see improvement. I would also defrag your harddrive. A fragmented gw.dat file can also add to this problem.
You want to buy fast timing memory. Memory will usually have something called CAS. The lower the number, the better. Example it could be displayed as CAS/CLS 2-2-2-2-5 or 3-3-3-3-6 or shortened form of 2-2-2-5.
It may actually cheaper to buy a fast 1xgb stick vs a "paired same speed" 2x512.
Ashleigh McMahon
Thanks. A 1x 512 will cost me £44.99 whilst a 1x 1024 will cost me £84.99. I want to avoid the 1x 1024 unless I have to buy it due to slot sources.
Empedocles
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by EternalTempest
You want to buy fast timing memory. Memory will usually have something called CAS. The lower the number, the better. Example it could be displayed as CAS/CLS 2-2-2-2-5 or 3-3-3-3-6 or shortened form of 2-2-2-5.
|
For the reference, anandtechs.com test:
The difference between memories of different latency are really really small.
The full review can be found at:
http://www.anandtech.com/memory/showdoc.aspx?i=2878&p=1
Actually, the tests I wanted to refer:
Quote:
| 3D games have always reacted readily to any increase in the speed of the memory subsystem. We see that again here, but the reaction isn't very enthusiastic. However, you can see that higher-frequency memory enjoys a certain advantage over slower-frequency one and allows achieving a higher frame rate whereas the memory timings affect system performance less. We shouldn't overestimate the role of fast memory in gaming applications. For example, the results of DDR2-533 and DDR2-1067 differ by only 5-10%, i.e. installing the twice faster memory leads to a negligible performance increase even in games. |
Tachyon
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ashleigh McMahon
Thanks. A 1x 512 will cost me £44.99 whilst a 1x 1024 will cost me £84.99. I want to avoid the 1x 1024 unless I have to buy it due to slot sources.
|
I'm guessing that you're using DDR PC3200 RAM as it's by far the most common. If so, then 1GB can be had for £50 over here.
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showpr...odid=MY-030-CR
Ashleigh McMahon
No Idea about the PC3200 bit, but my price list definately says 'DDR'.
Slomo
As my guildies would say, i'm currently running GW on a "hamster-wheel driven Spectrum ZX 128" which isnt a state of the art PC... its actually a 3yrs old Laptop...
Specs (b4 upgrade):
P4 2800
512 RAM
Crap Integrated 64mb Graphics
It ran GW guite nicely, but with a lot of map-load time and the frequent LAG-spike (during times of heavy spell-casting enemy movement, mostly during large map entries)
Recently i read abt the -image "trick", and that cut my map loadtimes to about 2/3rds of what they used to be.
Then i went out and bought a second stick of 1x512mb DDR400 RAM to complement the 512mbs of RAM i already had, and now my maploadtimes are about 1/2 of what they used to be.
Its hard to say what did the trick for me, but i'd say a combination of the two: -image + more RAM, gave me faster maploads.
Adressing the issue of actual IN-game lags: these still occur at times, but nowhere near as frequent as they used to, but they still come out to "freeze" me once in a while...
- image + more RAM did it for me... and the ram only cost me about 70euros (50£ ca.)
Next project to make GW a smoother experience: New PC!
Specs (b4 upgrade):
P4 2800
512 RAM
Crap Integrated 64mb Graphics
It ran GW guite nicely, but with a lot of map-load time and the frequent LAG-spike (during times of heavy spell-casting enemy movement, mostly during large map entries)
Recently i read abt the -image "trick", and that cut my map loadtimes to about 2/3rds of what they used to be.
Then i went out and bought a second stick of 1x512mb DDR400 RAM to complement the 512mbs of RAM i already had, and now my maploadtimes are about 1/2 of what they used to be.
Its hard to say what did the trick for me, but i'd say a combination of the two: -image + more RAM, gave me faster maploads.
Adressing the issue of actual IN-game lags: these still occur at times, but nowhere near as frequent as they used to, but they still come out to "freeze" me once in a while...
- image + more RAM did it for me... and the ram only cost me about 70euros (50£ ca.)
Next project to make GW a smoother experience: New PC!
Ashleigh McMahon
Slomo.
By ingame lag do you mean when your computer freezes abit when mass action is happening? I occasionally have that problem with 512 RAM.
Can ya tell me that 'image' trick please?
By ingame lag do you mean when your computer freezes abit when mass action is happening? I occasionally have that problem with 512 RAM.
Can ya tell me that 'image' trick please?
llsektorll
i upgraded recently maybe you can see how it the upgrade affects the game
Old PC
Asus NForce 4 Mobo
512 DDR
GeForce 6600GT 256mb
AMD 2400+ 1.8Ghz clock
Game Runs at 10-20FPS. Occasionally in a empty district game will run at 25 FPS on average it will be 14FPS in game. That annoying lag when you first face your team is there which it slows me down to freeze for up to 10s.
specs for bech: 1440x900 no AA lowest gfx
New PC
Asus NForce 570
2 x 1 GB DDR2 667mhz (5.4Gbps)
AMD 64 x2 (dual core) 4200+
XFX (overclocked) GeForce 7600GT (bought this card till i get my 8600GT to be released)
Game runs at 58-65 FPS (4x AA 1440x900 max gfx)
the game runs at that frame rate always... and never slows down. Loads are instant whether im in Ha with 24 people or in GvG it is constant speed. Only time it slows down is on 8v8v8 in HA it goes down to 35 FPS for 2s when we initially meet the team and then speeds up again back to 60FPS.
BTW as a comparison i can run F.E.A.R. at 1280x1024 with 4x AA max resultion with no LAG... haven't tested FPS yet but my estimation it should not be lower than 45FPS.
Ram does matter and GW is a RAM HOG!!
P.S.
before nightfall came out i used 512+128 DDR on my old pc and it did help the load times a bit but with nightfall you really need to upgrade your pc.
Old PC
Asus NForce 4 Mobo
512 DDR
GeForce 6600GT 256mb
AMD 2400+ 1.8Ghz clock
Game Runs at 10-20FPS. Occasionally in a empty district game will run at 25 FPS on average it will be 14FPS in game. That annoying lag when you first face your team is there which it slows me down to freeze for up to 10s.
specs for bech: 1440x900 no AA lowest gfx
New PC
Asus NForce 570
2 x 1 GB DDR2 667mhz (5.4Gbps)
AMD 64 x2 (dual core) 4200+
XFX (overclocked) GeForce 7600GT (bought this card till i get my 8600GT to be released)
Game runs at 58-65 FPS (4x AA 1440x900 max gfx)
the game runs at that frame rate always... and never slows down. Loads are instant whether im in Ha with 24 people or in GvG it is constant speed. Only time it slows down is on 8v8v8 in HA it goes down to 35 FPS for 2s when we initially meet the team and then speeds up again back to 60FPS.
BTW as a comparison i can run F.E.A.R. at 1280x1024 with 4x AA max resultion with no LAG... haven't tested FPS yet but my estimation it should not be lower than 45FPS.
Ram does matter and GW is a RAM HOG!!
P.S.
before nightfall came out i used 512+128 DDR on my old pc and it did help the load times a bit but with nightfall you really need to upgrade your pc.
Dex
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by llsektorll
i upgraded recently maybe you can see how it the upgrade affects the game
Old PC Asus NForce 4 Mobo 512 DDR GeForce 6600GT 256mb AMD 2400+ 1.8Ghz clock Game Runs at 10-20FPS. Occasionally in a empty district game will run at 25 FPS on average it will be 14FPS in game. That annoying lag when you first face your team is there which it slows me down to freeze for up to 10s. specs for bech: 1440x900 no AA lowest gfx New PC Asus NForce 570 2 x 1 GB DDR2 667mhz (5.4Gbps) AMD 64 x2 (dual core) 4200+ Game runs at 58-65 FPS (4x AA 1440x900 max gfx) the game runs at that frame rate always... and never slows down. Loads are instant whether im in Ha with 24 people or in GvG it is constant speed. Only time it slows down is on 8v8v8 in HA it goes down to 35 FPS for 2s when we initially meet the team and then speeds up again back to 60FPS. BTW as a comparison i can run F.E.A.R. at 1280x1024 with 4x AA max resultion with no LAG... haven't tested FPS yet but my estimation it should not be lower than 45FPS. Ram does matter and GW is a RAM HOG!! P.S. before nightfall came out i used 512+128 DDR on my old pc and it did help the load times a bit but with nightfall you really need to upgrade your pc. |
As for Guild Wars being a RAM hog...I find it to be more RAM efficient than most other games...not a hog. Ever played Oblivion? Now there's a RAM hog!!! Honestly, 1GB is plenty for Guild Wars and most other games out there for the time being. I really doubt you'll see much difference between a straight upgrade from 1GB to 2GB...perhaps a few seconds faster load times, but not much more unless you're running a bunch of background apps.
If you're buying a new PC 2GB is a good way to go. If you're upgrading an old PC just to play GW 1GB is a great amount. I wouldn't spend the money to upgrade an older PC to 2GB.
BTW, llsektorll, are you using the same 6600 or did you get a new video card as well?
llsektorll
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dex
Ummm......you upgraded a LOT more than your RAM!
As for Guild Wars being a RAM hog...I find it to be more RAM efficient than most other games...not a hog. Ever played Oblivion? Now there's a RAM hog!!! Honestly, 1GB is plenty for Guild Wars and most other games out there for the time being. I really doubt you'll see much difference between a straight upgrade from 1GB to 2GB...perhaps a few seconds faster load times, but not much more unless you're running a bunch of background apps. If you're buying a new PC 2GB is a good way to go. If you're upgrading an old PC just to play GW 1GB is a great amount. I wouldn't spend the money to upgrade an older PC to 2GB. BTW, llsektorll, are you using the same 6600 or did you get a new video card as well? |
lightblade
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ashleigh McMahon
1: Is the difference dramatic between 2x 512 and 1 x GB? Or 2 x 256 and 1 x 512??? Will it make a huge effect on loading?
|
2x512 is better, because it allows you to activate DDR (double data rate) if your motherboard supports it. DDR only works with 2 or more memory sticks and most manufacturors recommend to have memories of the same size.
Dex
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by lightblade
Yes, there IS a dramatic difference between 2x512 and 1x1GB.
2x512 is better, because it allows you to activate DDR (double data rate) if your motherboard supports it. DDR only works with 2 or more memory sticks and most manufacturors recommend to have memories of the same size. |
Dual-channel is a good thing, but in the end doesn't make an enormous difference. It looks really good in memory bandwidth benchmarks, but depending on how much your game relies on data transfer rates with your system memory will only result in a 1% - 5% overall increase in speeds while gaming.
llsektorll
With new games coming out I recommend getting a new RAM but also with increasing needs of Bump mapping and Vertex shader requirements I recommend upgrading your graphics card from 5500 to something else... 6600 series would be a good one... but don't go for too high a gfx card because your CPU will bottleneck your performance (laymans terms your slow cpu will slow down your overall performance no matter how expensive or powerful your card is)
Lonesamurai
ashleigh, in all honesty, i'd reccomend a full system upgrade, not just better RAM
you won't get much of an increase by adding 512mb ram on your current system and to be honest, 1 gb of DDR2 ram is much more than 512mb of DDR ram
plus with prices dropping, you can get a nice AM2 motherboard and dual core processor, 1gb ram and a nice 7600GT graphics card for £250
you won't get much of an increase by adding 512mb ram on your current system and to be honest, 1 gb of DDR2 ram is much more than 512mb of DDR ram
plus with prices dropping, you can get a nice AM2 motherboard and dual core processor, 1gb ram and a nice 7600GT graphics card for £250
llsektorll
wait till sping to upgrade when dx10 cards from 8000 series will come out... you will get cards for as cheap as 125 bucks or less for 8600 and 8300 series...
just wait you will like it.
I couldn't wait but thats just me...
just wait you will like it.
I couldn't wait but thats just me...
Lonesamurai
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by llsektorll
wait till sping to upgrade when dx10 cards from 8000 series will come out... you will get cards for as cheap as 125 bucks or less for 8600 and 8300 series...
just wait you will like it. I couldn't wait but thats just me... |
MegaMouse
Ram upgrades are the cheepest way to gain some more speed form your computer. By upgrading the system ram you give Windows and your programs more "foot room" to work better by taking them off the "Virtual Ram" that is on the Hard drive which is a heck of a lot slower than the system ram. Most computers are happy with 1 gig of ram but the more you have the better. Windows XP can run with 256 but barely as that is the miniumum that Microsoft reccomends for it. Other upgrades that give noticable speed increases are a new CPU and on occasion a new Graphics Card. Other things that can improve the performance of your computer are, switching to DSL or Cable internet if available in your area, and having a motherboard with a network interface that is at least a 10-100 type although most now come with the 10-100-1000 gigabit ones(not real sure about if the 1000 speed is utilized by many gamers due to their connection speeds though).
In conclusion upgrade to at least 1 gig, I run my gaming computer with 4 gigs and it is rather fast, and with that much ram I can run my mp3 player without problems. One other thing , Windows XP cannot address over 4 gigs of ram properly so it is not advised to go beyond that.
Mega Mouse
In conclusion upgrade to at least 1 gig, I run my gaming computer with 4 gigs and it is rather fast, and with that much ram I can run my mp3 player without problems. One other thing , Windows XP cannot address over 4 gigs of ram properly so it is not advised to go beyond that.
Mega Mouse
easyg
Really, the cheapest way to gain more speed is to tweak the OS, particularly if it's Windows XP, which installs with a bunch of junk you don't need and don't want.
Toss out the useless garbage. Stuff like Windows Messenger. It's just clutter. Edit SYSOC.INF file to get it to show up in Add/Remove Programs, then delete that garbage immediately.
Windows Automatic Updates is another well known system choke point, especially at startup. Turn that thing off.
A system with 512 mb RAM should be able to run Guild Wars just fine. If the system is bottlenecking cause all the physical memory is allocated, chances are the system is bogging down from a host of background applications hogging precious resources.
I think it would be in the best interest of the OP or anyone to begin by optimizing Windows itself. It costs nothing and it's a good idea anyway.
Toss out the useless garbage. Stuff like Windows Messenger. It's just clutter. Edit SYSOC.INF file to get it to show up in Add/Remove Programs, then delete that garbage immediately.
Windows Automatic Updates is another well known system choke point, especially at startup. Turn that thing off.
A system with 512 mb RAM should be able to run Guild Wars just fine. If the system is bottlenecking cause all the physical memory is allocated, chances are the system is bogging down from a host of background applications hogging precious resources.
I think it would be in the best interest of the OP or anyone to begin by optimizing Windows itself. It costs nothing and it's a good idea anyway.
Ashleigh McMahon
Hey. A few hours away from getting my pc back. Using an old one atm.
Looking forward.
Need one question answered though:
Will 1gb cure my 'freeze on load' problems + long load times?
Thanks
Ashleigh
Looking forward.
Need one question answered though:
Will 1gb cure my 'freeze on load' problems + long load times?
Thanks
Ashleigh