My New Rig

Message

2005 · #31 Post by **2005** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 10:16 am

Why do you have to load up 8 of your 5000x4000 res pictures at the SAME TIME???? Do one and then move to the next one, if you have to use something like Freeram XP Pro to free up the memory if photoshop isnt smart enough to.

This is going to be a gaming computer, in all but 2 of the modern games 2GB of ram can acutally SLOW things down not help. I have 512mb ram in this machine and hardly ever go over 256mb worth of it.

#32 Post by **palmboy5** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 5:49 pm

because i take multi of same thing, later choosing the best one from the folder, meaning i hold down Ctrl and click on the ones i like, then right click and Edit in Photoshop. opening only a few at a time would mean i have to MEMORIZE my choices..

how much does 2GB slow things down? is it as much as 1GB for 2GB apps?

2005 · #33 Post by **2005** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 7:18 pm

I have no exact details but it should be atleast as much. 2GB is just not practical right now, if there were some decent latency 2x1GB sticks I would get them. I plan on building this rig in 2-3 months and then upgradeing it in around 12-14 months. So in another year would seem like a good time to go to 2x1GB.

I7Iz490N · #34 Post by **I7Iz490N** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 7:21 pm

2005 · #35 Post by **2005** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 9:33 pm

But why go with 2x1GB 3-3-3-8 (or higher) when I dont NEED 2GB and can get 1GB at 2-2-2-5 WITH copper heat spreader

#36 Post by **palmboy5** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 10:07 pm

ur mentioning of a copper heat spreader is hilarious

it doesnt matter.

if RAM already clocked higher dont even use it, why would some PC3200 sticks need it?

I7Iz490N · #37 Post by **I7Iz490N** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 11:02 pm

2005 · #38 Post by **2005** » Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

palmboy5 wrote:ur mentioning of a copper heat spreader is hilarious it doesnt matter.

if RAM already clocked higher dont even use it, why would some PC3200 sticks need it?

Either way, its something the other sticks didnt have.

If I can find proof too much ram isnt bad, ill get 2x1 GB

#39 Post by **palmboy5** » Wed Nov 16, 2005 9:32 am

since i cant find anything on google to support either, u find proof that too much ram is bad and ill .. go from there

bah this is annoying, all i find is some stories of shitty brands going bad.

2005 · #40 Post by **2005** » Wed Nov 16, 2005 11:24 am

http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardware ... 68101.html

#41 Post by **palmboy5** » Wed Nov 16, 2005 3:50 pm

i dont see any mention of anything being bad other than the GeForce 5 series.. just the... i guess "lack of need" for it, the thing about not being able to clock the CPU as high cuz of RAM means GET HIGHER CLOCKED STICKS.

2005 · #42 Post by **2005** » Thu Nov 17, 2005 6:16 pm

http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardware ... 68127.html

#43 Post by **palmboy5** » Thu Nov 17, 2005 7:58 pm

im guessing ur WoWchamp.. XD

ill start off with.. that fucking Tech Report site crashed firefox every time i tried. it can go rape itself. its about timing anyway, and well..

"1) Part of the reason 1GB ram is better is because 2GB kits can't have 2-2-2-5 timings. They just can't....they have inflated timings. And timings matter....not a bunch but 2-2-2-5 system should be about 5-10% faster then the same exact ram setup with 3-4-3-8."

here is a 1GB stick with 2-3-2-5 (the one dragon mentioned earlier and $2 more than your 2x 512 choice)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6820227054
for its price getting two would be a worse deal than getting the mushkin i want or you want so.. just to show a possible CAS2 2x 1GB setup.

also they're ignoring the whole 4x 512MB option, its still 2GB isnt it? that way u can have ur 260MHz FSB at 2-2-2-5 RAM and still be 2GB. this is probably your plan but i dont like the "upgrade" concept, buy all at once! what if your model disappears? want to run into possible incompatibilities?

since that nullifies the timings issues, on to the "CPU's internal memory tables are bigger with 2GB and it takes the cpu longer to mange it . . . The performance loss is probably not significant but its there." yes... not significant... lets all go in HL2, watch the jumping fps numbers and swear its lower! and ignore how it would be easier to fit each map all within the RAM, as ive noticed many times when opening a door or going around a corner theres that split second annoying little pause.. im not even talking about BF2 or HL2's actual "Loading" times. it just happens, somethings not loaded... it may be that it was programmed to not bother loading until then but if u look at the January 10th update news for HL2, those should not be the case. BF2 is only a common reference for 2GB glory because it actually does help FPS for that game (which you dont really even NEED it, lower the settings), other games still benefit though.. in other areas of performance, areas typically ignored. again, not significant.

if you really must save money and upgrade later, consider the benefits of newegg's BillMeLater

2005 · #44 Post by **2005** » Thu Nov 17, 2005 8:33 pm

For one Im not buying 300$ worth of ram, thats retarded.

Now onto your whole load maps in memory deal, Im guessing every single map in the entire game is uner 500mb in size. If it took the extra GB of RAM to hold it then the install size must be like 15-20GB.

YUCKY who wants 4 sticks, and again im not spend 300$ on ram. I'll eat the supposed performance loss, like I give a shit... im gaming right now on a fucken radeon 9200 and a celeron for christ sake.

Its not the whole point that I couldnt afford the extra ram, I just see no point in it. I dont photoshop, I dont video edit and I dont play my games at 100000x100000. This computer is easily 10x better then the shit im posting on. And I wont spend more then 1500$ ( including a montior, taxes and shipping).

#45 Post by **palmboy5** » Thu Nov 17, 2005 10:00 pm

your getting an A64 3700+ San Diego to OC it, a 7800GT, and you're not going to play at "100000x100000"??

things like sound and textures arent single-map only