2 Gig.
Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known.
- Index »
- Games »
- Battlefield Series »
- Battlefield 2 »
- how much RAM do you have???
2 GB of ram is what I have in my rig
512 , and ati 9250 128 mb Card
Oscar590 wrote:
2 GB of ram is what I have in my rig
2GB ram
nvidea 7900gt
all high, 4 x AA
nvidea 7900gt
all high, 4 x AA
AXP 3000+ oc'd to 2.4 GHZ (have got it to 2.5 but not stable with crap ram)
1GB DDR333 Samsung chips @182mhz from 166
Epox 8RDA+3 PRO+
ATi Sapphire Radeon X800GTO OC'd like a beast!
TT soprano case
Foxconn HeatGuzzler Heatpipe CPU cooler (stays around 55C high load)
I run 1280X1024 6X AA high everything except lighting and shadows (personal preference can do higher)
1GB DDR333 Samsung chips @182mhz from 166
Epox 8RDA+3 PRO+
ATi Sapphire Radeon X800GTO OC'd like a beast!
TT soprano case
Foxconn HeatGuzzler Heatpipe CPU cooler (stays around 55C high load)
I run 1280X1024 6X AA high everything except lighting and shadows (personal preference can do higher)
Last edited by montypythizzle (2007-04-17 08:02:53)
945D @ 4.06Ghz
2GB DDR2 6400
X1900XT 512MB
Runs as smooth as a baby's bum @ 1680 x 1050 6xAA 16xAF (100fps)
2GB DDR2 6400
X1900XT 512MB
Runs as smooth as a baby's bum @ 1680 x 1050 6xAA 16xAF (100fps)
XP 64-bit and Windows Vista will utilize more than 2GB RAMJemme101 wrote:
What OS do the 4GB people use? Because regular XP doesnt support it.
2GB in two-three months, but BF2 actually runs fine with everything on high with 1. However, I have had to stop almost all services/stop background programs/defragment/and optimise to make it run smoothly. also, 512 mb video ram on my x1950pro.
Last edited by SargeV1.4 (2007-04-17 10:35:04)
I'm not sure i took the sticker off a while back but i think it's 512MB.
2GB thats fast enough for me
Well your not entirely correct..since I COULDN'T play maxed out with my 7600 GT with 1 gig. Because I simply didn't have enough, so it started to use virtual memory, which is bad. Then I got 2 gig's and the problem was solved, and so I could play maxed outchuyskywalker wrote:
No. Your graphics card is more important for high quality settings. Ram is important (along with HD speed) for load times. 1gb should be fine, but more is always better (as is faster). I have no idea what the specs/capabilites on the x800 are, so someone else can fill that gap in.
Personally, I have a 6600gt, but between my raid 1 raptors and 1.5GB of ultra low latency ram, I load the game extremely fast and play it very smooth. I'm happy.
C2D E6600
Gskill 2GB 6400 ram
Evga 680i mobo
4 x 36GB raptors in Raid 0
Evga 8800 GTS 640
Creative X fi sound card
Water cooling
Gskill 2GB 6400 ram
Evga 680i mobo
4 x 36GB raptors in Raid 0
Evga 8800 GTS 640
Creative X fi sound card
Water cooling
Regular XP sees about 3,5 GB if I remember correctly, but shows only 3 GB.RealBomber wrote:
XP 64-bit and Windows Vista will utilize more than 2GB RAMJemme101 wrote:
What OS do the 4GB people use? Because regular XP doesnt support it.
I know Vista & 64 use the full 4Gb in said situation, but txs for posting it
Played for ages with 1GB and recently upgraded that to 2.5GB. Playing difference is only marginally better. Loading is a bit nippier and the game will stay smoother for longer. It would degrade into choppiness after an hour or so or loads of map changes with just 1GB. The biggest happy difference though is closing the game down - now control of my computer is released instantly to me upon quitting BF2 whereas before I would have to wait a good few minutes before the game fully removed itself from the memory which it had soaked up and thus freezing the desktop to a sluggish crawl.
The increased RAM doesnt help me turn up the settings though, that is down to the rest of my now aging system. The graphics Card (ATI X850 XT PE) will give an average of 50-60 fps usually with moderate settings, but I think it is bottlenecked a bit by the processor which is a socket 478 based Pentium 4 (Northwood core mmm, toastey) 2.6 GHz. If I had more CPU grunt am sure my GFX card could spit out a bit more juice even if it is a bit on the crappy side.
Can see a complete rebuild from cratch on the horizon I think, the upgrade path for this AGP DDR based Motherboard has more or less reached the end.
The increased RAM doesnt help me turn up the settings though, that is down to the rest of my now aging system. The graphics Card (ATI X850 XT PE) will give an average of 50-60 fps usually with moderate settings, but I think it is bottlenecked a bit by the processor which is a socket 478 based Pentium 4 (Northwood core mmm, toastey) 2.6 GHz. If I had more CPU grunt am sure my GFX card could spit out a bit more juice even if it is a bit on the crappy side.
Can see a complete rebuild from cratch on the horizon I think, the upgrade path for this AGP DDR based Motherboard has more or less reached the end.
Actually isnt that slower than having the same sticks but 2 gbs? Since you have to use t2 instead of t1 settings.PenGuinER wrote:
3 gb... (3x - 1gb) 800 mhz OCZ ram.
1GB RAm.
Ati Radeon 9600XT
Choppy like hell.
Ati Radeon 9600XT
Choppy like hell.
Nothing wrong with that ATi card. I still use the ATi X800XL at 70-80 fps. What did help out in terms of choppiness was getting more RAM's. I would keep that GFX card and get a new mobo/proc/ram setup.Ur-Jack wrote:
The increased RAM doesnt help me turn up the settings though, that is down to the rest of my now aging system. The graphics Card (ATI X850 XT PE) will give an average of 50-60 fps usually with moderate settings, but I think it is bottlenecked a bit by the processor which is a socket 478 based Pentium 4 (Northwood core mmm, toastey) 2.6 GHz. If I had more CPU grunt am sure my GFX card could spit out a bit more juice even if it is a bit on the crappy side.
You are right. 3x - 1Gb cannot be used in a DUAL config so its pretty much worthless imo. Thats why I did 2x 1GB & 2x 512MB.im_in_heaven wrote:
Actually isnt that slower than having the same sticks but 2 gbs? Since you have to use t2 instead of t1 settings.PenGuinER wrote:
3 gb... (3x - 1gb) 800 mhz OCZ ram.
I have 512 MB.
And guess what?
I can play mostly High settings.
Although map load times are a nuisance. That's why I play 24/7 'whatever'.
And guess what?
I can play mostly High settings.
Although map load times are a nuisance. That's why I play 24/7 'whatever'.
2gb
2 x 512 stick and a 256 stick All are DDR Pc3200 (200 mhz)...well this is what Cpu-z tell me...
The things who suck the most is kinda my video card (Ati Radeon 9600 pro)
And the fact that both my HD (one is 200go and the other 40) Also got a 80 who is not yet plugged in.
Well those 2 HD are not Sata...im still on the old 2 inch wide thingies
But at least i can play most of the game with decent graphiq!
The things who suck the most is kinda my video card (Ati Radeon 9600 pro)
And the fact that both my HD (one is 200go and the other 40) Also got a 80 who is not yet plugged in.
Well those 2 HD are not Sata...im still on the old 2 inch wide thingies
But at least i can play most of the game with decent graphiq!
2GB. Essentially kills lag and loading times are 1 minute.
a certain amount...
GeForce 5200 FX
256 MB RAM
Intel Pentium 4 HT 2.7 Ghz
rofl, pitiful. I would own so much more if I didn't have this shit. In a month or two I'll have:
1.25/2 GB Kingston/Corsair RAM
GeForce 6600 OC
same processor, it's pretty good for this shit computer, even though I only have a fuckin AGP slot on my mobo.
256 MB RAM
Intel Pentium 4 HT 2.7 Ghz
rofl, pitiful. I would own so much more if I didn't have this shit. In a month or two I'll have:
1.25/2 GB Kingston/Corsair RAM
GeForce 6600 OC
same processor, it's pretty good for this shit computer, even though I only have a fuckin AGP slot on my mobo.
- Index »
- Games »
- Battlefield Series »
- Battlefield 2 »
- how much RAM do you have???