BF2S Forums Dual CPU

windows has problems using more than 3gb of ram

BlackLegion42 wrote:

At the same time, 4 GB is like only used for extreme corporate applications in the workfield. BF2 doesn't need more than 2 GB of RAM to run smoothly and most dual-cores are sufficient with 2 GB of RAM, for now...

I doubt 4GB is used in any corporate office in the world... because a server with that amount of memory is just asking to be completely overloaded.  For most desktop systems, 2-4GB is considered the top end spectrum.  However, there are those who need more, and that's where the 64bit part comes into play.  Windows will still run up to 4GB... whether or not this'll be an issue is yet to be known.  It'll hit the wall there.  But I haven't seen any documentation that dictates that there are performance issues regarding total memory of that size.

Usually the more memory a system have, the better it'll be.  However, the benefits to having such large memory directly reflects what the user does with the computer.  For people who do media editing, more memory means being able to apply various effects and work on large documents.  For 3D modeling, it means being able to work on complex multiple models and large 3D workspaces.  Depending on what the user demands from the system, having 4GB of memory can make or break the user's ability to expand and use the system to the fullest.

blackvenges wrote:

windows has problems using more than 3gb of ram

oh rly? then why is my 3gb ram setup running a-ok

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:
blackvenges wrote:
windows has problems using more than 3gb of ram

oh rly? then why is my 3gb ram setup running a-ok

stick another gig in and you'll find out

LOL, can't even read, he said MORE than, omg u noob

woops my bad but im running 3gb of ram and 1gb of cache... so its 4 gb?

Just a note, XP Home will only use a single cpu. For example, with XP Home if you have a dual core processor it will only use one of the two cores.

XP Professional can use two processors (or two cores, since they act as two processors to the OS).

If you have say two dual core processors then XP Pro will not use the last two cores.

The more advanced editions of Windows server can use more than 4GB of memory, this also includes the 64bit versions of XP Pro etc.

i have a x2 4800 its swett i have no problems et all.

EvilMonkeySlayer wrote:

Just a note, XP Home will only use a single cpu. For example, with XP Home if you have a dual core processor it will only use one of the two cores.

XP Professional can use two processors (or two cores, since they act as two processors to the OS).

If you have say two dual core processors then XP Pro will not use the last two cores.

The more advanced editions of Windows server can use more than 4GB of memory, this also includes the 64bit versions of XP Pro etc.

Wow, that is how bad XP Home is lol. I think people using Home w/Dual-Core right must be pissed to hear that. I think still 4 GB is overkill for most mainstream apps. You only need 4 GB if you want your server to perform the next digit for pi or something (Think Big Blue!).

sixshot wrote:

EvilMonkeySlayer wrote:

Just a note, XP Home will only use a single cpu. For example, with XP Home if you have a dual core processor it will only use one of the two cores.

XP Professional can use two processors (or two cores, since they act as two processors to the OS).

If you have say two dual core processors then XP Pro will not use the last two cores.

The more advanced editions of Windows server can use more than 4GB of memory, this also includes the 64bit versions of XP Pro etc.

I don't think that is correct.  Multi-core processors, as I have mentioned, is intended to act as what HyperThreading should have been, a method by which a single processor, as a whole, to process, handle, and execute multiple threads concurrently.  Having a dual-core processor would mean those with XP Home Editions would be screwed over in the first place.  There are numerous systems, which I have just done a quick look-up, that are dual-core and has XP Home Edition pre-installed in the specs.  Plus, I could have sworn that Microsoft's stand on multi-core vs multi-socket in that they will license based on socket rather than core.  In this case, XP Professional would then be able to handle two dual-core Opterons.

Dual-core processors is, by no means, another way of saying dual-processors.  The methodology surrounding this is blurry but the technical line between the two is not.

Yes, Microsoft have changed their licensing to correct for multi-core processors for their server editions.

On XP Home, the kernel itself is the uniprocessor one, it does NOT include the multiprocessor kernel. Unlike XP Pro which includes both the uni and multi processors kernels.

The operating system itself of XP Home will not use more than 1 core/1 processor, it's a kernel limitation.
The same is true of XP Pro, the kernel limitation is 2 processors/2 cores. If you use Windows Server 2000/2003 then you can use more than 2. It's an artificial limitation MS put into their consumer/workstation versions of Windows.



See here for some useful information.

Last edited by EvilMonkeySlayer (2006-04-24 00:12:39)

xp home WILL use both cores on a dual core processor. i know cause i have xp home and also a dual core cpu (opteron 170) it may be true u can't use a dual cpu but you can use dual cores on home

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

woops my bad but im running 3gb of ram and 1gb of cache... so its 4 gb?

1gb of cache?  you mean page file?


as to answer the original question.  BF2 wouldn't really see any direct performance.  It would likely only make a difference so that the other core can handle background processes while a single core can handle the game.  AFAIK BF2 isn't a multithreaded application so it won't show any improvements.  Also, I doubt there is a significant difference between 2 and 3 gb of ram.