| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Marradron
Netherlands1586 Posts
On March 22 2010 04:50 Chairman Ray wrote: ram won't be a problem for games unless you have like 512mb ram. well the speed might matter ? not sure if it changed much from ddr to ddr3 . but anyways if you have 1 or 2 gig you most likely have next gen ram anyway | ||
|
zealing
Canada806 Posts
| ||
|
member1987
141 Posts
Having additional ram only benefits you when you want to have several programs opened like winamp, fraps, some image viewer, etc... and play sc2 on top of that. Most important thing is your graphic card. 9400GT isn't really good, though its still much better than onboard graphics. | ||
|
lgd-haze
Sweden547 Posts
| ||
|
Southpaw
United States39 Posts
| ||
|
arew
Lithuania1861 Posts
On March 22 2010 04:08 Ideas wrote: i run on 2gb of ram, it's fine. this  | ||
|
Chairman Ray
United States11903 Posts
On March 22 2010 04:53 Marradron wrote: well the speed might matter ? not sure if it changed much from ddr to ddr3 . but anyways if you have 1 or 2 gig you most likely have next gen ram anyway Having extra RAM will not increase your speed. It's your CPU that determines processing speed, and GPU that determines display speed. RAM is for storing temporary data, and as long as your RAM is more than enough, having 8gb instead of 4gb will not make a difference. You only need to worry about RAM if you plan on running a dozen other things at the same time as sc2. | ||
|
FragKrag
United States11552 Posts
get a better graphics card. Your 9400GT has 1GB of VRAM, but the problem is that VRAM doesn't matter if your card can't even saturate it. The 9400GT has a pathetic amount of processors, a low clock speed, and a low shader count. Your GPU was the main issue and it still is. (Unless your CPU is really bad) | ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
| ||
|
IskatuMesk
Canada969 Posts
Also sc2 only uses two cores, and rather ineffectively at that. | ||
|
FragKrag
United States11552 Posts
| ||
|
Tef
Sweden443 Posts
| ||
|
IskatuMesk
Canada969 Posts
On March 22 2010 05:21 FragKrag wrote: I have never heard of a 32bit application that only uses up to 2gb of RAM. It also seems like SC2 scales well with extra cores. 32-bit is limited to using 2 gigs of ram for the most part, then it starts using pagefile I believe. I've never seen sc2 using more than 1.6gig after a day-long gaming session though. Some games, like Sins of a Solar Empire, will just flat out crash when you go over the 2gb limit. That is what programmers are telling me anyways, and the 32-bit limit is a big crutch with SoaSE. I doubt sc2 to run into similar issues but it could become a problem with very large mods that add a lot of custom textures. /e This is my CPU usage with a big FFA replay going on. http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/4382/5454o.jpg It seems sc2 has separated a handful of threads onto some other cores but for the most part the majority of the game is lumped onto the one core. Some cores it doesn't even touch. And this is with all of that shit I have running in the background. 'Course, they may improve it for release, but I kind of doubt it this far along the line. What this means is that if we have server-side physics for maps/mods they could be real performance killers unless they are one of the threads on another core. sc2 is more GPU intensive than anything else right now. | ||
|
JoSo
Sweden47 Posts
Runs smothly until I get like lets say 180+ or smt in supply, then it seems to lag a bit. Dunno if its because of the ram though, I have a laptop with a quite weak processor. | ||
|
FragKrag
United States11552 Posts
Well, all I have are those legionhardware benches, and it seemed like SC2 got a decent FPS boost with extra cores. | ||
|
IskatuMesk
Canada969 Posts
Having 8 cores like that is great for mass multitasking, though. :D | ||
|
EleanorRIgby
Canada3923 Posts
4 gigs on my desktop and same thing | ||
|
MoooN1
Germany128 Posts
when starcraft 2 is fully loaded it uses up to about 1,4 gig of my memory so loading times etc should be quite ok with 2 gig when you have ~ 600 mb free for other stuff | ||
|
OnCoke
Romania49 Posts
Resolution: 1440x900. Recommended settings: Ultra. FPS at the recommended settings: ~22-24 average. Needless to say, i've downgraded those settings to something between medium and high, and now the FPS counter averages 35-37. I don't have many programs running in the background (yahoo messenger, eset smart security, some other really minor stuff), sc2 load times are good, RAM consumption goes up to 1.6-1.7 gigs (this includes the 650-700 megs the windows & those other background programs use). Yes, x32 processes can't address more than 2GB of RAM. In XP, i know i was using a /3GB argument in the boot.ini, because, strangely enough, a program was crashing on me shortly after the task manager was showing that process hitting 1.6 gigs. | ||
|
ShivaN
United States933 Posts
| ||
| ||
HomeStory Cup
XXVII: Day 3
sOs vs uThermalLIVE!
Lambo vs ShoWTimELIVE!
Zoun vs HeRoMaRinE
Ryung vs Babymarine
[ Submit Event ] |
|
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Britney Dota 2  26637Sea  9696Calm  6626Horang2 1582Flash 562EffOrt 478BeSt 468Leta 326Shuttle 294Stork 290[ Show more ] Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
BSL: ProLeague
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
WardiTV European League
The PondCast
RSL Revival
WardiTV European League
RSL Revival
FEL
Korean StarCraft League
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
