Crysis + 9 VMs: Core i7 and 24GB RAM

Status
Not open for further replies.

etrnl_frost

Distinguished
Jan 9, 2009
198
0
18,680
0
I have had no problems with Crucial - either their Ballistix line or otherwise. And they're quite a bit less expensive than Kingston.
 

mrubermonkey

Distinguished
Nov 26, 2008
102
0
18,680
0
Would have been impressive eight virtual machines running with eight separate instances of Crysis running on all of the virtual machines and actual simultaneous game play, possible using four GTX 295 (Obviously not in SLI).
 

bone squat

Distinguished
Jan 21, 2009
41
0
18,530
0
I wanted to see some benchies. What a pointless article. I don't care what brand the RAM is so long as it is reliable. I find Kingston to be the most compatible and reliable but Gskill and OCZ have been great so far too.
 
G

Guest

Guest
So a core i7 and 24 gigs of ram just to run 9 copies of vista at idle, doing nothing. And one copy of crysis at the into screen doing nothing.

This is suppose to be impressive how? Ok they found a way to eat 24 gigs of ram....doing nothing.....leet?
 

radnor

Distinguished
Apr 9, 2008
1,021
0
19,290
3
Of course they didn't run the game. It is not "easy" to use powerfull GPUs on VMware, you got to reserve it.

And much less 8 Instances of it running full power. I can't imagine the mess it would be. Not to talk about keyboards,mouse, soundcards, ad nauseam.

Pretty great it "executed" crysis on a "emulated" GPU.
 

A Stoner

Distinguished
Jan 19, 2009
249
4
18,685
0
Don't care. I need large quantities and who ever provides the high qantity and with some descent speed for a price I can afford gets the cash.
 

hellwig

Distinguished
May 29, 2008
1,743
0
19,860
26
I didn't realize VMWare provided direct-access to the graphics card.

Stupid Microsoft VirtualPC provides a fake Intel graphics adapter with no connection to the underlying DirectX hardware. Of course, it doesn't support USB either, which makes it a wholly worthless piece of crap. No wonder its now free.
 

tpi2007

Distinguished
Dec 11, 2006
475
0
18,810
6
I have two kits of Corsair XMS2 DDR2 memory, both running flawlessly.

The first one I bought was 2 x 1 GB, running at 667 Mhz with 4-4-4-12 timings at 1.9, absolutely stable and barely warm (curiously it didn't like running at the stock JEDEC standard of 667 at 5-5-5-15 at 1.8v - it ran flawlessly but it produced a lot more heat than at 1.9v 4-4-412 timings. It's weird, but it's true)

The second is a 2 x 2GB XMS2 DHX running at 800Mhz with stock timings of 5-5-5-18 and stock voltage of 1.8v.

Both of them were being sold for very competitive prices at this quality.
 

jhansonxi

Distinguished
May 11, 2007
1,262
0
19,280
0
I've had several pairs of Crucial Ballistix PC2-8500 2.2V modules fail. I've had a pair of Corsair TwinX DDR 400 fail. Both were replaced under warranty and I don't hold a grudge against either brand. But having experienced data corruption with faulty RAM I went with 8GB of Kingston KVR800D2E5K2/4G ECC memory in my Asus M3A78-EM. With a large amount of memory the chance of a bad or flipped bit is rather high and the performance penalty is minor. Unregistered ECC modules are not much more than non-ECC. The Kingstons were only $45/pair.
 

buzznut

Splendid
I've had failures with all kinds of ram and some good modules too. Right now OCZ gets my money. Quality product!
Gotta love mushkin though, produced in Colorado, USA. I buy enough electronics from China.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY