What will give me better performance?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.battlefield1942 (More info?)

I have a:

P4 2.66
only 512 Meg ram PC 3200 400.
NVIDIA Ti-4600 AGP video card ( I know its old )
Win XP home
Audigy2 sound.

the question is I can play pretty good, but will I get better performance
from more memory? or a new video card. I simply can't afford the 4600 right
now 🙁 but could put another 512 Meg in OR a G-Force FX 5900 card. (although
I want a 5950 I cant really afford that either ) My immediate feelings are
its about a 50 / 50 call. I would like to see though what you guys think..
It's my understanding that BF is a memory hog.

My plan is to get one or the other, can't afford both atm..
 
Archived from groups: alt.games.battlefield1942 (More info?)

On Mon, 07 Feb 2005 04:11:43 GMT, "Kedrid" <KedridNOSPAM@kedrid.com>
wrote:

>
>I have a:
>
>P4 2.66
>only 512 Meg ram PC 3200 400.
>NVIDIA Ti-4600 AGP video card ( I know its old )
>Win XP home
>Audigy2 sound.
>
>the question is I can play pretty good, but will I get better performance
>from more memory? or a new video card. I simply can't afford the 4600 right
>now 🙁 but could put another 512 Meg in OR a G-Force FX 5900 card. (although
>I want a 5950 I cant really afford that either ) My immediate feelings are
>its about a 50 / 50 call. I would like to see though what you guys think..
>It's my understanding that BF is a memory hog.
>
>My plan is to get one or the other, can't afford both atm..
>

I would definitely add more RAM first (go up to at least 1GB) then the
video card. XP *is* a major memory hog in its own right. You won't
regret adding RAM! My system is similar to yours. I replaced both
over time, RAM first then upgrade to ATI 9800 Pro video card. Much
better gaming now! 🙂

Best,

Rick
[AGB] Duckhunter
 
Archived from groups: alt.games.battlefield1942 (More info?)

"Kedrid" <KedridNOSPAM@kedrid.com> wrote in message
news:3UBNd.2275$mG6.1301@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> I have a:
>
> P4 2.66
> only 512 Meg ram PC 3200 400.
> NVIDIA Ti-4600 AGP video card ( I know its old )
> Win XP home
> Audigy2 sound.
>
> the question is I can play pretty good, but will I get better performance
> from more memory? or a new video card. I simply can't afford the 4600
> right now 🙁 but could put another 512 Meg in OR a G-Force FX 5900 card.
> (although I want a 5950 I cant really afford that either ) My immediate
> feelings are its about a 50 / 50 call. I would like to see though what you
> guys think.. It's my understanding that BF is a memory hog.
>
> My plan is to get one or the other, can't afford both atm..

With your setup, I'd say increase the memory to 1 gig. If you end up being
able to afford a new video card, that wouldn't hurt. Decent video cards run
less than $100, unless you're looking for the latest. A video card with 256
meg on board RAM is best.

--
Visit the [FLOT] MOHAA: Spearhead servers: 14 Player TDM/Moded:
66.55.134.103!
Single Player maps converted to Multiplayer: 14 Player: 64.237.43.196
http://www.flotserver.net
 
Archived from groups: alt.games.battlefield1942 (More info?)

On Mon, 07 Feb 2005 04:11:43 GMT, "Kedrid" <KedridNOSPAM@kedrid.com>
wrote:

>only 512 Meg ram PC 3200 400.

I think this is the current bottleneck. BF loves memory and moving up
to 1 gig should make a big difference. When I went from 512 meg to 1
gig my map load times went from minutes to seconds.

>NVIDIA Ti-4600 AGP video card ( I know its old )

Old but still capable and certainly good enough for BF at normal
resolutions.

HTH.
--
[AGB]Captain Scarlet
Stockholm, Sweden
 
Archived from groups: alt.games.battlefield1942 (More info?)

"Captain Scarlet" wrote in message

> Old but still capable and certainly good enough for BF at normal
> resolutions.

True even my old 4200 used to do OK at 1024x768.

L.
 
Archived from groups: alt.games.battlefield1942 (More info?)

"Captain Scarlet" <andy.nocrap.cunningham@home.se> wrote in message
news:0v8e01ljqfskgv51vk5thugum6nela9tto@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 07 Feb 2005 04:11:43 GMT, "Kedrid" <KedridNOSPAM@kedrid.com>
> wrote:
>
> >only 512 Meg ram PC 3200 400.
>
> I think this is the current bottleneck. BF loves memory and moving up
> to 1 gig should make a big difference. When I went from 512 meg to 1
> gig my map load times went from minutes to seconds.
>
> >NVIDIA Ti-4600 AGP video card ( I know its old )
>
> Old but still capable and certainly good enough for BF at normal
> resolutions.
>

Question. I have updated my chip to an AMD 2700 and have 512 meg of RAM.
But it's only 2100 speed.

I am stuck between just getting another stick of 512 meg 2100 ram or throw
it out and get 512 meg of 3200 and go with that for now. I can't swing the 1
gig of 3200 right now.

Thoughts?
 
Archived from groups: alt.games.battlefield1942 (More info?)

"Kedrid" <KedridNOSPAM@kedrid.com> wrote in message news:3UBNd.2275$mG6.1301@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> I have a:
>
> P4 2.66
> only 512 Meg ram PC 3200 400.
> NVIDIA Ti-4600 AGP video card ( I know its old )
> Win XP home
> Audigy2 sound.
>
> the question is I can play pretty good, but will I get better performance from more memory? or a new video card. I simply can't
> afford the 4600 right now 🙁 but could put another 512 Meg in OR a G-Force FX 5900 card. (although I want a 5950 I cant really
> afford that either ) My immediate feelings are its about a 50 / 50 call. I would like to see though what you guys think.. It's my
> understanding that BF is a memory hog.
>
> My plan is to get one or the other, can't afford both atm..

Video card. More RAM will just make maps load faster.
9800 Pro
$224
http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=14-102-286&depa=0
 
Archived from groups: alt.games.battlefield1942 (More info?)

"Lorian" <nospam@lorian.nod> wrote:

>True even my old 4200 used to do OK at 1024x768.

Ha, my old GF3 (bought in summer of 2001) could do this.




JK'05 aka Elkrider
 
Archived from groups: alt.games.battlefield1942 (More info?)

On Mon, 7 Feb 2005 09:26:38 -0500, "John Poutre"
<mehatespam@gmail.com> wrote:

>I am stuck between just getting another stick of 512 meg 2100 ram or throw
>it out and get 512 meg of 3200 and go with that for now. I can't swing the 1
>gig of 3200 right now.

Well in that case I'd go for another stick of 512 at 2100. Better to
have a gig of slightly slower ram than only half a gig of the faster
stuff.

In this case I believe its quantity and not quality that counts ;-)

HTH.
--
[AGB]Captain Scarlet
Stockholm, Sweden
 
Archived from groups: alt.games.battlefield1942 (More info?)

"Captain Scarlet" <andy.nocrap.cunningham@home.se> wrote in message
news:rg0f011lkbg7g09n2rm9ivk6c8ngh5b946@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 7 Feb 2005 09:26:38 -0500, "John Poutre"
> <mehatespam@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >I am stuck between just getting another stick of 512 meg 2100 ram or
throw
> >it out and get 512 meg of 3200 and go with that for now. I can't swing
the 1
> >gig of 3200 right now.
>
> Well in that case I'd go for another stick of 512 at 2100. Better to
> have a gig of slightly slower ram than only half a gig of the faster
> stuff.
>
> In this case I believe its quantity and not quality that counts ;-)
>

Great, thanks. I was thinking of getting a stick of 3200 anyways and I
figured when they are mixed they will go at the slower speed but I will be
half way there for the future. Will have to research that.

John
 
Archived from groups: alt.games.battlefield1942 (More info?)

Einstine wrote:
> "Kedrid" <KedridNOSPAM@kedrid.com> wrote in message news:3UBNd.2275$mG6.1301@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...

> Video card. More RAM will just make maps load faster.

Disagree - with 512 Mb, the game will stutter and lag. However, the maps
certainly load faster too (less swap-out)

> 9800 Pro
> $224
> http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=14-102-286&depa=0

The NVidia 6600GT is a tad cheaper, and has gotten really good reviews.
And it outperforms the 9800. However the 9800 is an excellent card too.

regards,

Achtung Ecco
 
Archived from groups: alt.games.battlefield1942 (More info?)

> Disagree - with 512 Mb, the game will stutter and lag. However, the maps
> certainly load faster too (less swap-out)


Interesting, thats why I thought it was 50 / 50 chance either way as
being a performance increase. I do shutter and lag a little, even with a
great ping. like 16 - 30 pings. I will get screen freeze for a second or
two, this really throws me especialy when flyin' a chopper. I can be crusing
alone just fine, then freeze a few seconds, then oppps crash flames, and
death. I am on occation then laughed at for being a poor poilot ( fair
enough, but I am a ok pilot, not a bad one I pull off monuvers regularly
with no lag I never crash) but then when I do play most of the time its
fine. I thought it was poor frame rate and video card catching up? it felt
like video card studder anyway. However when everyone said how much faster
maps load I thought might be memory too ( or both )..



"Achtung Ecco" <nospam@nospam.no> wrote in message
news:420874d6$0$48703$edfadb0f@dread15.news.tele.dk...
> Einstine wrote:
>> "Kedrid" <KedridNOSPAM@kedrid.com> wrote in message
>> news:3UBNd.2275$mG6.1301@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
>> Video card. More RAM will just make maps load faster.
>
> Disagree - with 512 Mb, the game will stutter and lag. However, the maps
> certainly load faster too (less swap-out)
>
>> 9800 Pro
>> $224
>> http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=14-102-286&depa=0
>
> The NVidia 6600GT is a tad cheaper, and has gotten really good reviews.
> And it outperforms the 9800. However the 9800 is an excellent card too.
>
> regards,
>
> Achtung Ecco
>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom