2 GB of RAM works!

[Thaurin]

I've plugged in an extra gig of RAM and the difference is astounding! I can actually play without too much of a stutter now, going for minutes at a time before I get a slight hick-up. People were all complaining about how performance still sucks with 2 GB of RAM, so I was a little worried. This is totally better than 1 GB.

[Cormac]

I have 1 Gig only and it's exactly what I'm planning to do, soon I hope. . . or after the next patch.

[Thaurin]

Mind you, it won't eliminate the thing entirely, but I sure as hell could play and have fun for a long time before I got any sort of short pause or stutter. FPS, of course, was exactly the same.

I didn't notice any significant decrease in loading and saving time, but as some of those earlier tests people did shows, it should be faster too.

[Danicek]

Sounds good. Maybe I should consider buying another gig as well.

[bjon045]

I played with 2 gig ram (ddr2) and a reasonably fast HDD (WD 16mb cache) and I got pretty good performance on loading/saving and very little jerkiness (played on the high setting) even though my PC is hardly top of the line anymore - AMD X2-4200.

[Asbjoern]

The reports are the same with Dark Messiah. 2 GB should increase the performance a lot. I just bought another 1 GB yesterday.

Regards Asbjørn

[Danicek]

This is possibly question for a tech forum, but anyway, probably you had to solve this as well somehow - Currently I have 2 x 512 in dualchannel. I have 4 slots, well, did you simply buy another 2 x 512 sticks one upgrading from 1024 to 2048 or did you use a waste bin for your 512 sticks and bought two new 1024?

[Asbjoern]

If you're refering to me, then I bought a stick with 1024 MB. I bought my computer one year ago with 1024 MB in one stick, so I didn't have to throw my ram in the bin, when I would have to upgrade. So now I have 2x1024 MB with room to further upgrades.
But I haven't received my shipment yet.

Regards Asbjørn

[Pladio]

Dani, I think you would be better of on the Tech forum. All the techies are there :)

[bjon045]

It's not really recommended to run all 4 channels in dual channel mode (2 dual channels) from what I have heard. It is possible with certain ram sticks but quite often you have to run it at a very high latency in order to get it to run. I imagine this might not be a problem if you have high grade ram sticks.

[Danicek]

Yes, that is what I've heard and that is why I'm asking.

[Thaurin]

Damn, you could've told me. :P

I had 2x512MB in dual-channel and bought two 512MB sticks more. So now I'm running with the setup bjorn described. I did notice some slow-ups that I could not explain-- some stuff used to not freeze up my computer as badly. Of course, I had a LOT less HD thrashing as my RAM has doubled, but I definitely could see situations where I had to wait (without the HD thrashing).

I used to convert AVI files to DVD format and lower the priority of the process doing the converting. It used to be fine with only a few seconds where it would take over my computer (with no priority lowering, it would be unusable). Now, with the 2GB in dual-channel, I can't use the computer at all even when I lower the process's priority. It just seems to "thrash" the memory and my other windows stop responding.

Might be related to what's described here. But at least I haven't had to throw out my old RAM.

[Gorath]

To summarize the results:
Sell the old RAM, buy 2*1 GB identical modules. ;)

[ToddMcF2002]

Generally, if you are not overclocking 4x512 should be just fine.

[Gorath]

Not "generally". Incompatibilty is a serious possibility because many chipsets do not support 4 modules, only support them as PC 333 instead of PC 400 or require SS modules instead of the usual DS. That´s quite a lot of "ifs". ;)

[Danicek]

Seems like I'll have to buy 2 x 1024. Problem is that it is really problematic to sell used RAM modules.

And - I did some more web research on the topic and it seems that it is really not recommanded to have 4 modules (also seems to be related to dual channel). Some don't have problems at all but generally there is high probability that one will run into problems with it.

[Thaurin]

Well, no problems for me (yet, knock on wood ;)), except some of the minor things I mentioned. I'm not up to speed with the latest hardware issues, so I wouldn't know. Works fine for me, anyway.

[Maylander]

I run 512 * 4 (2048 in total) MB Ram, AMD X2 4600 and GeForce 8800 GTX. I never notice any lag at all.

[ToddMcF2002]

Not "generally". Incompatibilty is a serious possibility because many chipsets do not support 4 modules, only support them as PC 333 instead of PC 400 or require SS modules instead of the usual DS. That´s quite a lot of "ifs". ;)

That's some seriously old hardware if you are running PC 333. I can't imagine running Gothic 3 on anything entertaining PC 333.

Its probably safe to say that any socket 775 board with an Nvidia 650i/680i, Intel 965/975 or Ati RD600 will support 4 matching sticks. If you own a MB with different Northbridge you should probably upgrade. The Intel 965/975 is by far the most stable, specifically the D975XBX2 board (Bad Axe 2). Its the best on the market for stability. For Asus junkies the Asus P5W DH is probably equivalent and also uses the 975 chipset.

[Danicek]

PC333 is not an old hardware. Difference between PC333 and PC400 is not important. There are other far more important things such as memory timings. So in general good low latency PC333 may be faster than stock PC400.

[ToddMcF2002]

Its not a question of which RAM is faster - its that you are on an old socket MB where even 2 GB of RAM was outragious in its day so absolutely 4 slots is a crap shoot.

Since this is a Gothic 3 forum, I was assuming a modern socket (775) and 4 sticks of DDR2 meaning 533/667/800. Of course if you were on that socket you probably wouldnt have a 512 stick in the first place.

[Gorath]

It was more the exception than the rule a year ago in the AMD world if a mainboard supported simply 4 matching 512 MB modules without further requirements like all being double-sided or without penalty like addressing them as PC-333 instead of the PC-400 they really are.

I don´t know the situation regarding Intel parts because for a few years before the C2D was released there simply was no reason to waste money on an Intel system. AMD was less expensive AND faster for a gamer, plus since the A64 you couldn´t even say "Intel is the original, AMD just a clone".


That's some seriously old hardware if you are running PC 333. I can't imagine running Gothic 3 on anything entertaining PC 333.

Its probably safe to say that any socket 775 board with an Nvidia 650i/680i, Intel 965/975 or Ati RD600 will support 4 matching sticks. If you own a MB with different Northbridge you should probably upgrade. The Intel 965/975 is by far the most stable, specifically the D975XBX2 board (Bad Axe 2). Its the best on the market for stability. For Asus junkies the Asus P5W DH is probably equivalent and also uses the 975 chipset.

[Gorath]

Its not a question of which RAM is faster - its that you are on an old socket MB where even 2 GB of RAM was outragious in its day so absolutely 4 slots is a crap shoot.

Since this is a Gothic 3 forum, I was assuming a modern socket (775) and 4 sticks of DDR2 meaning 533/667/800. Of course if you were on that socket you probably wouldnt have a 512 stick in the first place.

Maybe you have unrealistic expectations. An old S754 board + an overclocked Sempron64 is easily fast enough for G3 if the rest of the system is okay.

[ToddMcF2002]

It was more the exception than the rule a year ago in the AMD world if a mainboard supported simply 4 matching 512 MB modules without further requirements like all being double-sided or without penalty like addressing them as PC-333 instead of the PC-400 they really are.

I don´t know the situation regarding Intel parts because for a few years before the C2D was released there simply was no reason to waste money on an Intel system. AMD was less expensive AND faster for a gamer, plus since the A64 you couldn´t even say "Intel is the original, AMD just a clone".
This is a bit offtopic but...

I ended up building Intel 3 years ago because of hardware/bios familiarity. Stupid reason by I'm lazy. Oblivion marked the end of that hardware though. The Gothic 3 demo barely ran with high textures and I wasnt about to compromise the graphical experience by stripping the game down. So instead of upgrading my aging AGP/Socket 478 I'm choosing to wait to play Gothic 3 on new hardware.

I've been waiting for Vista and now I'm waiting for drivers for Vista 64 so I go 4 gig of RAM. But there is lots to wait for frankly:
- non extreme series Intel quad core (~$500 at the end of April)
- ATI R600 and mature vista compliant drivers
- If the R600 rocks, G80 prices drop
- 680i mature drivers if you care about SLI
- vista drivers for pretty much everything!
- game compatibility on Vista 64 (Gothic 3?)
- Crysis to release to see if quad core will crush C2D (there are 20 titles for 2007 that will utilize multicore!)
- Gothic 3 patches and patches on those patches ;)

[Danicek]

@Todd
I would go wait for R600 to see what it does to 8xxx prices and then I would go with either cheaper 8xxx, some cheaper R600 or with top 7xxx series. Simply there's always something you can wait on. But prices of some GPU's are now really great. It's good time to upgrade to not the latest but still very fast for very good money.

I'm planning to switch my 6800GS to either some 1950 or 7900 or something like that in following month(s). The prices are really tempting.

[Thaurin]

It was more the exception than the rule a year ago in the AMD world if a mainboard supported simply 4 matching 512 MB modules without further requirements like all being double-sided or without penalty like addressing them as PC-333 instead of the PC-400 they really are.

That doesn't sound good for me, since it almost exactly describes my situation. I bought this AMD system about two years back and like I said, I now run it with those 4 x 512 MB sticks. Sounds like I may have to experience it with some of those penalties, but I don't think it's all that severe. At least I don't have to continuously wait for my hard disk to finish now. :D

[Prime Junta]

I added a second Raptor 74.5 GB and two more gigs of RAM, and hit it with Vista Ultimate 64-bit edition. I have an A8N SLI Premium board -- and it clocks down to 333 with four sticks of RAM. Thing is, it really doesn't matter.

Note also that DDR runs at tighter timings than DDR2, which means that DDR2 needs a faster clock to match DDR. DDR2 has more potential for improvement, but as things currently stand, it's no faster in practice.

Tom's Hardware did a pretty extensive investigation of RAM speeds a while back, and discovered that RAM clock and timings don't make much of a difference -- we're talking a few per cent here or there, and on most systems that don't run their CPU's at extreme clock speeds, the difference may not even be detectable.

Most games nowadays aren't CPU/RAM bottlenecked anyway; they're disk I/O bottlenecked and GPU bottlenecked. That means that more RAM will make for a nicer gaming experience with less stuttering due to disk I/O, even if you might experience a drop in frame rate on the rare occasions the game is CPU or RAM bottlenecked.

[ http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/03/31/tight_timings_vs_high_clock_frequencies/ ]

Quote from the conclusion:


The bottom line is that as long as you have enough memory - preferably 2 GB - the extra money you pay for more memory speed would be better invested in a faster graphics card. And if you don't play games, then the CPU and hard drive offer more room for improvement than the memory.


I.e., chasing RAM speed numbers makes even less sense than chasing CPU clock speed numbers. If you really want to boost your system, buy a pair of fast disks for your system disk and RAID-0 them -- and then pay yourself silly buying a really good GPU.

[Thaurin]

Thanks for your informative post! Thing is, if you run out of RAM, first thing you should do is get more RAM! Everything else you say makes a lot of sense.

[b3vad]

i play it by 512mb of ram!
use your HDD :D

[Thaurin]

Oh no, it's one of those "won't someone think of the hard disks!" nut. :p

[jmurdock]

Hey, so do I... Had huge performance problems when virtual memory stored in IDE drive, but most disappeared when I moved page file to SATA HD. Still freezes a lot, mostly after teleports and such. Really annoying, but have learned F5 and F9 REALLY well. LOL

[Gorath]

512MB RAM???
Crazy. Maybe you have no idea how much performance, and indirectly fun, you´re wasting. :)

[jmurdock]

Yeah, it's a pain, but can't afford the extra. Boyfriend bought me the new MB and well... beggars can't be choosers lol

[lanux128]

i have 2gb ram and play at 'High' settings but stuttering still occurs for a few seconds after loading a saved game.. after a while, things even out.. btw, this has been a recurring problem since NotR.. then i had 512mb ram and had to upgrade to 1gb :)