• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Video RAM vs. System RAM

P

PGHammer

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 8, 2002
Messages
3,315
I have a Celeron DC E1200 overclocked to 2.67 GHz, but have but 1 GB of system RAM (DIMM issues) and an HIS ATI HD3450 PCIe (256 MB of DDR2). I'm looking at doing two upgrades: adding a single 2 GB DIMM (the motherboard holds a max of 4 GB in three slots) and a graphics upgrade (initially to a VisionTek HD4350 (512 MB of DDR2) whch I'm buying locally for specific reasons; for THIS purchase, online is not an option).

The question is, which upgrade (Vista Ultimate x64) should I do *first* to increase gaming performance (primarily in UT3 and Burnout Paradise Ultimate Box)? (I will be doing both upgrades; I'm simply trying to determine upgrade order.)
 
If it were me, I'd do the system ram first. I am thinking you would notice a difference doing both, so it's a toss up for me. Maybe you could test it out and let us know-
 
I think you'd be happiest getting that 2gb stick first. Not only will you see an improvement in games, but overall PC performance should go up dramatically.
 
Do the memory first.

When I switched to my P5Q which allowed XP to see 3gb, instead of 2gb, my performance in COD WaW jumped. The game moved from using 1gb to using almost 2gb. The numbers are even better in Vista x64 and the game uses 2.5gb. I play at 1920x1200 with 8xAA_Perf 16xAF and in XP RivaTuner shows that the game never uses more than ~512mb on either gpu, which I was kind of surprised to see.
 
Will have to say system ram first also...

1Go. is not much these day, the overall gain will be more noticable then the video card
 
1gb of ram with vista 64? i would get the ram first, that will help you with games and over all system performance. you must be running on the page file all the time with 1gb of ram. if you dont get the ram first i would upgrade (downgrade?) to xp32.
 
+1 for getting system RAM first. System RAM is used OVERALL by the entire system; it'd be better if you get it, opposed to a better video card where you'll only see a performance jump marginally in games.
 
tricky0502 said:
1gb of ram with vista 64? i would get the ram first, that will help you with games and over all system performance. you must be running on the page file all the time with 1gb of ram. if you dont get the ram first i would upgrade (downgrade?) to xp32.
Click to expand...

I went with 64-bit entirely for stability reasons, especially while multitasking.

As a home user, speed normally is not a priority; however, as a multitasker, stability very much is a priority. While I would get the VERY occaisional BSOD with Vista32 or XP32, with Vista64 (and now 7 RC 64), I don't even get that.

Also, I did not (and still don't) plan on staying at even 2 GB. I had originally bought a pair of 1 GB Corsair XMS2 DIMMs (both are 5-5-5-18 1.9V and have never been overclocked); however, I can only use one due to a quirk in the P5N-EM's nForce 630i chipset (which is a dynamite chipset otherwise IMHO).

The nature of the quirk: As most folks that have read up on the nForce 6-series chipsets are doubtless aware, it's a single-channel DDR2 chipset in low-end 630i trim, and generally is outfitted with *three* DIMM slots (the leftmost in yellow, and the remaining two usually in black). The quirk is not only do you have to use the yellow slot first, but you must have a larger DIMM in that slot than in the next slot in use (the leftmost black slot) - thus, while 2G + 1G is allowed, 1G + 1G (or 2G +2G) is not. To fill up all the DIMM slots, you'd generally use 2G +1G +1G or 1G +512M +512M. Aside from any performance issues with using DDR2 in single-channel mode, the larger issue is that DDR2 is usually sold in *pairs*; that means either you pay a premium for buying a single DIMM or you wind up using only half of a matched pair.

Why I still like the chipset/motherboard, in spite of the quirk: First off, it can swallow any modern LGA775 CPU Intel makes (from single-core Celeron to even the quad-core C2E Yorkfields, and everything in between), so I have a truckload of CPU upgrade options. Second, it's extremely easy to overclock on air simply using FSB adjustments (I've got my Celeron DC running at 2.67 GHz with a 1333 FSB; not bad for an E1200 that normally runs at 1.6 GHz with an 800 MHz FSB, especially since I'm running with stock voltage and the stock HSF). Third, despite the integrated graphics (GeForce 7100 with VGA/DVI-D and HDMI-out options), it also includes a separate PCIe x16 slot (complete with PCIe 2.0 x16 support), which means I could upgrade to any PCIe graphics solution, despite the mATX form-factor. Lastly, the two PCIe x1 slots are at the *ends* of the expansion row (PCIe x1 therefore won't block PCI/USB).
 
this might be old but ill give my own opinion here.

System ram > video ram untill 2GB then Video ram > system ram untill 512MB for normal gaming and 1GB for hard core gaming. BUT going from 2GB to 4GB system ram will help when your video card is 1GB so we can conclude 4GB system ram == 1GB Vram.

my own experience was with wow, i lent my brother one of my 512 mb ddr sticks (back when 1gb was alot) and while i didnt have a blazing fast pc wow went from constant 60 fps to choking to 20-30 fps and regularly needing to flush data to the hard drive, needless to say when i got my total 1gb back wow went back to being at a steady 60fps.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top