Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

When would you realy need 2 to 4ghz of memory

Tags:
Last response: in Memory
Share
January 19, 2006 11:18:06 PM

Hi have a question about ram and the quotaty of it for your computer
after doing some research for my big boy to oc I found out that
OCZ DDR 2x 512 kit EL gold VX or any other fast rating 1 GHz kit
would run faster and better then a 2 GHz kit or even 4 GHz
So my question is if you are going to over clock your computer for gaming or general purposes then when would the 2 GHz and 4 GHz really come out on top and be the correct choice to buy
Would future gaming with HD graphic cards and super fast chips really require the 2 to 4 slots of 1 GHz Chips?

http://www.anandtech.com/memory/showdoc.aspx?i=2560&p=1...

I will be oc my comp
OCZ EB DDR PC-4000 2 x 1024 GB or OCZ 3200 Platinum R2 2 x 512GB
AMD Opteron 180
Asus ATI A8R-MVP
x1800xt x 2
Just quious which would be better
Cheers gazza :D 

More about : realy 4ghz memory

January 21, 2006 9:53:49 PM

Some people use PC as workstation and run various RAM-hungry apps.
I've got 2GB. Thinking of going for 2 more.
January 22, 2006 12:05:14 AM

Just to let you know, Memory/RAM sizes isn't measured in Ghz, it's measuer in Gigabytes or GBs.

Ram speed however is measured is timings and Mhz.
Related resources
January 22, 2006 1:44:34 AM

Get 2GB of RAM, have them for at least a couple of weeks and see if you REALLY need 2GB more or not.
January 22, 2006 2:26:42 AM

If want you to build ur PC as Server go ahead for 4GB. Applications run smoother at 4GB and will improve multi tasking. but 2GB is a great deal for now. Go for 2GB if ur not planning to run heavy applications at the same time. then upgrade later...


:)  are you goin to play heavy games at the same time? :) 
:wink:
January 22, 2006 4:16:29 AM

oops gpt a little punch drunk with all my reading and playing
thanks
January 22, 2006 4:39:45 AM

well im curently running 1.3 thunderbird and i wanted to upgrade but this time to bild a big boy and fiddle with some oc my first time
this is a home computer conected to a 3 computer network on cable I am hevely into HL2 DoD Fear Quake Unreal Tourney all gameing on and off the net with a side hobby of movie making :oops:  big ham
the main reason I picked the opteron 180 was i read that they are a much superior chip then the x2 and fx and that it was better for over clocking becouse it ran cooler I then thought that in a coupple of years i would then underclock it back to 2.4gz and let it do its retirement easy
but i was uncertain about the ram i will only be ocing on air I have a Lian Li 1200 + and i have ordered my opteron 1800 and antec 550 pc and SI-120 cpu cooler my next purchace wa going to be by ram mobo and graphics card wich are Asur A8R-MVP to run the crossfire system but now i will have to get the X1900xtx
so you think the 2gb :roll: would do me
January 22, 2006 5:22:23 AM

Maybe try 2GB first, but if you think your PC need more memory, upgrade it 4GB. Games Like BF2, Doom3, Half-Life, Far Cry will run smooth with 2GB ( but it still depends on your Video Card) in other applications 2GB memory will be enough. But as I said go with 2GB first. Then upgrade it to 4GB If you need more ram.. 8)
January 22, 2006 6:54:44 AM

:D  Thanks heeps I will get the 2 gb of ram
January 22, 2006 7:14:04 AM

i kinda disagree with the others. unless you are runnin a server or work station, i say 1 GB ram is enough.
i once experimented with BF2 with different ram amount. the only difference i found between 1gb and 2gb ram was that 2gb reduces the loadin time by hardly 8 sec. and during gameplay there were only a few frames more.
if dont wanna lose those 'precious' 8 sec and 4-5 fps or ur into professional work, only then get 2gb. other wise 1 gb is enough.

i personally am a semi pro video editor and have no problem with my 1 gb ram. just make sure ur arn't bottle-necked by other components.
January 22, 2006 7:40:19 AM

Quote:
i kinda disagree with the others. unless you are runnin a server or work station, i say 1 GB ram is enough.
i once experimented with BF2 with different ram amount. the only difference i found between 1gb and 2gb ram was that 2gb reduces the loadin time by hardly 8 sec. and during gameplay there were only a few frames more.
if dont wanna lose those 'precious' 8 sec and 4-5 fps or ur into professional work, only then get 2gb. other wise 1 gb is enough.

i personally am a semi pro video editor and have no problem with my 1 gb ram. just make sure ur arn't bottle-necked by other components.


I would have to agree, 1 gig is more then enough for now.
January 22, 2006 10:19:04 AM

Thanks heeps fellas
Gazza :D 
January 23, 2006 9:05:13 AM

If you give me some of that 4ghz memory, you can shave my head, wax my legs, and use me for a surfboard.
January 23, 2006 10:20:49 AM

Quote:
I would have to agree, 1 gig is more then enough for now.

I wish everyone can say that. I've seen Quake 4 take up 900MB on my system thank god I have 2.5GB. Since I do a lot in the background if I only had 1GB I would get killed. Otherwise yeah, 1GB is more than enough for the average user.
January 23, 2006 4:52:22 PM

In my experiences using CAD gaming and video editing, 2gig DDR is just about right.
January 23, 2006 6:16:01 PM

WinXP is swapping even if there is an available RAM.

Well, if you run 2GB in WinXPSP2 then you can simply turn off disk swapping altogether.

Generally, if you use WinXPSP2, then it is better to get 2GB and switch off swapping.

If you plan to use WinXP x86-64 edition, then get 4GB and switch off swapping.
January 23, 2006 7:06:10 PM

Ever tried to run HL2, BF2 or FEAR with task manager opened on your second screen?
You'd be surprised how much memory these games use up once you start "experimenting" with the game options.

I run HL2 with ALL details maxed out + 4xAA + 16xAF at 1280x1024
Ontop of that I have a 460MB hi-res texture pack added to HL2.
On some big levels (Like Ravenholm) I have seen the game go over 1.3GB memory usage.

BF2 and FEAR are in thesame range when you turn on every option there is available.
I've seen FEAR go up to 1.5GB once.
Add your OS and background apps to that and even 2GB is starting to look cramped.

(I do admit I was down to 15FPS in some FEAR levels.)

BTW: I'm also running the OCZ EB DDR PC-4000 2 x 1024 GB kit
Insane memory for an insane price... :p 

[EDIT]And I registered at this forum just to come tell you guys this.
Quake 4 - 900MB? In default settings maybe, try turning it up.
January 25, 2006 9:39:56 PM

:D  Once again thanks fellas for your imput I do have another computer to upgrade but it wont be until the end of the year and its just for gameing for the family so it wount be as expensive and isnt a pet project
So haveing said that i was thinking of takeing the advice and getting the
( 2 x 512mb ) ocz el ddr pc-3200 platinum r2
based on the oc article on ram so that i can get the fastest oc with my cross fire system for gameing then try the
( 2 x 1gb ) 0cz eb ddr pc-4000 platinum ed
when I do the second upgrade at the end of the year and swop ram
This is hitting my hip pocet in a major way this year I guess I wont be visitting friends In Ohio this year :( 
but hey im pleasing the one and not the masses :D 
Cheers
Gazza ( I come from the land down under ) oi oi oi :lol: 
January 26, 2006 2:08:24 AM

Good point
January 26, 2006 2:25:01 AM

how do you disable excutive paging? :?
January 27, 2006 10:46:33 PM

windows vista will require 2gb of ram (minimum recommended requirement)
January 28, 2006 5:42:03 AM

Min hardware as stated from MS always has and is 512MB RAM and a modern processor and some Longhorn certified graphic driver spec, available 90 days before launch. So you video card has to be modern and have driver support by the manufacturer...
January 28, 2006 2:43:10 PM

I quote:

"If we were building an AMD Athlon 64 system today, we would definitely choose a 2GB kit for memory. It finally makes sense to choose a 2GB kit and our Editors Choices in this roundup should help in your buying decision. 2GB also makes sense for the OS future. With Vista coming and 2GB being the new memory recommendation for the new OS, you will be set for Vista."
January 30, 2006 11:40:44 AM

Well, you might be quite content with recommending just 512mb of ram to users and running stripped down versions of applications that perform at a snails' pace but I personally have just had 5 years of that and would now never recommend less than 2gb of ram. Even moreso now that memory is dirt cheap. It is like the performance difference between a 56kbps modem and 2mbps broadband! Please also show me where it says that 512mb ram is the minimum recommended requirement for windows vista as I don't believe that is true either.
January 31, 2006 1:31:38 AM

Quote:
windows vista will require 2gb of ram (minimum recommended requirement)


Thats not microsofts minimum, thats ideal for Vista 64 bit. For 32 bit Vista they say 1 G is ideal, 512 min. But I feel ya, even the ideal may not be enough. Remember this rule? Work fits to the time alloted? Well how about this, Windows & applications fit into the space alloted.
February 1, 2006 5:12:59 PM

Quote:
(minimum recommended requirement)


*cough*cough*
what?

Also, you guys realize that what's important when measuring the need for RAM is not the actual size of the chunk games plop in the physical ram, but the performance dip if you don't have the 2 Gig?

I think all applications load memory with more data if there's room for it.
It's mostly just unneeded giant texture packs for Games.
Excuse me, but using that 500 mb hi-res texture pack doesn't really prove anything... because 2 GB is not enough if you want to use the new 1.5 GB texture pack. And 4 GB is not enough if you want to use the 3.4 GB pack.
Besides, of those 500mb of textures I think hardly a quarter are used at the same time, so as someone mentioned, the only thing that'll noticeably improve are load times, because your PC won't require to reload as much from the swap file. But once your PC has all those BF2 desert textures loaded, it's loaded and that's it.

Quote:
As an application is executed, it normally requests a large amount of memory for its operation- much more than it typically needs just in case it may use it.


So there's what I think.
2 Gig will become useful. But I wouldn't say it's mandatory if you're getting a new system now, unless you have alot of spare cash.
My estimate is memory prices will halve before you actually "need" 2 GB of physical System Memory.

[edit]not that it's of any importance in relation to PC gaming, but do you realize that all current gen consoles (PS2, GC, XBox) have less than or exactly 64 MB of physical system memory? The need for 1024² px textures is greatly exaggerated IMHO.
February 1, 2006 5:37:06 PM

95% of the time you are right and if you can live with a ocasional stutter because a game needs a file that isn't in the cache 1GB is enough yes.
However, if a game has enough memory to indeed waste memory on things it most likely won't need, even those last stutters will be gone.

I have gamed with 1GB and went to 2GB. Did my average framerate improve? No. Did my minimum framerate improve? Yes.
!