first of all :
my name is khaled, i live in Egypt, and i have just got my computer upgraded, not to the best of the best, but it is Very good, it runs games perfectly, i have:
Windows 7 x64 bit ultimate
VGA: Nvidia geforce GTS 250 1 GB up to 1.5 GB GDDR 3
Processor: intel core i5 2400 3.10 Ghz
RAM: 4 GB GDDR 3
Hard disk: 320 GB sata
now, i have a problem of setting the virtual memory, i dont know should i turn it off or leave it as it is or set it to recommended, a friend of mine said i should make the initial size half the recommended, and the maximum size = the recommended which is 6118 MB, i run HL2 games perfectly and so as Counter strike source and Team fortress 2, but i experience a mouse lag when i activate the Vsync, now, as for assassin's creed , i have the recommended to run assassins creed on the best of graphics, but in the gameplay, the fps drops to 55 in crowded areas, and it does that in many other games, so i am PISSED, I DONT KNOW WHAT TO DO, can some one please help me? What is the recommended size for the Virtual memory for a 4GB ram?
Might try half for your max , and say intial 4, so intial at 1g with max of 2, given you a total of 6gs altogether within use. Or 1.5, 3 Max of 7 GBs.
Think anything different would be specific which would probably apply to your interest instead of a specific say overall approach of use. You can usually have alot of vitural ram, but gotta watch it cause it tends to slow system performance once and awhile. Think you still gotta rely on your ram and at so much you'll have more information then your ram to work with.
But what you have said, think you be on the max of use also within idea of use with ram. System should have a calibrate to say, also within ram to use i think as well. So you dont use anymore then you can or need, want too on somethings.
But think gets easy at times to get more ram with it though, or want, need.
Might be helpful, i dont know. Specifically, i wouldnt really be able to tell you.
It might if not alot of use is of it for awhile. Just i think on idea of more then after awhile doesnt do much, in terms of say "demand", unless "made" for the interest. Instead of just say more ram.
But if anything yes, a better graphics card would probably be helpful if thats what he is asking.
Otherwise working with virtual memory would need to probably be specific for the interest. Dont think Virtual Ram is created the same as "normal" ram.
But hard saying or telling really, Newer systems might have Vitural Ram the same as Hardware ram, despite rather for say gaming ram, or anything else that would be specific, and/or made differently. Like timing, speeds, amounts.
I say on the idea of shifting betweeen say which ram is in use and the power of use to say of it, if you max VR to say with RAM, you might sihft to much info over to your VR and reapply info in RAM, which would probably try to shift within use of your VR and Stall. And still not get even one G of either side of the situation.
So on a lower part of interest you can at least go a full of something cause its open to use for what it is cause you'll have -it-: to use-(it). Hopefully this makes some sense. you'll have it to use, or have to use it.
But some games i think in all honesty, that are of decent release, have it within some interest of use that they made their own virtual memory but its hard saying, cause it used to be alot of manual info.
Otherwise VR is just ram designed to be used as ram within an application that would need more use of say RAM interest.
Gaming is werid with virtual ram, think say powershifting in demands cause the issue. Otherwise you get lag and stall. Right?
VR also takes RAM to use. Maybe not much at times, but still. But newer systems might not need them as much for use with VR as well too.
Leave the virtual memory alone as it won't improve FPS. On the other hand, a better GPU would definitely help.
well, i dont know if i should leave it alone, bec. i read once if you left it alone, you can get lag, BTW, i have just upgraded my PC, it is not that noticeable lag, but it pisses me off, maybe it is because i raise the resolution and the anti aliasing to the max(1440x900 75 hz /16Q), i am starting to suspect that
Theres usually Min. Settings, Optimal Settings, and Max settings. But dont see optimal as a medium setting though. Cause you may optimize actually higher or lower then say meduim settings. Cause optimal to say usually runs between low and medium and medium and high.
In terms of features and the like there isnt as much lose between the settings.
With VR which you are inclined too right now, would try to cover some difference.
With settings you say i would see a difference between 50 units and 100 units.
For probably on low setting without AA, the effort for one unit in Full AA and Screen res, could probably make maybe up to 4 more Otherwise be lag and stall.
Your Screen res should be minimal res for card at least or within a few res of it.
Rather Hz matter after awhile im not sure, to be honest. Sometimes i think you could have 200hz and it wouldnt change a thing your system could or couldnt display. But is nice of use of option for that of interest for it. But 75 is fairly nice if i remember right. Cause gaming usuauly say covers or tries a 3d depth of change and continued applying with or without change.
So, of the res though, to say you can get say your high depth on lower res, i think is perspective. Cause screen res has an appliance of use to size of screen, yes?
So, to say well let see what is what with the facts of VR to help on this? Right?
Well, if you are running what you are running and all systems are in use for a point of use to say, then some VR use would be helpful. But too much of it, right? Cause the system probably isnt designed for extensive VR use, Cause theres probably little use of it after awhile. Since you speak of FPS the most, i dont know much. As of now at least within the interest, cause of the idea of what is considered new. And changes of that.
But for the graphics and features hardware having 7 vs 7 squads was still fairly easy without lag, in terms of console at least. For PC usually is 5 v 5 on my part. Even though like the 24 players and 32 player maps were in use, i was on sub-par systems, think most was maybe 8-8 maybe a 10-10 without huge lag issues. 4-4 being a common arrangement.
So for single-play say missions and campaign and the like. Idk.
Usually can turn the difficulty level way up and increase graphics and a maintain without some much lag in many comparisons.