Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

BF2 - Insane RAM usage?

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
June 22, 2005 8:37:16 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

My system:

P4-3.4ghz
1 gig RAM
Geforce 6800 Ultra
XP Pro


BF2 runs like the earlier BF games did before I upgraded RAM. I can
see the RAM usage peaking way past the 1 gig mark, (around 1.4 gig),
resulting in swapping, long load times etc
Whats more, after I exit BF2, my entire system feels slow unless I
reboot.

Are the folks out there who are happy with the performance of this
game all running more than 1 gig of RAM?

I don't really mind if I have to spring for another stick of RAM but
it doesn't seem like a well-designed game if it needs 1.5 gig to be
comfortable. HalfLife2 which is far superior graphically never
exceeds .7 gig or so.

More about : bf2 insane ram usage

June 22, 2005 8:54:28 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 16:37:16 GMT, Litten Peeps <darthknee@groin.com>
wrote:

>Are the folks out there who are happy with the performance of this
>game all running more than 1 gig of RAM?

I only have the demo, it runs fine with medium textures, but gets
choppy at high, although I am not sure if that is because I only have
a 128MB video card or 1GB of RAM, the machine feels like it is
swapping though.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
Anonymous
June 22, 2005 9:56:27 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Litten Peeps wrote:
> My system:
>
> P4-3.4ghz
> 1 gig RAM
> Geforce 6800 Ultra
> XP Pro
>
>
> BF2 runs like the earlier BF games did before I upgraded RAM. I can
> see the RAM usage peaking way past the 1 gig mark, (around 1.4 gig),
> resulting in swapping, long load times etc
> Whats more, after I exit BF2, my entire system feels slow unless I
> reboot.
>
> Are the folks out there who are happy with the performance of this
> game all running more than 1 gig of RAM?
>
> I don't really mind if I have to spring for another stick of RAM but
> it doesn't seem like a well-designed game if it needs 1.5 gig to be
> comfortable. HalfLife2 which is far superior graphically never
> exceeds .7 gig or so.

HL2 has a fraction of the activity BF2 does, you can't compare the two
in terms of system requirements.

I'm on 1Gig and have had some stuttering and freezing up problems with
the demo, but I put that down to server lag. IGN did a big system test
and there was next to no difference between 1 and 2 gigs, main thing
seemed to be video card power.

I might go up to 2 anyway though to make sure! Seems like a game that
it's worth doing it for.
Related resources
Anonymous
June 22, 2005 9:56:28 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 17:56:27 +0100, Jamie_Manic <yeahbutno@slag.com>
wrote:

>
>I'm on 1Gig and have had some stuttering and freezing up problems with
>the demo, but I put that down to server lag. IGN did a big system test
>and there was next to no difference between 1 and 2 gigs, main thing
>seemed to be video card power.

Or just order a 7800GTX from Newegg at $599 :)  :-)
They are in stock..... PCIe only at the moment.
Dunno if/when an AGP version will be available.

John Lewis

>
>I might go up to 2 anyway though to make sure! Seems like a game that
>it's worth doing it for.





John Lewis
--

John Lewis

"Technology early-birds always turn out to be flying guinea-pigs"
Anonymous
June 22, 2005 10:15:38 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 17:23:28 GMT, john.dsl@verizon.net (John Lewis)
wrote:


>Or just order a 7800GTX from Newegg at $599 :)  :-)
>They are in stock..... PCIe only at the moment.
>Dunno if/when an AGP version will be available.
>
>John Lewis

I don't see how upgrading my vid card (256 meg 6800 Ultra) is going to
prevent the game from swapping RAM to disk. Feel free to enlighten me
if I'm missing something here.
June 22, 2005 11:25:29 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Litten Peeps" <darthknee@groin.com> wrote in message
news:nqajb15uov0rb8d0d3alkva212pn5ol464@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 17:23:28 GMT, john.dsl@verizon.net (John Lewis)
> wrote:
>
>
>>Or just order a 7800GTX from Newegg at $599 :)  :-)
>>They are in stock..... PCIe only at the moment.
>>Dunno if/when an AGP version will be available.
>>
>>John Lewis
>
> I don't see how upgrading my vid card (256 meg 6800 Ultra) is going to
> prevent the game from swapping RAM to disk. Feel free to enlighten me
> if I'm missing something here.
>
>

BF2 is certainly the first game in a while that's made me think I need a
memory upgrade but at the moment I'm running 1 GB of RAM (2 x 512) in dual
channel mode, now I can maybe afford to buy another 512 Meg of the same
memory (Crucial Ballistix PC4000) probably 1 x 512 DIMM.

How much performance would I loose going from Dual to Single channel ~ 5%?
Anonymous
June 22, 2005 11:28:02 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 18:15:38 GMT, Litten Peeps <darthknee@groin.com>
wrote:

>On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 17:23:28 GMT, john.dsl@verizon.net (John Lewis)
>wrote:
>
>
>>Or just order a 7800GTX from Newegg at $599 :)  :-)
>>They are in stock..... PCIe only at the moment.
>>Dunno if/when an AGP version will be available.
>>
>>John Lewis
>
>I don't see how upgrading my vid card (256 meg 6800 Ultra) is going to
>prevent the game from swapping RAM to disk. Feel free to enlighten me
>if I'm missing something here.
>

Read again, you left out the quote in my posting.

I was replying to Jamie, not to you............... !!
--

John Lewis

"Technology early-birds always turn out to be flying guinea-pigs"
Anonymous
June 22, 2005 11:37:47 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 19:28:02 GMT, john.dsl@verizon.net (John Lewis)
wrote:

>On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 18:15:38 GMT, Litten Peeps <darthknee@groin.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 17:23:28 GMT, john.dsl@verizon.net (John Lewis)
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Or just order a 7800GTX from Newegg at $599 :)  :-)
>>>They are in stock..... PCIe only at the moment.
>>>Dunno if/when an AGP version will be available.
>>>
>>>John Lewis
>>
>>I don't see how upgrading my vid card (256 meg 6800 Ultra) is going to
>>prevent the game from swapping RAM to disk. Feel free to enlighten me
>>if I'm missing something here.
>>
>
>Read again, you left out the quote in my posting.
>
>I was replying to Jamie, not to you............... !!

Well then that's thread hijacking, for which maybe you should
apologize (or send me lots of money) before you get all
exclaimation-point happy, sir. I started this thread to inquire about
RAM usage and swap files, not deals on video cards.
Anonymous
June 23, 2005 12:42:34 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

If the vid card has 256+ megs maybe.

"Litten Peeps" <darthknee@groin.com> wrote in message
news:nqajb15uov0rb8d0d3alkva212pn5ol464@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 17:23:28 GMT, john.dsl@verizon.net (John Lewis)
> wrote:
>
>
> >Or just order a 7800GTX from Newegg at $599 :)  :-)
> >They are in stock..... PCIe only at the moment.
> >Dunno if/when an AGP version will be available.
> >
> >John Lewis
>
> I don't see how upgrading my vid card (256 meg 6800 Ultra) is going to
> prevent the game from swapping RAM to disk. Feel free to enlighten me
> if I'm missing something here.
>
>
June 23, 2005 2:20:45 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Litten Peeps" <darthknee@groin.com> wrote in message
news:tl4jb152urbn2cld4vjkt2fdfb9hr4dt5l@4ax.com...
>
> My system:
>
> P4-3.4ghz
> 1 gig RAM
> Geforce 6800 Ultra
> XP Pro
>

> Whats more, after I exit BF2, my entire system feels slow unless I
> reboot.

No need to reboot. It's because the game's demands caused other apps and
idle parts of the OS to swap out to disk. Once things swap back into memory
you're fine again.
Anonymous
June 23, 2005 3:25:09 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

In article <tl4jb152urbn2cld4vjkt2fdfb9hr4dt5l@4ax.com>,
Litten Peeps says...

>
> My system:
>
> P4-3.4ghz
> 1 gig RAM
> Geforce 6800 Ultra
> XP Pro
>
>
> BF2 runs like the earlier BF games did before I upgraded RAM. I can
> see the RAM usage peaking way past the 1 gig mark, (around 1.4 gig),
> resulting in swapping, long load times etc
> Whats more, after I exit BF2, my entire system feels slow unless I
> reboot.

Running fine on my box. AMD 3500+ 1 Gig and a 6800 card. XP Pro.

Everything is pretty much maxxed as well as having 1280 x 1024 set up
in properties of the icon. I've gone in and out of the game at least
half a dozen times (haven't even rebooted at install) in the last day
as well as loading up a few other games. Actually it's been 13 days
since my last reboot in fact.

Worst I can say is I get the odd stutter when I'm being hit by arty and
there's a lot of smoke around, but I'm generally dead at that stage.

Cheers,
Rod.
Anonymous
June 23, 2005 3:39:40 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

> I don't see how upgrading my vid card (256 meg 6800 Ultra) is going to
> prevent the game from swapping RAM to disk. Feel free to enlighten me
> if I'm missing something here.
>
>
>


put your Windows swap file in a swap-dedicated partition m8.... Size min
1,5x, max 2,5 x your RAM size.
June 23, 2005 4:18:19 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"F r e e" <free@spam.nothanx> wrote in message
news:ITkue.52722$US.49589@news.ono.com...
>> put your Windows swap file in a swap-dedicated partition m8.... Size min
> 1,5x, max 2,5 x your RAM size.

That won't make any difference, unless the partition is on a different HD
controller on the mobo.


--
Rocky
GhostRecon.net | AGR-S.com | Tactical-Elite.net

__
Anonymous
June 23, 2005 4:27:40 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

My buddy played the BF2 demo on a 2.8Ghz, 1GB, 9700 pro laptop and didn't
have any problems. He only has <20 processes running at any one time though
so he's definitely stripped down to the bare minimum of what XP Pro needs to
run.

--
there is no .sig
"Litten Peeps" <darthknee@groin.com> wrote in message
news:tl4jb152urbn2cld4vjkt2fdfb9hr4dt5l@4ax.com...
>
> My system:
>
> P4-3.4ghz
> 1 gig RAM
> Geforce 6800 Ultra
> XP Pro
>
>
> BF2 runs like the earlier BF games did before I upgraded RAM. I can
> see the RAM usage peaking way past the 1 gig mark, (around 1.4 gig),
> resulting in swapping, long load times etc
> Whats more, after I exit BF2, my entire system feels slow unless I
> reboot.
>
> Are the folks out there who are happy with the performance of this
> game all running more than 1 gig of RAM?
>
> I don't really mind if I have to spring for another stick of RAM but
> it doesn't seem like a well-designed game if it needs 1.5 gig to be
> comfortable. HalfLife2 which is far superior graphically never
> exceeds .7 gig or so.
Anonymous
June 23, 2005 1:30:01 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Rocky" <Rocky@GhostRecon.net>

> "F r e e" <

> That won't make any difference, unless the partition is on a different HD
> controller on the mobo.

Never heard that, and what i said is what is officially recommended. NT
cores don't have trouble with IDE overflows like Win9* had. Its a non issue.
Normally people have their swap set to 'automatic size' and in C: . Having
it in a different partition that is dedicated is a huge improvement, also
maintaince wise...
June 23, 2005 11:48:33 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"F r e e" <free@spam.nothanx> wrote in message
news:qztue.46201$dr.13799@news.ono.com...
>
>
> "Rocky" <Rocky@GhostRecon.net>
>
>
>> That won't make any difference, unless the partition is on a different HD
>> controller on the mobo.
>
> Never heard that, and what i said is what is officially recommended. NT
> cores don't have trouble with IDE overflows like Win9* had. Its a non
> issue.
> Normally people have their swap set to 'automatic size' and in C: . Having
> it in a different partition that is dedicated is a huge improvement, also
> maintaince wise...

If it is on a different partition on the same logical drive, it will make
little if any difference, it has to be on a different physical drive for any
benefit. In this manner the system can access the swap file on the second
hard disk and data on the first hard disk at the same time, which it
couldn't do if they were simply on different partions of the same harddrive.

The reason I posted it had to also be on a seperate channel is that only one
hardrive (PATA) can be active at any one time on the same ribbon. So even if
the user had the partition on a seperate HD, but it was on the slave
connection of the same ribbon the other drive was using, then there is no
benefit, the system can only access one drive at a time if they are on the
same ribbon - data can't be read from both drives at the same time.


--
Rocky
GhostRecon.net | AGR-S.com | Tactical-Elite.net

__
Anonymous
June 24, 2005 2:07:31 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Litten Peeps wrote:
> My system:
>
> P4-3.4ghz
> 1 gig RAM
> Geforce 6800 Ultra
> XP Pro
>
>
> BF2 runs like the earlier BF games did before I upgraded RAM. I can
> see the RAM usage peaking way past the 1 gig mark, (around 1.4 gig),
> resulting in swapping, long load times etc
> Whats more, after I exit BF2, my entire system feels slow unless I
> reboot.
>
> Are the folks out there who are happy with the performance of this
> game all running more than 1 gig of RAM?
>
> I don't really mind if I have to spring for another stick of RAM but
> it doesn't seem like a well-designed game if it needs 1.5 gig to be
> comfortable. HalfLife2 which is far superior graphically never
> exceeds .7 gig or so.


I've got 4 Gigs running in dual channel mode and it seems to run fine.
Didn't notice any swapfile activity. The last time I checked memory was
pretty cheap.
Anonymous
June 24, 2005 3:11:02 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Rocky" <Rocky@GhostRecon.net>



> same ribbon - data can't be read from both drives at the same time.


interesting and enjoyable discussion but i really don't think it is that
way, a computers inside is not an exact analogy of a traffic jam. Anyway
Rocky, plz take into account that my tip was to give an improvement (an
always non fragmented swap file obviously is convenient) not to tell that
guy what the cleverest way to build a pc is.
I will do my homework. Im a bit curious about memory and disk usage during a
game (not when loading a game)... I suspect its mainly RAM and swap, not
much apart from that.

c y m8
f r e e
June 24, 2005 3:11:03 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"F r e e" <free@spam.nothanx> wrote in message
news:D yFue.52872$US.16099@news.ono.com...
>
> "Rocky" <Rocky@GhostRecon.net>
>
>
>
>> same ribbon - data can't be read from both drives at the same time.
>
>
> interesting and enjoyable discussion but i really don't think it is that
> way, a computers inside is not an exact analogy of a traffic jam. Anyway
> Rocky, plz take into account that my tip was to give an improvement (an
> always non fragmented swap file obviously is convenient) not to tell that
> guy what the cleverest way to build a pc is.
> I will do my homework. Im a bit curious about memory and disk usage during
> a game (not when loading a game)... I suspect its mainly RAM and swap, not
> much apart from that.

That is the way it works. I just didn't want the guy to go to the trouble of
moving his swap file to a partition and expect a boost in performance,
because if it is on the same HD there will not be any boost.

It's all explained at
http://www.rojakpot.com/default.aspx?location=3&var1=14... - the best
virtual memory guide on the web :o )


--
Rocky
GhostRecon.net | AGR-S.com | Tactical-Elite.net

__
Anonymous
June 24, 2005 3:57:23 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

> That is the way it works. I just didn't want the guy to go to the trouble
> of moving his swap file to a partition and expect a boost in performance,
> because if it is on the same HD there will not be any boost.

Well, his swap efficieny would be everyday like if he jsut defragmented, and
defragmentation is recommend, or? :-P

> It's all explained at
> http://www.rojakpot.com/default.aspx?location=3&var1=14... - the best
> virtual memory guide on the web :o )

Long time since reading Adrian's site, looks good but not too many *facts*,
but too long read for tonite, still want to explore some more new BF2 maps,
and some GR of course :-)

Finally I just remember my swapfile is on a second HDD. =8)

take care
f r e e
June 24, 2005 3:57:24 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"F r e e" <free@spam.nothanx> wrote in message
news:SdGue.46337$dr.35481@news.ono.com...
>> It's all explained at
>> http://www.rojakpot.com/default.aspx?location=3&var1=14... - the
>> best virtual memory guide on the web :o )
>
> Long time since reading Adrian's site, looks good but not too many
> *facts*, but too long read for tonite,

Are you kidding Free? That's the most facts you'll find on virtual memory
optimisation anywhere on the web.


--
Rocky
GhostRecon.net | AGR-S.com | Tactical-Elite.net

__
Anonymous
June 24, 2005 5:08:05 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

> Are you kidding Free? That's the most facts you'll find on virtual memory
> optimisation anywhere on the web.

LOL! Well, me thinks his style is more ... philosophical then scientific, no
numbers or comparisons (like some graphs showing differences between
swapfile allocations), only deductions. Cool and clever deductions of
course. Really smart when he uncovers old copnventions that are not useful
anymore (like 2,5x RAM)

:-)

>
> --
> Rocky
> GhostRecon.net | AGR-S.com | Tactical-Elite.net
>
> __
>
>
!