Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

MY NEW computer questions, 256mb ddr enuf?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
July 22, 2002 11:27:48 PM

im ordering from ibuypower.com this week its going to be an amd... at ibuypower.com the processor 1800xp is $100 less than the 2200xp with my sys configuration and all varying in between that range.. is it worth it to go for the 2200 for only one hundred more or which one should i get? im confused if there is very much difference between them.. also
is 256mb of pc27000 enough or would i be better of getting 512 with the slower processor
should i b worried about heat ive heard some of the xp's are better then others in this department
i will b running windows xp fyi
thank u very much
July 22, 2002 11:42:52 PM

Win XP is a huge memory hog. You will get by on 256mb, although I would <i> highly </i> reccomend getting 512mb and a slightly slower processor.

"When there's a will, there's a way."
July 23, 2002 12:57:50 AM

I have XP and 256 of DDR and it's soooo enough for me. I play games, like GTA and such and they run fine. I web browse, rip MP's and watch movies with no problems - no lags + sandra rates my mem bandwidth higher that the 2GHz P4 with PC800.

Unless you use photoshop and other progs that need ass loads of RAM you should be a happy camper. From my experience with many XP configs, the lag goes away once you get or surpass 192MB of RAM. As for the processor, I'd get whatever your pocket book can handle!

My system:

WinXP Pro
XP 1700+ OC'ed to 1900+
Kingston ValuRAM 256MB PC2100 OC'ed to 290DDR
Chaintech G4 Ti4200 OC'ed to 4600
AK31A (266A)
Cheapo, yet not bad at all Cmedia 6-ch Sound :o )

"Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one"
Related resources
July 23, 2002 1:02:37 AM

Hey do you know how Win2K uses memory compared to WinXP? Does it need less or more?

:smile: Falling down stairs saves time :smile:
July 23, 2002 1:29:04 AM

the XP1800+ is far from being a 'slow' processor. i have one and it rocks for me!

remember that the XP2200+ is only 266Mhz faster, or 17.4% faster.

so my recommendation is DEFINATELY get 512Mb of ram, especailly if you likes playing lots of games on win2k or XP.

<b>Genius may have its limitations, but stupidity is not thus handicapped! :cool: </b>
July 23, 2002 3:00:56 AM

I have to disagree, almost any WinXP user will NEED 512MB RAM for games. I had 256MB and I had long user switch times, game loading takes time, games stuttered in the beginning (JK II, MOHAA), exiting games was often LONG, unless GTA III.
With 512MB RAM, I got everything shorter, no stuttering at all, hell even startups were slightly faster. I can say the difference is noticeable anytime when going from 256 to 512 in WinXP.

--
An AMD employee's diary: Today I kicked an Intel worker in the "Willy"! :lol: 
July 23, 2002 4:48:10 AM

I would definately vote for the 512 over the faster processor. Grab the ram now while its cheap or you will regret it!
July 23, 2002 1:00:10 PM

512 it is which of the xp processors should i go w/ or are they all pretty similiar peas
July 23, 2002 2:08:34 PM

There isn't so much of a difference when using an XP1800+ over an AXP 2200+, in general usage. However grabbing the best price/performance processor often yeilds the best satisfactory results. In this case the XP1800+ wins. It can also OC fairly well. You could take it up to XP2000 speeds safely with a good HSF, not RETAIL! A Volcano 7, or anything of the price range.

--
An AMD employee's diary: Today I kicked an Intel worker in the "Willy"! :lol: 
July 23, 2002 2:18:43 PM

Like most people here suggest, i'd also go with the 1800+ and 512Mb RAM. It'll be more beneficial.


<font color=red>Floppy disk?!? What the heck's a floppy disk?!?</font color=red>
July 23, 2002 4:45:43 PM

Quote:
I have to disagree, almost any WinXP user will NEED 512MB RAM for games. I had 256MB and I had long user switch times, game loading takes time, games stuttered in the beginning (JK II, MOHAA), exiting games was often LONG, unless GTA III.


Spot on, but gameplay does not suffer, if you have winxp and 256 megs of ram it will run fine,but you will have some slowed down task switching and closing.

:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:
July 23, 2002 7:03:28 PM

Quote:
Spot on, but gameplay does not suffer, if you have winxp and 256 megs of ram it will run fine,but you will have some slowed down task switching and closing

i was going to say the exact same thing (actually...something somewhat similar to that)...
anyways...i would know because im running 256mb w/ win xp pro. and i havent suffered any noticably performance decrease...but i do notice a lag time while exiting out of games (JKII, WCIII, etc.)
i will switch out my 256mb ocz pc2700 ram if and when samsung comes out with pc3200 (of the 512mb flavor) cl2 ram...

:eek:  <b>L <font color=red>A</font color=red> e <font color=red>T</font color=red> a <font color=red>I</font color=red> K</b> :eek: 
July 24, 2002 3:44:01 AM

Warcraft 3 lags a bit on my computer with only 256 of ram. Athlon 1700+ and a Radeon 8500 64Mb. I would suggest 512 even if its not needed in too many programs today it will be needed in the upcoming ones.
July 24, 2002 3:51:35 AM

Regardless of the detail, WCIII manages to stay smooth on my Ti200 in very very active moments. I do notice frame skips then, but damn it it ain't a slide show yet, and does not feel like 15FPS at all. I like Blizzard for fine tuning their games. Despite the fact this might be explained by the fact the game's engine isn't THAT modern, characters are not very polygon intensive and textures are actually lacking on the polys. Even with that, from an isometric POV, the game looks beautiful, and runs very smooth. The particle effects and special effects are nothing skimped on, and stay smooth and beautiful in intensive moments.

I have no complaints as to play this game on my XP1600+ and Ti200, and get occasional frame drops in very intensive moments.

Now if you asked for an old game which can lag new systems, go get Sacrifice, get over 20 creatures in front and let 'em attack! The game was made in 2000 btw, you can just imagine how they had to turn down detail back then, no matter what.

--
An AMD employee's diary: Today I kicked an Intel worker in the "Willy"! :lol: 
July 24, 2002 3:57:25 AM

Eden how much ram you got?
July 24, 2002 4:01:30 AM

512MB!

As for Sacrifice, I uninstalled it a long time ago, but when I had it installed, it was on 256MB RAM with my new system. Beleive me Sacrifice EATS, it has nice textures and a LOT of beautiful effects, but I doubt RAM is what held it back, I fully doubt 100% that RAM is even involved.

--
An AMD employee's diary: Today I kicked an Intel worker in the "Willy"! :lol: 
July 24, 2002 1:00:03 PM

Yes, it is. But because of the RAM prices now, you may buy 512MB and upgrade your CPU later. It depends on what applications you are going to run, and how many in the same time.
July 24, 2002 2:45:20 PM

No, you need at least 1Gb of ram surely :-P.
July 27, 2002 8:54:52 AM

I think the reason Warcraft III runs find on your computer is the 512 of ram cause my 8500 should beat your ti200 so unless you have a dually rig or something, then the 512 vs my 256 is the limiting factor. Go for 512 the ram prices are actually dropping again but I don't know if they will reach the low they did a few months ago. Make sure you buy ram before september though cause of hte back to school rush that is coming.
July 27, 2002 1:40:45 PM

Quote:
But because of the RAM prices now, you may buy 512MB and upgrade your CPU later.

RAM prices are as high as hell lately? Wouldn't it be prudent to get 256MB and when prices come down, get another 256 or 512MB?

:smile: Help the n00bie!! :smile:
July 27, 2002 9:03:22 PM

Though there is speculation that the DRAM makers won't allow prices to plummet to the same levels that they were at last summer and fall. In fact, I'd be inclined to believe that the prices are at the point that they will remain, except for the Fall, when OEMs go on RAM buying sprees to fill Christmas orders. So, unless you get RAM in the next few weeks (or build a system with a large amount), you might save more money to wait until Jan. or Feb., when supplies have stablized again.

In other words, get 512MB or more RAM before the middle of Aug. or so, and get a AXP 1800+ or 1900+... though AMD just dropped the price of the 2000+ 20%.

-SammyBoy
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
July 27, 2002 10:16:42 PM

hey chucky, how do you do? :smile:

i've plugged my home blower to my case ... dunno what happen ... that works?!?
July 27, 2002 10:39:17 PM

Great, you? I came back cause I wasn't really getting the help I wanted from SkarkyForums :tongue: . Good to see you again!!

:smile: Help the n00bie!! :smile:
July 27, 2002 11:07:11 PM

I know the inquirer is not a very reliable source, but they report that DRAM contract prices seem to be dropping. Seems like the rush for the back to school season is over and Dell/IBM/HPQ already have a full stock of DRAM to hold them over. Hopefully the price drops will trickle down to us buyers!!

:smile: Help the n00bie!! :smile:
July 28, 2002 12:18:43 AM

Don't count on Canadian prices... damn Canadian pricing...

--
The sound of determination is the echo of will...
July 28, 2002 12:27:24 AM

That's what you get for living in a third world country... Wait, we're in the G8???!!! LOL... No, I guess a lot of the computer stuff originates in the US, or Asia, but usually gets shipped to the US, then by the time the stuff gets here, the prices usually have changed elsewhere. It may be good for us sometimes, like when prices go up, but bad, when prices go down. We just follow the rest of the world, but a bit behind I think...

:lol:  Finally, I get a capitalized title!! WOOT!! :lol: 
!