|
The Official Graphics Card and PC gaming Thread
|
|
Member
2 product reviews
|
29. November 2008 @ 21:55 |
Link to this message
|
|
i am back on XP now did a new fresh install just now still installing games and stuff lol. do you think that part of it would be that vista i to bulkie and is that it eats memory because i only have 2 gig at the moment. the other thing is that my benchmarks was lower on vista lol.
Vista i got 5762
Xp i got 7757
using 3marks06.
do you think that when windows 7 comes out in 09 well that what i have been told.that there will be a bigger improvement on the games or not. i have been testing with the pre alpha beta and i got an extra 15fps on most games. benchmarks was the same area as XP. witch i not bad. going to try the DX10 hack and see how it gose tho.
thanks for reply
graham
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
29. November 2008 @ 21:59 |
Link to this message
|
|
Yes, 2GB for Vista isn't really enough to run anything outside the desktop, it uses 1.4GB on its own. That said, 2GB isn't really enough to run everything in XP either, just most stuff, whereas in Vista it'll be a problem for almost everything. 4GB fortunately, is sufficient for both.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 29. November 2008 @ 22:03
|
AfterDawn Addict
2 product reviews
|
29. November 2008 @ 22:07 |
Link to this message
|
Yeah I'm using up 1.7Gb right now with Aero, two different media players, web browser, and three IM clients. Also some microsoft word windows open.
Of course it is using prefetch or superfetch. This way my programs load almost instantly. If I were to disable that I would save a lot more ram space.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
29. November 2008 @ 22:09 |
Link to this message
|
|
For the record, I didn't experience much of a difference, certainly not one that justifies the extra 2m20 added to my boot time. (Indexing reduced it by 2m40 and malware scans off by about 30s)
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
29. November 2008 @ 22:11 |
Link to this message
|
Currently using 825MB of RAM with 57 Processes open including Firefox AND Superfetch. I dunno if it's something I'm doing wrong or what, What are you guys using to track RAM useage?
And yes. Vista is riddled with all sorts of little incompatibilities. Fortunately, most of them have a 100% work around. My only complaints so far are my Soundblaster X-Fi doesn't work at all. And my $50 Sennheiser headphones only kind of work with the integrated Realtek HD. I can get the sound test to work in them but it doesn't deactivate my speakers and switch to headphone output. I've still got a virgin install of XP on my other partition so I'm ready to drop Vista at a moments notice if it ticks me off :P
And as far as dual graphics. As far as I've tested and seen, the differences are extremely minor. I get roughly the same performance with only a few games showing any performance gains. Nothing to write home about.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 1. December 2008 @ 16:48
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
29. November 2008 @ 22:13 |
Link to this message
|
|
Pertelian X2040 System Stats Plugin, as I know that reads actual memory usage, not commit charge.
|
Member
2 product reviews
|
29. November 2008 @ 22:13 |
Link to this message
|
now i am back on XP i think that vista dose not know how to manage Ram because here is what i am running now.
itunes
internet explorer with 4 tabs open
outlook express
microsoft excel
task manager
crysis installing.
and i am only using 512nb of ram witch not bad. me thinks vista need to learn some management skills lol.
|
AfterDawn Addict
2 product reviews
|
29. November 2008 @ 22:13 |
Link to this message
|
|
Just taskmanager and the page file usage.
I don't care about boot times. I turn it on when I wake up go to the bathroom and come back and it's all loaded up.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
29. November 2008 @ 22:15 |
Link to this message
|
|
XP certainly does not read memory correctly, I think Vista does, but I'm not certain. In Task manager I can be using 540MB and my memory monitor reports 870...
I wouldn't care about boot times always, but when I'm in a hurry to do something with my PC (like I forget to check something in an email for example before I go out), before I disabled those three things I could save several minute by going into the BIOS, changing the boot device, restarting and going into XP. Now the two OSs are very similar.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 29. November 2008 @ 22:16
|
AfterDawn Addict
2 product reviews
|
29. November 2008 @ 22:19 |
Link to this message
|
Yeah and my computer boots up pretty damn fast. Even if I am standing right there waiting for it to boot up.
Although I wonder if I can get those instant on Linux OS installed on my laptop as well. Just to quickly check FF maybe.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
29. November 2008 @ 22:21 |
Link to this message
|
I have a suspicion it uses Asus hardware specific drivers, but it may not.
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
29. November 2008 @ 22:22 |
Link to this message
|
It tells me 1.2GB in use for the page file, if that's what I should be looking at. But really, how do you guys know which is right? I'm having ZERO problems gaming with 2GB of RAM. Everything runs smooth and relatively hitch free.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
|
Member
2 product reviews
|
29. November 2008 @ 22:22 |
Link to this message
|
|
i am not bothered about boot times but i just like to have the proformce in the games that is where it counts. its i run leopard on my pc aswell and that can take up3 or 4 mins to boot. but once it boots its fine. on the other hand i will download a mem monitor and dubble check that what you say. know of a good one.
@sam or anyone
have the benchmarks improved on the 4850 yet because you said that they was not so good at the moment.
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
29. November 2008 @ 22:23 |
Link to this message
|
|
I wouldn't worry. The HD4850 is a kickass card.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
|
AfterDawn Addict
2 product reviews
|
29. November 2008 @ 22:24 |
Link to this message
|
lol
I don't really care. I have 3GB of Ram anyway. Plus Windows 7 runs perfectly on my 512MB of ram machine so this should survive the future pretty well.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
29. November 2008 @ 22:25 |
Link to this message
|
Estuansis: Nope, page file is relatively unrelated to memory usage, you want actual RAM usage. I'm sorry I don't know of a software memory monitor program, since I use a hardware device to tell me instead.
When did I say this about the benchmarks? I think you must have misinterpreted me.
Abuzar: The BETA runs well, and betas include less functionality, and therefore use less RAM.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 29. November 2008 @ 22:25
|
Member
2 product reviews
|
29. November 2008 @ 22:26 |
Link to this message
|
|
sam it wasnt that long ago.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 29. November 2008 @ 22:27
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
29. November 2008 @ 22:28 |
Link to this message
|
|
What did I say then, in what way is the HD4850 generally 'not good'? I would have clarified it in some manner.
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
29. November 2008 @ 22:32 |
Link to this message
|
|
Yeah I don't believe that. Sam is a hardcore ATi fanboy :P
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
|
AfterDawn Addict
2 product reviews
|
29. November 2008 @ 22:32 |
Link to this message
|
|
Alpha build actually, and release builds tend to be more streamlined. It can work both ways, and I'm hoping for the best.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
29. November 2008 @ 22:33 |
Link to this message
|
|
Lol if you say so. I'm more an absolute image quality fanboy really, which just happens to imply your statement :)
|
Member
2 product reviews
|
29. November 2008 @ 22:34 |
Link to this message
|
you might be right there then because i cant find in on this thread. anyway it might of been a miss-understanding (is that work even right lol). i got my artic cooler 64 today i must say what a kiss ass product thanks for the recermendation.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
29. November 2008 @ 22:36 |
Link to this message
|
No problem. I was going to say, it doesn't sound like me, the HD4850 is probably the card I've recommended most over any other recently, so much so that the version I recommended went out of stock... haha
It's about 80% faster than the HD3870, 85% faster than the HD4670, 75% faster than the 9600GT, and around 10-15% faster than the legendary 8800GTX.
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
29. November 2008 @ 22:38 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Lol if you say so. I'm more an absolute image quality fanboy really, which just happens to imply your statement :)
Don't give me that. The last Nvidia card you used was a Geforce 4MX :P
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
Member
2 product reviews
|
29. November 2008 @ 22:39 |
Link to this message
|
you can tell i am getting sleepy now look at this
Quote:
i got my artic cooler 64 today i must say what a kiss ass product thanks for the recermendation.
lol
i like nvidia but i like the price of the ATI card thease day with the credit crunch like and i like the fact that the product also comes from AMD witch i am a fan of.
and the time here in the uk is lol 03:40AM lol
|
