i think it goes down on what system u'r running on

a high end system definetly need that extra 2 gig, with all eye candy and physics to the max

But my pretty old P4 2.8 and yesteryear 6800 i don't think it'll utilize it alot....ok, maybe aroung 1.2GIG, but thats as far as it goes...anything more and my system won't take it anyway

i don't think it makes loading time any faster
u just have more memory for u'r system, the loading time is still pretty much limited to how fast u'r HDD can transfere data, and u'r memory bandwidth for that mater, not its size.

more ram alone doesn't make a system any faster, its the system as a whole, not just a component.....it'll be pretty silly for a low end user to get 2Gig, because at the end of the day, the application he runs will be tone down so low that he barely need anything more than 1gig...u have to be running the currently greatest system which can handle a situation where the program will take more than 1 gig, then u'll be utilizing it.

This post has been edited by Hornet: Oct 17 2005, 09:39 AM

well, my mistake then, but from u'r post, it does seems like u'r suggesting there is somesort of improvement in 2Gig over 1Gig (or at least u'r suggesting that all ppl, both who can and cannot afford it, do believe that there is peformance inprovement)...else no one's gonna want want 2Gig, being sour grape or whatever

So, basically i'm just giving my opinion that 2 gig isn't nessarily improve peformance, just in case there's anyone who have the misconcept that more ram always means better...

hmm? i don't quite get what u mean there...
anyway i was talking about performance, specifically gaming

might as well spend more on faster CPU an GC. RAM can be added later, if u compromise u'r CPU for more ram, then u won't be able to use the benefits of it anyway.

Thats the fastest and greatest system i believe....not everyone can get such improvement, heck some even not at all...

yeah, that was why i upgrade to 1gig as well, but the game was FarCry, when setting is High, it stutters.

But then i feel, at least for my system which was bought 2 years back and even then it wasn't the greatest, perhaps 1 gig is as far as it goes, even in FEAR, i have to begin turn off soft shadow with my 6800NU...and any future games that use moer than 1 gig, most probably i'll be turning off this and that and the memory usage shouldn't be more than a gig.

In fact if they were to use my system to test that 2 gig ram, there won't be any difference as the FPS would have been below 30 no matter how much ram they gives it

I don't think that's a typical setting. supersampling takes a hell lots of gpu pwer although lates cards are design to run it. it'll take a top notch sytem for that

So far from wat i've heard, only those who does heavy multitasking like, say media editing and encoding at the same time will not return to single CPU.
I'm not sure, but i think AMD FX CPU are still the better choice in gaming as compare the dual core CPU right...

but the extra ram is a different thing, it can benefits a single application since it possible for certain apps to use more than 1 gig.

This post has been edited by Hornet: Oct 20 2005, 12:48 PM

Wow, RAMBUS is still around eh...

Hmm....i somehow hope that RAM woundn't branch out into 2 camps, DDR and XDR...we've already had enough options to figure out.

And i hope to see Ageia would be brought into gaming soon once Vista is release. (i'm not to keen with havoc idea trying to use GPU cycle to simulate physics.)

The new Vista's Graphic API, DX10 WGF2.0 Direct3D10 or whatever u wants to call it.... one new things that it introduce is Virtual memory concept, i think the basic concept should be similler like curent virtual memory, dividing process into small pages and so on....but instead of HDD, pages that's isnt needed are stored in the system memory...

So there, basically requirement for memory will shoot up, as developers now are virtually boundless in texture size. Thats when 2Gig becomes the limits...

This post has been edited by Hornet: Apr 1 2006, 01:04 PM

But then again, for a apps tat utilize that much of memory, I doubt the CPU would be able to handle it anyway....the size has to somehow goes up with the overall system peformance as well.

isnt the requirement for vista stands at 1gig?
In that sense, I dont see that OS sucking up anywhere close to 1 gig
at least application will still have one gig. Current one of course. No doubt that ram requirement will grow, but I dont see the need for any more than 3gig anytime soon. I know, 3 seems awkward lol, but seriously, why waste another 1 gig in a 4gig config lol