Curse

Ashleigh McMahon · Feb 14, 2007, 06:01 PM // 18:01

Hey there.

About 6 or 7 months ago I upgraded my computer to 512 RAM from 256 RAM. I noticed a good change in loading. On 256 it took up to a minute to load a map, but on 512 it takes about 20 seconds tops? I can now, with 512, usually load a random arena game about 10 seconds before it starts, with the rare occasion of the game starting before I load up the screen.

Now, I've been considering upgrading from 512 up to 700ish(Don't know exact number). My question is; Will the upgrade in RAM significantly upgrade the loading speed of my Guild Wars game?

Heres some of the specs I know (Using different PC, well Mac atm)...

512 RAM(Current)
Nvidea 5500 Gfx Card. (either 128 or 256..not entirely sure)
1.79 Ghz Processor. (Don't know the name from the top of my head)
--

That's all I know, so please try and answer my question.

Thanks alot for reading and hopefully answering.
Asheigh

tijo · Feb 14, 2007, 06:15 PM // 18:15

Upgrading your ram will increase your computer's overall performance, not only GW's performance, you'll should get a lower loading time (i got 1.5gb atm with shared video graphics and loading time is under 10 secs). Upgrading from 512mb to 1gb would be a better choice imo.

Wrath Of Dragons · Feb 14, 2007, 06:15 PM // 18:15

I went from 512 to ~1274(1 gig + 256)
the step was huge. Im pretty certain that there will be a really noticeable difference from 512 to ~700, but not as much as from 256 to 512

Loviatar · Feb 14, 2007, 06:17 PM // 18:17

add a 512MB stick to total 1 gig or dont bother.

the difference from adding only 256 MB will not make a difference.

doubling it at only a tiny cost increase will make a difference.

how much ? who knows

EDIT

this is from personal exerience.

there was a small increase but not much

Ashleigh McMahon · Feb 14, 2007, 06:32 PM // 18:32

Ok thanks. How much will a 512 stick cost me in store?

Thanks

synthjeno · Feb 14, 2007, 06:33 PM // 18:33

Upgrading your RAM is always a good idea. Id say go for the 1gb or more. This will prolong the gaming experience of your pc with newer games. Ofcourse your processor and gfx card will become/are a bottleneck too for newer games.
Who knows what the specs of the upcoming GW are, or even Aion.

Point is, that your pc is kinda outdated. RAM will have a positive effect on low spec games like GW. So upgrade as much as you can, or buy a new pc (yeah theyre really cheap i know

) Just remember there are different kinds of ram, so look at the one u have now. The chance might be that if you have the wrong ram speed, it will work not efficient.

Ashleigh McMahon · Feb 14, 2007, 06:40 PM // 18:40

Thanks - I know I have the right RAM stick as the people I bought them from in the past sold me the computer. I'll see if I can upgrade to 1gig if I can afford it, otherwise I'll go for 700.

I just hope it'll do me some good on 700 ; I'm sick of waiting endlessly for stages to load.

tijo · Feb 14, 2007, 06:46 PM // 18:46

Your best bet would be to add 2 sticks of 256mb running in dual channel (that's if you have 2 ram sockets available) you'll get better performance than a single 512mb stick.

sh4d0whunta · Feb 14, 2007, 06:47 PM // 18:47

my computer is awesome i got 2 gig ram

Tachyon · Feb 14, 2007, 09:11 PM // 21:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by sh4d0whunta

my computer is awesome i got 2 gig ram

Welcome to two years ago!

Kuldebar Valiturus · Feb 14, 2007, 09:23 PM // 21:23

For the money, increasing the amount of RAM offers the greatest performance gain, followed by video card in second place. CPU, is probably a distant 3rd.

Also, larger amounts of RAM tend to prolong the operational life of a PC significantly by allowing an "older" PC to run newer programs effectively.

My home built PC was built 3.5 years ago but the 2 gigs of RAM I originally chose to install has helped to keep my old clunker viable. I did choose to upgrade my video card, but only after my old one died.

Quote:

Computer
Operating System Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition
OS Service Pack Service Pack 2
DirectX 4.09.00.0904 (DirectX 9.0c)

Motherboard
CPU Type AMD Athlon XP, 2200 MHz (11 x 200) 3200+
Motherboard Name Asus A7N8X-E Deluxe (5 PCI, 1 AGP Pro, 1 WiFi, 3 DDR DIMM, Audio, Gigabit LAN)
Motherboard Chipset nVIDIA nForce2 Ultra 400
System Memory 2048 MB (PC3200 DDR SDRAM)

Display
Video Adapter Radeon X1300 Series (256 MB)
Monitor LG Flatron L1920P (Digital) [19" LCD] (140432772)

Multimedia
Audio Adapter nVIDIA MCP2 - Audio Codec Interface
Audio Adapter nVIDIA MCP2 - Audio Processing Unit (Dolby Digital)

Storage
Disk Drive Maxtor 6Y080P0 (80 GB, 7200 RPM, Ultra-ATA/133)
Optical Drive SONY CD-ROM CDU5211 (52x CD-ROM)
Partitions
C: (NTFS) 78152 MB (53861 MB free)

Don't let the PC snobs get you down.

Tyrnne · Feb 14, 2007, 09:40 PM // 21:40

The upgrade to 1GB sounds like it should work for you.

Guild Wars, while having beautiful graphics, isn't a resource hog. My system has Athlon 3000/1 GB RAM/GeForce 6800 (a nice system but far from state of the art) and it runs GW super fast.

Dex · Feb 14, 2007, 09:42 PM // 21:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kuldebar Valiturus

For the money, increasing the amount of RAM offers the greatest performance gain, followed by video card in second place. CPU, is probably a distant 3rd.

Also, larger amounts of RAM tend to prolong the operational life of a PC significantly by allowing an "older" PC to run newer programs effectively.

My home built PC was built 3.5 years ago but the 2 gigs of RAM I originally chose to install has helped to keep my old clunker viable. I did choose to upgrade my video card, but only after my old one died.

Don't let the PC snobs get you down.

RAM bottlenecks are nasty, but I don't think that you can make a blanket statement about what is going to provide the most improvement to your system performance. The upgrade that's going to make the most difference is the upgrade that improves the situation wherever your performance bottleneck is. For some people this may be RAM, but for others it could be their video card or CPU. You really have to determine what your weakest link is before deciding what's going to make the biggest performance difference.

If your system has plenty of RAM for what you're doing, adding more is going to make exactly zero difference in performance. If your CPU isn't keeping up with your game or application, upgrading the video card isn't going to make much of a difference either. Having plenty of RAM does take some of the strain off of your CPU and hard drives when it comes to swapping and caching, but enough RAM is enough....adding more than your software will use won't help.

That being said, 1GB is the sweet spot for games under XP right now. 2GB is great if you're a power user and you keep a lot of apps open. More than 2GB in Windows XP is a waste of time.

Kuldebar Valiturus · Feb 14, 2007, 10:32 PM // 22:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dex

RAM bottlenecks are nasty, but I don't think that you can make a blanket statement about what is going to provide the most improvement to your system performance. The upgrade that's going to make the most difference is the upgrade that improves the situation wherever your performance bottleneck is. For some people this may be RAM, but for others it could be their video card or CPU. You really have to determine what your weakest link is before deciding what's going to make the biggest performance difference.

If your system has plenty of RAM for what you're doing, adding more is going to make exactly zero difference in performance. If your CPU isn't keeping up with your game or application, upgrading the video card isn't going to make much of a difference either. Having plenty of RAM does take some of the strain off of your CPU and hard drives when it comes to swapping and caching, but enough RAM is enough....adding more than your software will use won't help.

That being said, 1GB is the sweet spot for games under XP right now. 2GB is great if you're a power user and you keep a lot of apps open. More than 2GB in Windows XP is a waste of time.

A healthy generalization works perfectly here. Yes, 10 years from now, no amount of RAM will make a 15 year old PC viable, but in a span of 5 years the strategy holds.

Cost(s) versus performance gain(s) over time.

When discussing practicality it's usually implied that the finer points of technicalities are set aside when they don't apply to the question at hand.

Question:

I have $250 I can spend on a 3 year old PC. What is the best way to improve performance?

Answer:

Generally speaking, upgrading system memory is the most efficient way to increase the application speed.

An old PC is an old PC, bottleneck issues will exist to a greater or lesser degree depending on the age and type of gear.

Most users will not be upgrading a Motherboard, CPU, Video Card and Memory because of expense. They will need to prioritize. Triage upgrades are the norm for people who don't purchase brand new PC's every 14 months.
Obviously, it is more cost effective to build or purchase a new machine if all those items are to be replaced.

So, if costs are to be considered, upgrading system memory is an obvious choice. If the system already has a healthy amount of RAM then a video card upgrade should be considered.

Lastly, a CPU upgrade to the fastest processor that the existing MOBO can support is an option, but one with the least amount of gain.

Dex · Feb 14, 2007, 10:55 PM // 22:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kuldebar Valiturus

A healthy generalization works perfectly here. Yes, 10 years from now, no amount of RAM will make a 15 year old PC viable, but in a span of 5 years the strategy holds.

Cost(s) versus performance gain(s) over time.

When discussing practicality it's usually implied that the finer points of technicalities are set aside when they don't apply to the question at hand.

Question:

I have $250 I can spend on a 3 year old PC. What is the best way to improve performance?

Answer:

Generally speaking, upgrading system memory is the most efficient way to increase the application speed.

An old PC is an old PC, bottleneck issues will exist to a greater or lesser degree depending on the age and type of gear.

Most users will not be upgrading a Motherboard, CPU, Video Card and Memory because of expense. They will need to prioritize. Triage upgrades are the norm for people who don't purchase brand new PC's every 14 months.
Obviously, it is more cost effective to build or purchase a new machine if all those items are to be replaced.

So, if costs are to be considered, upgrading system memory is an obvious choice. If the system already has a healthy amount of RAM then a video card upgrade should be considered.

Lastly, a CPU upgrade to the fastest processor that the existing MOBO can support is an option, but one with the least amount of gain.

Yes, yes. I agree with what you're saying for the most part. If you're going to make an uninformed, shot-in-the-dark upgrade to your computer a RAM upgrade is a good bet. Identifying where you're bottleneck is and upgrading that component, however, is a lot more cost-effective. A RAM upgrade is simply not going to always improve performance. Computers just don't work that way. It's only going to increase performance if you have a RAM deficiency. If you don't, you've just wasted your money.

The same goes for the video card. If your CPU isn't up to the task of running your game, upgrading your video card isn't likely to improve the situation either. Just because you're not ready to buy a new computer doesn't mean you should just start throwing money into your old machine without any sense of whether or not it's going to improve your situation.

Here's my point: throwing money into older technology yields diminishing returns. If someone is looking for better framerates in games, then a RAM upgrade is NOT the best choice unless they're severely deficient in the RAM department. A video card upgrade is only a good idea if their CPU isn't already a major bottleneck, and a CPU upgrade is almost never a good idea, because as you said, it's typically only going to be a clockspeed upgrade which isn't likely to net a big performance increase for the money.

All I'm saying is that it's better to (have someone help you to) identify where your bottleneck is, decide how much of a performance increase an upgrade is going to net you, and then decide if it's worth dropping the money on your old technology or if you should just put the money in a jar toward your "new computer" fund. I hate seeing people wasting money on upgrades that they don't need or aren't worth the money.

In the OP's case, I agree that upgrading his RAM to 1GB is worthwhile. Beyond that, his best bet for a performance increase that's really worth his money would probably be to wait to update his entire platform (i.e., new computer), unless he could get a REALLY good deal on a video card upgrade (<$100). Even then it's not going to extend the (gaming) life of that machine for very long. Considering that he could get a decent new box that's a much better platform for ~$700 I can't see throwing $200 on his existing system. He'd be better off saving it up toward the purchase of some new tech.

eggrolls · Feb 15, 2007, 01:25 AM // 01:25

Well, memory prices are dropping now, ~$40 for 512MB is a pretty good deal imo. If you don't mind spending ~$80 for 1GB, go for it, although I don't recommend spending too much on outdated technology though.

synthjeno · Feb 15, 2007, 02:37 AM // 02:37

Reading all this makes me realise again how wonderful a game GW is. Its can be played on (snob term

) last gen pcs, has no fee and looks like a gem. Just had to say it ^^

Please tell us how ur findings are when you have ur new ram

easyg · Feb 15, 2007, 04:18 AM // 04:18

Ah, yes, increasing the amount of RAM is generally a good way to increase overall performance.

But another thing you should defintely do is optimize your OS by disabling uneeded autoruns, trashing useless startup items, repairing and defragging your registry, etc etc.

Lord Sojar · Feb 15, 2007, 09:48 AM // 09:48

Ok, time for my fare warning... so listen up OP.

Upgrading the amount of RAM is fine and dandy. Be aware though, that depending on what you are doing, more RAM isn't always better. If you are not using most of that RAM, it will slow down your PC. Why you ask? Well, here goes!

The CPU (Central Processing Unit) aka, your processor, is in charge of every single task that occurs whilst the PC is running. You CPU can decide whether it wants to perform that task itself, or if it wants to delegate it to another hardware component, i.e the video card, sound card, etc etc (so many controllers, not bothering to list more). Anyways... So, let's say that Guild Wars, Firefox (or IE), iTunes (winamp, w/e), Word, and Quicktime were all open at once. You are playing Guild Wars, and the game sends a graphics directive to the processor. Your AMD/Intel knows that it would be more efficient for the graphics card to process that data. So, it sends it to the graphics card... but wait... processors cannot send data directly. It must first be sent to the RAM, and then to the video card. Now, let's assume you had 1GB of RAM (2x512MB) That directive can now be put into stick#1 which is already a very active RAM module. The data can be retrieved by the video card quickly, because the RAM is well organized. Now, scenario#2 comes along. You have 4GBs (1GB ea module) Now, the CPU decides to send the script to stick#1 again. But WAIT! Stick #1 is much larger! So now, there will be what we call latency. What that basically means is that it will take longer for the GPU to find that data because of a "deeper" module. So, more RAM in larger size sticks = slower speed, but more power. The same story is true of increasing the RAM's speed. In order to do that, you have to raise the CAS latency, RS Latency, etc. When you raise the timings of the storage, hash, read, and write functions, you raise the latency of the RAM. So, despite the RAM moving faster, it is taking longer to perform each task.

I tried not to get too technical there, hope it made some sense.

Anyways, 512MB is an awfully small amount. I would recommend getting 2x256MB more or 1 512MB depending on how many slots you have open atm. Remember, 2x256 will be faster then 1x512 stick. Good luck!

EternalTempest · Feb 15, 2007, 02:57 PM // 14:57

Windows XP loves 1gb of ram. You will notice the system will be "snappier" all the way up to 1gb of ram. Anything past 2gb you won't really see that much improvement unless you are doing 3d modeling / autocad rendering.

Now Vista loves 2gb of ram and runs well on 1gb so if you plan up wanting to run Vista nicely (but does well at 1gb), go for a 2gb upgrade.

This is under the assumption you have decent cpu / video card. If not, these will be the components will holding you back. I running an higher end video card (7600) on an old single core cpu (amd 754pin Athlon XP 64bit 3400+). The cpu is two "generations" behind the current socket.