Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Simple question: Memory or CPU
drob
Member Posts: 1
in Everquest II
I run EQ2 on P4 2,8 GHz, 1 GB memory, GF 6600 GT and game runs quite good. But still I need better visual quality and performance. I think that GF 6600 is a good one so I ask you:
Which one will give me better visual quality and performance, better CPU or another 1GB of memory?
Thank you.
Comments
Neither is going to give you very much. In order to see much more performance you'll need a top of the line video card. 1GB of RAM is enough, and about a 3 gig CPU is enough too. You'd have to upgrade to the very top of the line of video cards before you could consider your CPU a bottleneck, and even then a 2.8 is probably not going to hurt much at all.
In other words, you already have a great system, and you'll have to spend a helluva lot more money to get even another 20% faster performance out of it. Probably at least $500. I would stick with what you got. Wait on the next gen video cards, the G70 is supposed to be some kind of amazing leap in performance again, we'll see real soon if that's true. More details will come out about it this month. R520 finally has PS 3.0 support, and hopefully that's going to be clocked pretty high giving a good boost. We should know more about that shortly after we get details on the G70 I would think.
EQ2 is designed to tax systems even 2-3 years from now, so everyone, even those with super high end machines, is disappointed that they can't turn up more stuff. It's the nature of the engine though. They didn't want it to end up looking like EQ1 did after a couple years, which was sort of lame and tacky. Frankly, I think the game will look a lot better in 2 years when people can get better hardware to run it, but we'll see.
Habit is not to be flung out the window by any man, but coaxed down the stairs one step at a time. - Mark Twain
Ok, I've spent a good amount of time setting up computers to run fairly well on EQ2, so maybe I can help.
Information from you that would help would be:
What are your current settings in EQ2 (performance, ballanced, quality, etc...), Motherboard, RAM Brand name (if any), I'm assuming you are runnning XP but if not say so, Video card drivers.
What you have to remember is that without blowing tons and tons of money, there's no way you can get EQ2 to run at full tilt and even then you would be doing some tweaking but you can get some great results by being smart. Also, EQ2 is extremely taxing on modern computers, it's Heaviest work load goes to the CPU but it graphics engine uses an extreme amount of memory paging, graphic texturing and compressing, not to mention lots and lots of LOD. Thats why you obviously get better performance from higher standard GPU's, RAM and Hard Drive.
To cap that off, one thing to keep in mind is this. As much as I hate to admit it, I saw a huge difference in raw speed performance in EQ2 when I went from 1 Gig of Platinum OCZ ram to 2 gigs, my loading times were cut in half and texture compression, dissertation and swapping between the GPU and Harddrive were significantly reduced. It really seems that going over board is the key with EQ2.
Anyways, I don't know if I offered anything of value, lol, but if provide that needed info, I can do more.
-.~
Important Information regarding Posting and You
More RAM. With another 1 GB of memory you will be able to enable more visual options.
Holy crap that's a big spider crawling up my wall....
~Mysk
OC the CPU will do almost nothing to boost performance.
If you want more performance then you need another card.If you have an SLI MB then get another 6600 and that should get you a 50% or so boost.
Alternatively,get yourself a X850xt this is the fastest G card at the moment.
solution:
get rid of that intel processor, and get an AMD64
of course, that would necessitate another motherboard....and switching to DDR2....and potentially SATA HDDs....
There are exactly zero DDR2 mobos for Athlon 64, and I have yet to see a SATA or SATA-II board come out that didn't still have two IDE channels.
Habit is not to be flung out the window by any man, but coaxed down the stairs one step at a time. - Mark Twain
really? Then I guess my wife's computer doesn't exist? I built it myself from scratch, plugged in the DDR2, hooked the SATA cables up.....hmmm...interesting....was I imagining this? Does the computer in teh ThermalTake Lanfire II case next to me not exist? A figment of my imagination??
I suggest you go look at the Asus web site.
It exists. It just isn't DDR2. And I didn't say they don't have SATA, I just said you can still use IDE. Link the mobo, and I'll gladly point out in the specifications where it says that it uses 184-pin DDR, and includes support for IDE storage/optical devices.
Link please.
Habit is not to be flung out the window by any man, but coaxed down the stairs one step at a time. - Mark Twain
Still waiting sir. I happily admit I am wrong when shown proof. I would hope you could show me some sportsmanship and post the link to the board even though it uses dual-channel instead of DDR2, and simply admit your error.
Habit is not to be flung out the window by any man, but coaxed down the stairs one step at a time. - Mark Twain
uh, gee....sorry I don't troll these boards and post every five minutes SIR.
I have not a damn thing to prove to you, and your childish demands aren't going to do a damn thing to motivate me. Go to Asus and look for yourself if you want proof, I have better things to do than waste my time proving to ignorant children what I already know to be fact.
Don't believe they exist? Fine. I could give a shit, really. But it's running next to me (Damn TT HSF sounds like a vacuum cleaner).
Even better, head to pcperspective.com and read some reviews and benchmarks on the asus boards there.
But don't go making demands of me. I'm a spiteful person and it simply motivates me to do the exact opposite of what you want.
From PCPER.com, their new tech story about AMD and DDR2.
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=147
So why are they talking about AMD supporting DDR2 in 2006 if you have a DDR2 AMD machine sitting next to you sir?
Seems to me that you're the one acting childish, just because you're wrong. No skin off my back, guy. Simply don't mislead people is all I ask, and own up when you make a mistake. Dual Channel != DDR2.
Habit is not to be flung out the window by any man, but coaxed down the stairs one step at a time. - Mark Twain
lol...ya know what?
Your post got me wondering, and I looked it up.
I must humbly say that you're right, and apologise. It's been a few months since I put that thing together, and apparently my memory isn't what it used to be....DDR400 is simply dual channel.
I wouldn't have been such a prick if I wasn't so convinced that I was right. Sorry, man. I stand corrected.