Hey all, how you guyz doin

well ive sold my crappy midranged intel C2D rig for a new High budget AMD monster, these are the specs :-

AMD athlon 64x2 6400 3.2Ghz
ASUS m3a32-mvp deluxe wifi
2GB kingston 800mhz HyperX (1x2)
Western Digital Caviar 250GB /7,200/16MB cache/sata
liteon optical drive dvd-r ,light scribe
thermaltake m9 /black/with side panel window
thermaltake w0151 /tough power/modular/500watt PSU effecincy over 85%
ATi asus 3870 512mb factory overclocked edition. (top)

Im getting BF2 , crysis and quake 4 in a few days and im expecting to play all of these games and the others i have with sets maxed out on a 19inch wide (1440by 900)

i have already orderd the above specs , but im thinking of upgrading my RAM from 2gigs to 4 ------> so my qestion is - am i gona see a noticeable diffrence , like the main reason i wanted to add 2 more gigs is that i wanted the games to open and load much faster (im very impatient

tell me wat you think about my specs, feel free to disagree although ur wrong.

thnaks

is that 2 sticks or one, if its 2 then you already have 4GB of RAM

if you add any more you will need a 64bit operating system to take advantage of any RAM over 4GB

hey,

no right now ive just orderd 2GB of kingston hyperX in a 1GB x2 = 2GIGS
but ive never used 4 gigs as i didnt really need it, so like i know that there is gona be a slight diffrence in loading and things like that but would the diffrence between 2gigs and 4 gigs be noticable or would it just be same as the extra 2 gigs wont be used coz like im gona run (xp sp3) and the games that i wana play dont really need that much of ram allthough that would help with the lag. so basically i wanna know if my pc would get a diffrence worth upgrading for.

thank you

well it wouldn't hurt to add more RAM, you would see a slight difference in speed and I agree that it will help with the lag but, as far as being worth it, if what you are doing doesn't really require that much RAM then I would say it's probably not worth it to have that much RAM.
so at this point I guess you just have to ask yourself if you want to spend that extra cash or not.

well what im gona do now is just wait and see how the pc runs everything with 2gigs and if it runs a bit slow or if theres any need for more ram , then ill get 2 more gigs and a 64bit OS, but if things run fine and smoothly i wont get more ram, but eventually maybe in the next 8 months ill get it anywayz coz with the new games that are coming out, i figured wat the hell , might as well future proof it a little bit.

thanks compdoc

I think 4Gb would help; however I don't know if I would upgrade to 64 bit even with 4Gb, true you can't use some, but x64 XP is a pain, hard to get programs for it, and other misc. issues, Vista may be better...DK.

vista sp1 32 bit will recognize all 4 gigs and with that much ram you won't see a performance drop from upgrading the os. either way to fully utilize all 4 gigs you will need to change operating systems.

widescreen runs games badly

wrong. All MS did is chage the numbers. It still handles it the same as Vista RTM did. Check the release notes.

and you dont need an amazing PC to run BF2 on max settings. I do so on a pentium 4 3ghz with 2gb ram and an x1650 pro 512mb.

you only need an ultra high end pc to run crysis(and dude believe me that game uses resources like mad)and da rig you're building aint that ultra high end...and if i were you bro i'd go for a new C2D

I concur, for crysis at good (not max) res I would suggest 4Gb minimum. As for the vid card, you *might* be able to max the settings if you double up. I like the card, but it has its limitations. As for a cheap rendering card, its great; but dont expect wonders out of a sub-$200.00US card.