4GB of RAM is awesome....

[BORIStheBLADE]

Originally Posted by Seanohue

[doctorcue]

Yeah right... run Crysis or COD on a $1299 PC and it will stutter more than Mean D with 2/3 bottle of Zaya in him.

[webjunkie]

Actually my main complaint about my macbook is that it uses integrated video instead of a dedicated GPU. I don't play many games so it's not usually an issue, but it still bugs me from time to time.

Edit: I would also like to see the fps for the dell.

[Silound]

Originally Posted by webjunkie

Actually my main complaint about my macbook is that it uses integrated video instead of a dedicated GPU. I don't play many games so it's not usually an issue, but it still bugs me from time to time.

Edit: I would also like to see the fps for the dell.

FPS will be heavily dependant on what kind of video card is in the Dell. An amazing machine with a low end GPU will still suck for games.



I can build a computer for under $1800 that will do anything a $3000 Dell will do just as well. I've never met a game yet that my computer can't handle at full settings, and I can re-code video, browse the web, download torrents, and still play two copies of World of Warcraft without stuttering. Quad core, 4 gigs of RAM, and SLI based video are enough to do just about everything you can ask.


Always get someone who knows WTF to build you a computer if you can, it's far more cost efficient.

[Seanohue]

Originally Posted by doctorcue

Yeah right... run Crysis or COD on a $1299 PC and it will stutter more than Mean D with 2/3 bottle of Zaya in him.

Just benched, for you

1920x1200 0xAA Enthusiast settings: 25.08FPS

Not bad, for a rig under $1K.

Originally Posted by webjunkie

Actually my main complaint about my macbook is that it uses integrated video instead of a dedicated GPU. I don't play many games so it's not usually an issue, but it still bugs me from time to time.

Edit: I would also like to see the fps for the dell.

The Dell is there just to represent PC; it by no means represents my "liking" for Dell.

[webjunkie]

Originally Posted by Silound

FPS will be heavily dependant on what kind of video card is in the Dell. An amazing machine with a low end GPU will still suck for games.



I can build a computer for under $1800 that will do anything a $3000 Dell will do just as well. I've never met a game yet that my computer can't handle at full settings, and I can re-code video, browse the web, download torrents, and still play two copies of World of Warcraft without stuttering. Quad core, 4 gigs of RAM, and SLI based video are enough to do just about everything you can ask.


Always get someone who knows WTF to build you a computer if you can, it's far more cost efficient.

Of course a custom rig will always be cheaper than a pre-assembled computer. Then again, people who buy a mac or a dell aren't necessarily going to want to do that.

Of course, the mac will also be dependent on what GPU the user was willing to shell out for. On the downside, once you've got it you can't really upgrade it without buying a new one.

[SmoknTaz]

Originally Posted by Darrell

Those are PC's though, they need 7 GB just to boot.

I'll take the 8 over my 2 anyday.

[AD720]

Originally Posted by King James

I'd say 2GB is probably enough Carlos, if you just use it for day to day tasks and searching the net. 4GB maybe, but two would probably be fine. It is fairly easy to do, but knowing your track record with Macs..... lol

DO NOT buy from apple though.

crucial ram is the best deal I have found.... anyone else can chime in if a current one beats crucial's price.

I got mine from OWC. But I bought there b/c there was the best deal on the hard drive was I looking at. I think crucial might have been a couple bucks under.

[AD720]

Originally Posted by webjunkie

Actually my main complaint about my macbook is that it uses integrated video instead of a dedicated GPU. I don't play many games so it's not usually an issue, but it still bugs me from time to time.

Edit: I would also like to see the fps for the dell.

Not the new ones. SOOO glad I waited!

[Blueface]

I did a simple test based on my activity monitor that I read about and it seems that over two thirds of the circle is yellow and red and I notice it is tough to run some applications with others.
So....I am ready to upgrade.

I checked out various places like Crucial, NewEgg, etc.
Seems around $59 gets me 4 GB.
Question I have is does it make a difference what brand the memory is?

[AD720]

Originally Posted by Blueface

Question I have is does it make a difference what brand the memory is?

There are definitely differences in quality and compatibility.

Crucial is a good bet as they offer guaranteed compatibility and a life time warranty.

Getting a matched pair also has it's benefits.

[Tenor CS]

I only have 512. But I run linux

[VirtualSmitty]

Originally Posted by Blueface

I did a simple test based on my activity monitor that I read about and it seems that over two thirds of the circle is yellow and red and I notice it is tough to run some applications with others.
So....I am ready to upgrade.

I checked out various places like Crucial, NewEgg, etc.
Seems around $59 gets me 4 GB.
Question I have is does it make a difference what brand the memory is?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820231135

[SeanGAR]

Originally Posted by VirtualSmitty

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820231135

+1

I usually buy Muskin or GSkill.

[rizzle]

Man. Y'all really are some computer nerds aren't ya?

[jkim05]

Originally Posted by Silound

Not to knock anyone, but why put more than 4 Gb in a PC running Windows XP or Vista 32-bit as the primary OS?

32-bit versions of Windows can only effectively use up to 3120Mb (roughly 3 gigs) due to software limitations (claimed to allow compatibility on older machines), and can be forced into using a full 4Gb via registry changes. Otherwise, the 4th gig is essentially only used by hardware such as shared video memory tasks.


Much love to 64-bit OS's for opening that up, but even then Vista was proven to actually SLOW DOWN with more than 16 GB of RAM (inefficient memory use) until Service Pack 1 came out and ended that problem.

Just wanted to bump this post. Important thing to remember, unless you're running a 64-bit OS, there's no point in putting more than even 3 GB in a computer, the OS barely recognizes part of the 4th GB and it doesn't give any noticeable benefit.

That's why my next CPU is gonna run a 64-bit OS.

[Blueface]

Originally Posted by jkim05

Just wanted to bump this post. Important thing to remember, unless you're running a 64-bit OS, there's no point in putting more than even 3 GB in a computer, the OS barely recognizes part of the 4th GB and it doesn't give any noticeable benefit.

That's why my next CPU is gonna run a 64-bit OS.

Does that apply to my MacBook also or just PC?

[VirtualSmitty]

Originally Posted by Blueface

Does that apply to my MacBook also or just PC?

Depends Carlos. Current macbooks run 4 gigs no problem, but the pre santa rosa chipset macs will only recognize 3.3 gigs.

[Blueface]

Originally Posted by VirtualSmitty

Depends Carlos. Current macbooks run 4 gigs no problem, but the pre santa rosa chipset macs will only recognize 3.3 gigs.

Mine is a year old.
I have the 2.2 Ghz Intel core 2 Duo Processor
Has 1 GB (2 x 512MB SO-DIMMs) of DDR2 SDRAM.

[VirtualSmitty]

Originally Posted by Blueface

Mine is a year old.
I have the 2.2 Ghz Intel core 2 Duo Processor
Has 1 GB (2 x 512MB SO-DIMMs) of DDR2 SDRAM.

Your good then. Apple upgraded the macbooks summer of 07.