bf2 system recommendations (cpu)

Its WAY more GPU for gameplay but to make the excruciating load times go faster a dual core would be much better. CPU intense games are like the Source enging games.
 
Its WAY more GPU for gameplay but to make the excruciating load times go faster a dual core would be much better. CPU intense games are like the Source enging games.
Click to expand...

I've always found it to load fairly fast. Prob. even faster then games like Doom3.
 
I cannot stress the dramatic difference in loading times with 2gigs of RAM as opposed to 1. Also, and damn i love these, my raptor drives in RAID 0 dramatically helped out. Sorry, that was tooting my horn.....but my point being myself and some friends have found that once they went from 1 to 2 gigs of RAM, the loading time was exponentially better.
 
Doom 3 loads twice as fast as BF2 does for me.
Click to expand...

Well that is strange.

I cannot stress the dramatic difference in loading times with 2gigs of RAM as opposed to 1. Also, and damn i love these, my raptor drives in RAID 0 dramatically helped out. Sorry, that was tooting my horn.....but my point being myself and some friends have found that once they went from 1 to 2 gigs of RAM, the loading time was exponentially better.
Click to expand...

Fast drives are nice. They have though proving that in most cases drives in a raid 0 config don't load modern games any faster then drives not raided. Has to do with it taking more time loading into memory etc.

I will say this though I also use a raid 0 config but with 7200rpm drives and I did not notice games like doom3 loading any faster then it did when I used a single drive. Now I hear from many that BF2 is such a slow loading game an it loads fast on my computer. Maybe it does load faster due to raid 0? I don't know.
 
randruff said:
I cannot stress the dramatic difference in loading times with 2gigs of RAM as opposed to 1. Also, and damn i love these, my raptor drives in RAID 0 dramatically helped out. Sorry, that was tooting my horn.....but my point being myself and some friends have found that once they went from 1 to 2 gigs of RAM, the loading time was exponentially better.
Click to expand...

since you brought this up, i want your opinion on something.

would you rather have a gtx or a gt with a 36gb raptor to go along with my TERRIBLE hd now?
 
since you brought this up, i want your opinion on something.

would you rather have a gtx or a gt with a 36gb raptor to go along with my TERRIBLE hd now?
Click to expand...

I know you are not asking me but I wonder... What is the HD you have now?
 
Blue said:
I know you are not asking me but I wonder... What is the HD you have now?
Click to expand...

honestly i have absolutely no idea. it's a very old 80gb hd back from the days when i had a celeron. i really want the 36gb to run windows and games off of, however at the same time i really think i want to get the gtx and get the hd later...
 
If it where me I would get the GTX and then sometime later get the HD. I however would never spend the money on a 36gb raptor (just my preference). I would rather get my moneys worth and purchase a much larger drive yet still fast 7200rpm speeds and a 16mb cache. The raptors are nice but for the cost difference I doubt the performance difference is not that great from a sata 7200rpm drive.
 
Blue said:
If it where me I would get the GTX and then sometime later get the HD. I however would never spend the money on a 36gb raptor (just my preference). I would rather get my moneys worth and purchase a much larger drive yet still fast 7200rpm speeds and a 16mb cache. The raptors are nice but for the cost difference I doubt the performance difference is not that great from a sata 7200rpm drive.
Click to expand...

alright, thanks man!
 
Blue said:
skidude said:
Its WAY more GPU for gameplay but to make the excruciating load times go faster a dual core would be much better. CPU intense games are like the Source enging games.
Click to expand...

Well that is strange.
Click to expand...

i have the same here. Doom 3 loads much faster here.
 
i have the same here. Doom 3 loads much faster here.
Click to expand...

Hmmm... Makes me wonder just what it is that affects the loading of each game and why it seems to be different for so many. I have actually timed the loading of each game and different levels. On average Doom 3 took considerable more time to load then a BF2 level on my computer. There is an old thread around here where I mention how long it took. I cannot remember nor do I want to install the games and time them again. I believe though BF2 was like 15 seconds to load a level and Doom 3 could take up to about 30sec. I'm "guessing".
 
2.4ghz intel clock speed amd that is like what 1.6ghz amd idk for sure. what is the accual diffence in speed? in example a intel processor at 3 ghz would = what ghz in amd? 3.0 divided by ? to = the speed of the amd. is there an accual equation to figure that out?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top