Perhaps I don't understand...

[CrimsonChaos]

So I've been reading some of the posts regarding what to upgrade first -- CPU vs. RAM. Most of the time, I see RAM being the suggested path. So I did some testing on my system...

My system is a Conroe E6600 with 2 GB of RAM.

I launched several games (Ok, so they're some old titles like: Nascar Racing 2003, Rome Total War, Rise of Nations). But in each of them, only about 500MB of RAM was used (total of about 800MB when combined with system resources) , while 50% to 60% of BOTH processors was being used consistently by the games, with spikes even higher than that.

So am I not understanding how RAM works? If I increase my RAM from 2GB to 4GB, how would that improve system performance, especially since (even when gaming) the system isn't even using 1/2 of the RAM?

And even with 2 cores, the games were using over half of both of the processors' capacity. So it would seem to me that you'd want to increase the processor first -- especially with more complicated AI models being released today than the titles I tested.

Can someone enlighten me on this?

 

[JustaGeek]

You are perfectly fine with 2GB.

I use 3GB, because... I was curious LOL...

And wondering if it would help the"jittery" performance in Quake 4 w/ Ultra Quality settings enabled. I was getting the memory 99% full with 2GB.

It did. Adding the extra gig helped tremendously.

If you are not running out of memory now, you don't need more RAM.

 

[Noema]

Games today are not CPU limited, for the most part.

A given program will use as much CPU time it is allowed to, and the fact that a game is using over both of your processor's capacity is meaningless and it doesn't mean you need to update your processor. For heaven's sake! You have a C2D E6600...you won't see much of an improvement in games, and it's not as if getting an E6850 would make much of a difference in games...specially because most games (and specially older games like the ones you were trying) aren't optimized for multi-threaded multicore processors. You don't messure your need to upgrade a CPU just by looking at how much it's being used...in fact, you WANT your CPU usage to reach 100%; otherwise something else is holding you back, be it I/O, or the video card.

If I'm ripping a DVD to my computer, I want my CPU to be at full load, dedicating every single pipeline to it! But that will not happen because both the optical drive I'm ripping it from and the HDD I'm ripping it to are both mechanical and thus create a bottleneck, because the processor has to wait for them. And you don't want your processor idle, just wating there, being wasted.


And as for RAM...well, more RAM is always nice, but if you are using XP, you don't really need more than 2GB for the moment. In most games, anything above that would likely go unused (for the time being, at least). EDIT: And like JustAGeek said, 3GB of RAM is all you need if you are still using XP.

For games, the big bottleneck is the Video Card and that's what you'd be looking at upgrading. If you want to improve your gaming performance, get a faster video card. A X2 4200+ with 2GB of DDR RAM and a 8800Ultra will beat the living snot out of a C2Q with 8GB of DDR3 RAM and a 8600GT in games.

Bottom line: Your CPU is fine! There's absolutely no need to upgrade it for now if games are your primary concern. And 2GB is enough for now too.

Want better performance? Get a better video card.

Upgrades should be determined and dictated by performance. If your computer is running fine, then it doesn't need an upgrade. And if a C2D can't handle those old games you mentioned, it's because you are probably running an ancient video card, or something is seriously wrong with your rig.

 

[sun818]

This is from the Dell site:

The amount of RAM you have determines how many programs can be executed at one time and how much data can be readily available to a program. It also determines how quickly your applications perform and how many applications you can easily toggle between at one time. Simply put, the more RAM you have, the more programs you can run smoothly and simultaneously.

RAM is good if you are multi-tasking. If you're just playing one game, a faster processor would improve performance. But the cost to upgrade the processor may not give you that much more bang for the buck.

 

[Noema]

Originally posted by: sun818


RAM is good if you are multi-tasking. If you're just playing one game, a faster processor would improve performance.

Yes, but only if your Video Card is not holding you back.

And he has a C2D E6600! It's not as if he were running a Sempron

With games, the bottleneck is the Video Card (except in games like Supreme Commander, but those are very rare). A faster CPU in his will barely increase performance, perhaps only some frames in the maximum fps, but not the minimum...he'd get 160 instead of 150fps...and that's only if he's not GPU bound.

In games: Video Card > CPU