The Thread of Computers (aka will my computer run Skyrim)

[dwellufool]

I already corrected that mistake a while ago. Refresh often >.>

No thanks. And 4gb is borderline, though not as much as something like 3 (or 2 :ohdear:) , better just get 8. A lot of people have other programs running in the background, some more than others.

 

That's doubling the standard for something you might not even use, a person should really look into it before doing so. I mean, if you run something demanding and you know it, that makes sense, but otherwise I don't see why a gamer would go any higher.

 

I guess just look into it. Will you use it?

 

Most people who game on a PC do a lot more than just game. If your running a 64bit OS it will be using 1.7 - 2.1 gb all by itself and if you only have 4gb of Ram your going to be stretching it to the max while running only a game and nothing else. Like it or not 8gb is the new standard min and it's bad advice to tell anyone to go with less. Especially considering you can get 8gb of high performance ddr3 1600 for 85-100$. Saving 40-50$ to minimize your system's RAM is utterly pointless now with the new standards of hardware. You should keep up with the evolution of PC hardware and stop giving the same advice you gave three years ago.

 

I'll continue to do so because I continue to accept the idea I'm not unique in the ways I use my computer.

 

Both of my computers have 4gb, it's all I need. I generally have SCII, a web browser, and winamp up all at the same time. Sometimes I'll even do some light video editing, but I've never gone "Wish I had 4 more gigs."

 

Which brings me back to saying, will the person use it? It doesn't take long to find out, and that's $40-$50 is nice in a down economy for savings toward another part of the computer, or something more essential.

[jordanLoL]

Most people who game on a PC do a lot more than just game. If your running a 64bit OS it will be using 1.7 - 2.1 gb all by itself and if you only have 4gb of Ram your going to be stretching it to the max while running only a game and nothing else. Like it or not 8gb is the new standard min and it's bad advice to tell anyone to go with less. Especially considering you can get 8gb of high performance ddr3 1600 for 85-100$. Saving 40-50$ to minimize your system's RAM is utterly pointless now with the new standards of hardware. You should keep up with the evolution of PC hardware and stop giving the same advice you gave three years ago.

 

I have Windows 7 Ultimate 64 and I never see my ram usage climb higher than 1.2 GB idling. That's just Windows services running and not much else. It usually sits around 800 MB to 1 GB. Unless you have a lot of useless junk running in the background that isn't related to Windows I have no idea how it could get to 2.1 GB unless the cache gets loaded up big time.

[LeopoldCrank]

I have an ATI Radeon HD 4300/4500 Series Video Card, but the "Can You Run It?" site says that it is worse than the ATI Radeon HD 3850 series card. Can someone explain?

[elderiii]

I have an ATI Radeon HD 4300/4500 Series Video Card, but the "Can You Run It?" site says that it is worse than the ATI Radeon HD 3850 series card. Can someone explain?

 

Because you need to compare the second and third digit, not the first one. The 3800 series, even although it's like 3 generations old. was at least a gaming grade video card(s). The 4300 or 4500 series are NOT meant for gaming, they are for HTPC useage and accelerated 3D processing in non gaming applications. They do not belong in a gamer's PC.

[worm82075]

I'll continue to do so because I continue to accept the idea I'm not unique in the ways I use my computer.

 

Both of my computers have 4gb, it's all I need. I generally have SCII, a web browser, and winamp up all at the same time. Sometimes I'll even do some light video editing, but I've never gone "Wish I had 4 more gigs."

 

Which brings me back to saying, will the person use it? It doesn't take long to find out, and that's $40-$50 is nice in a down economy for savings toward another part of the computer, or something more essential.

You'd be surprised how much memory each of your programs will use when they are not being limited by the OS and when they are not limited they run much, much faster. Advising people to go with the absolute min RAM is basically saying "you don't need to run at maximum speed, so what if it takes 3x longer for your programs to complete tasks, you saved 40$".

 

We'll just have to agree to disagree. I advise people to build for the future and 4gb of RAM is not going to be viable for much longer.

 

I have Windows 7 Ultimate 64 and I never see my ram usage climb higher than 1.2 GB idling. That's just Windows services running and not much else. It usually sits around 800 MB to 1 GB. Unless you have a lot of useless junk running in the background that isn't related to Windows I have no idea how it could get to 2.1 GB unless the cache gets loaded up big time.

Granted I have a pretty hefty number of programs running at all times...

AVG

Windows Defender

Display Fusion Pro(Multi-monitor desktop manager)

Skype

Saitek programmable game pad profiler

Fraps

Power ISO virtual drive manager

AMD Vision Engine Control Center

All CPU Meter gadget

Open Hardware Monitior + gadget

 

...but i consider all of them essential and if i had only 4gb of ram I would not be able to run all of the following at top speed in addition to those

Windows Media Player

Firefox(min of 5 tabs)

Photoshop 64bit

NifScope(2-6 windows)

CS or Geck (LAA)

Oblivion or Fallout 3

[jedimembrain]

I'll continue to do so because I continue to accept the idea I'm not unique in the ways I use my computer.

 

Both of my computers have 4gb, it's all I need. I generally have SCII, a web browser, and winamp up all at the same time. Sometimes I'll even do some light video editing, but I've never gone "Wish I had 4 more gigs."

 

Which brings me back to saying, will the person use it? It doesn't take long to find out, and that's $40-$50 is nice in a down economy for savings toward another part of the computer, or something more essential.

You'd be surprised how much memory each of your programs will use when they are not being limited by the OS and when they are not limited they run much, much faster. Advising people to go with the absolute min RAM is basically saying "you don't need to run at maximum speed, so what if it takes 3x longer for your programs to complete tasks, you saved 40$".

 

We'll just have to agree to disagree. I advise people to build for the future and 4gb of RAM is not going to be viable for much longer.

 

I have Windows 7 Ultimate 64 and I never see my ram usage climb higher than 1.2 GB idling. That's just Windows services running and not much else. It usually sits around 800 MB to 1 GB. Unless you have a lot of useless junk running in the background that isn't related to Windows I have no idea how it could get to 2.1 GB unless the cache gets loaded up big time.

Granted I have a pretty hefty number of programs running at all times...

AVG

Windows Defender

Display Fusion Pro(Multi-monitor desktop manager)

Skype

Saitek programmable game pad profiler

Fraps

Power ISO virtual drive manager

AMD Vision Engine Control Center

All CPU Meter gadget

Open Hardware Monitior + gadget

 

...but i consider all of them essential and if i had only 4gb of ram I would not be able to run all of the following at top speed in addition to those

Windows Media Player

Firefox(min of 5 tabs)

Photoshop 64bit

NifScope(2-6 windows)

CS or Geck (LAA)

Oblivion or Fallout 3

 

Ram is only imprtant for texture really .. 4gig is more than enough .. its a lot more about CPU/GPU balance .. I have 4 gigs and easily max out oblivion and fallout 3 .. as well as crysis and crysis 2 .. Duo core 2.6GHz CPU "a little wimpy but it does the job" and a GTX550 ti "Its a good upper mid range card and easily handles all games out today at a 1080i res and maxed out graphics" .. But even a GT220 could handle Skyrim .. its a console game .. your PC only needs to be as powerful as a console so long as your running a 720i res or lower "the max a console can handle* you just might not get all the bells and whisles~

[worm82075]

Ram is only imprtant for texture really .. 4gig is more than enough .. its a lot more about CPU/GPU balance .. I have 4 gigs and easily max out oblivion and fallout 3 .. as well as crysis and crysis 2 .. Duo core 2.6GHz CPU "a little wimpy but it does the job" and a GTX550 ti "Its a good upper mid range card and easily handles all games out today at a 1080i res and maxed out graphics" .. But even a GT220 could handle Skyrim .. its a console game .. your PC only needs to be as powerful as a console so long as your running a 720i res or lower "the max a console can handle* you just might not get all the bells and whisles~

Your talking about running just a game. If that's ALL your going to run then sure you can get away with 4gb.

 

As i explained above, just because you can run lots of programs with only 4gb of RAM doesn't mean they are going to run as fast as they could if they had more memory available. People who do more than just game and are wanting to get the most out of their PC need 8gb min on a 64bit OS...period.

[jedimembrain]

Ram is only imprtant for texture really .. 4gig is more than enough .. its a lot more about CPU/GPU balance .. I have 4 gigs and easily max out oblivion and fallout 3 .. as well as crysis and crysis 2 .. Duo core 2.6GHz CPU "a little wimpy but it does the job" and a GTX550 ti "Its a good upper mid range card and easily handles all games out today at a 1080i res and maxed out graphics" .. But even a GT220 could handle Skyrim .. its a console game .. your PC only needs to be as powerful as a console so long as your running a 720i res or lower "the max a console can handle* you just might not get all the bells and whisles~

Your talking about running just a game. If that's ALL your going to run then sure you can get away with 4gb.

 

As i explained above, just because you can run lots of programs with only 4gb of RAM doesn't mean they are going to run as fast as they could if they had more memory available. People who do more than just game and are wanting to get the most out of their PC need 8gb min on a 64bit OS...period.

 

Crap.. you have all that junk running at the same time? o__o lols .. sorry .. yea .. I missunderstood what you were saying .. but yea .. seriously? xD . do you just run fraps to see how badly all that crap is hurting your performance or do you record too?

[worm82075]

do you just run fraps to see how badly all that crap is hurting your performance or do you record too?

I use Fraps to take PNG screens of any render window i have open as well as recording videos. Fraps has the smallest footprint of all those programs in the first list of only 2mb when idling. AVG has largest at 200mb and Skype has 80mb. granted if i had less RAM all of those programs would be limited to much less but they would be a lot slower too. The less memory you have the slower your PC will run.

[conerin136]

I run Oblivion, FO3 and NV on my computer but theyre all more or less the same tech. I'm worried about Skyrim though its a new engine entirely and ive been dissapointed with a few games recently my laptop is fairly modern in most respects but it only has a single core so Im kinda worried it wont run on my laptop, I have a single core 2.4ghz a 128 meg ati radeon 4200 HD and 2 gigs of ram, Is it possible to upgrade these on a laptop?