Battlefield 2: Corsair Performance Impact Document (1GB - 2GB)

Zardon

Corsair sent me a PDF file with some interesting information regarding the differences with Battlefield 2 from 1 gigabyte to 2 gigabytes of system memory. I have hosted this PDF for everyone to read directly. Here is a snippet.

Battlefield 2 Flight Demo
"We were very eager to run testing on Battlefield 2, as current user feedback indicated that this game performed much better with larger amounts of memory. As expected, the increase in memory array size from 1 GByte to 2 GByte had a very substantial performance impact on this game. We found that this to be the case regardless of processor platform, as well as regardless of screen resolution."


"The performance increase realized in real-world applications like Battlefield 2 and Permier elements indicate that the current generation of enthusiast systems will certainly benefit from the selection of 2 GByte memory arrays. These benefits will become greater in the next six months as new memory-intensive applications and games are brought to market."

read the full PDF here

SFOSOK

Sounds like Corsair may have a secret deal behind the lines with EA to makes more moeny off unsuspecting users.

MarginWalker

sounds like if you are having problems with game performance that adding ram is a better idea than upgrading your CPU or Video card, unless you are running some ancient hardware. Certainly cheaper to add another gig of ram than it is to buy a new video card that's for sure.

That has been my experience with the Battlefield series all of the way through. I upgraded my video card after playing BF42 for about six months and saw some improvement, but saw more of an improvement when I doubled my memory to 512mb (woohoo!) and then increased it again to 768 sdram. Upgraded my processor from a ! GHz to a 2Ghz while playing BFV and again saw some improvement, but that was outpaced again by the move from 768 to 1 GByte of DDR Ram.

Zardon

I can understand why you would think that, but in this case its actually the truth, BF2 eats memory, ive seen it first hand with load times halved when doubling memory from 512 to 1024........

CDsDontBurn

bf2 eats up alot of resources. Before consuming system memory, it first consumes gfx card memory. So having a 512Mb gfx card will be very beneficial so BF2 doesn't consume system memory, and quite possibly virtual memory if system memory has already been consumed.

swatX

i have noticed diffrence not only in BF2 load times but in the Performence also. when i had like 1GB it used to lagg whenever i crank up the res with 4xAA on high. Now with 2gb OCZ plat, whatever res and settings i put i have noticed absolutely no lag!

CDsDontBurn

what i notice when i play on rigs w/2Gb of ram vs. my 1Gb of ram, is that they don't have that bit of tiny lag that happens from time to time.

SFOSOK

I think if EA truely cared, they would have found a way to get around a need for such high memory. But it does kinda make sense, memory is the cheapest part to upgrade so that should be what games stress on. Just seems rather convienent for Corsair though or any other RAM companies.

CDsDontBurn

it's not just BF2, but all kinds of different games that run better on 2Gb of ram, but a whole lot of newer games that run better on more than 1Gb of ram

INSTG8R

It made a big difference on my system when it came to BF2 I can pretty much run whatever settings I want and overall it runs much smoother.Now as for the cost,adding another gig is relatively cheap but buying a 2 gig set is still pretty pricy.

dsdsdk

why was my post removed?

i think my point was pretty valid...

Zardon

Nothing was deleted in this thread, ive checked the logs. perhaps you are mixing this thread up with the duplicate in the news forum.

dsdsdk

ah, yes. so we doing 2 threads :-)

http://hardware.gamespot.com/Story-...&body_pagenum=5

Zardon

interesting test results from gamespot

MarginWalker

Those are interesting test results from Gamespot. They were using a 6800 Ultra for the testing while Corsair was using a 6600GT which could make a big difference in the impact of the ram. If you are running a 6600 or equivalent and a GByte of ram, it still would make financial sense to spend the money on the memory given the price difference between the two cards (about $250 according to newegg).

The Gamespot article was also posted in June while the infamous memory leak was still happening. Could that have impacted their results?


I guess it all depends on what your "weak link" in your system is.

pr0digal jenius

it also may depend on video drivers and heap settings. Games like BF2 will benefit exponentially from heap file icnreases, if your card has the balls for it