22 réponses à ce sujet

[ETermin]

 I randomly decieded to see how much ram Mass Effect 2 was using and it only uses 800 mb of RAM. Is there som way to enable it to use mote then that?

[PnXMarcin1PL]

Game or App uses as much ram as is avaiable and needs. You can't do this man. lol

[DragonIroh001]

There is this app here:
www.techpowerup.com/forums/showthread.php

It allows programs access to more system memory. Though I imagine RTS games will get the most benefit out of this.
Just be sure to read the instructions carefully.

[ETermin]

thanks dragon will test it and let you know how it goes. hopefully minimize the loading times more. Also PnX developers sometimes limit how much an application can use. Such as skyrim was restricts to 2gb of RAM and the 4gb RAM patch was recently released.

[Fredvdp]

ETermin wrote...

thanks dragon will test it and let you know how it goes. hopefully minimize the loading times more. Also PnX developers sometimes limit how much an application can use. Such as skyrim was restricts to 2gb of RAM and the 4gb RAM patch was recently released.

Load times are bugging you? Might I ask, did you apply both of the load time fixes? The first is that dual-core processors cause minute long load times (which is getting rare now that everyone's upgrading) and the second is the giant oversight on BioWare's part to force us to watch the entire loading animation before going to the level. The latter can be fixed by replacing all loading cutscenes by generic 1 second videos.

There's a URL on this page that leads to a zip file with movie files. These are all the same video with the filenames of all loading videos. Dragging these to the right folder gives you shorter videos: www.gamefaqs.com/boards/944906-mass-effect-2/53442477

Edit: Getting a 404 on that one but it worked a minute ago.

Modifié par Fredvdp, 25 décembre 2011 - 10:21 .

[ETermin]

it is just the Normandy load times the take 45 sec compared to the levels which take 25 sec. and it seems it might be the videos as you said. I figured it cut off once it was loaded. also i do get some texture popping was hoping it would help with that as well. mainly the texture popping that gets me.

Modifié par ETermin, 25 décembre 2011 - 04:54 .

[Fredvdp]

ETermin wrote...

it is just the Normandy load times the take 45 sec compared to the levels which take 25 sec. and it seems it might be the videos as you said. I figured it cut off once it was loaded. also i do get some texture popping was hoping it would help with that as well. mainly the texture popping that gets me.

45 seconds on the Normandy is too long. The Normandy is actually the only location that doesn't force you to watch the entire thing. Do you have a dual core processor? Usually this problem can be solved by first booting the game, then ctrl+alt+del, go to processes, find the Mass Effect 2 process, right click, set affinity, make sure only one core is selected, accept, then put all cores on again.

Or you can download a program that does all this automatically. Boot the game through MassAffinity. If this fixes anything, please let us know.

I don't believe I've heard of texture popping in ME2. What graphics hardware do you have?

Modifié par Fredvdp, 25 décembre 2011 - 09:45 .

[ETermin]

I am using the geforce 210,
http://www.newegg.co...N82E16814133320

It only started having textures pop once i upgraded my cpu. from p4 2.8 Ghz to pentium dual core 3.0 Ghz. everything was an increase for the processor FSB, core speed, etc.

Edit: Tested the MassAffinity and loading times were decresed to about 25 seconds and texture poppning is gone as far as I can tell.

Modifié par ETermin, 26 décembre 2011 - 12:25 .

[Fredvdp]

In case you weren't sure, the Geforce 210 is below the system requirements, just like the Pentium dual core. Some issues are to be expected.

[Gorath Alpha]

ETermin wrote...

 I randomly decieded to see how much ram Mass Effect 2 was using and it only uses 800 mb of RAM. Is there som way to enable it to use mote then that?

With that purely awful excuse for a video graphics card, you'll be lucky to see 128 MB actually doing any work.  It's too slow, has too narrow of a memory system bandwidth, etc etc (Most current onboard chipset video chips are better than the 210 / 310 cards are). 

http://www.gpureview...1=621&card2=354

[ETermin]

i have been told it is not a good gpu but I am limited to a single slot and have not seen any decent cards for a reasonable price. on the to do list for upgrades. This one has done better then expected and half wonder if the chip is from another set. crysis test ran 10 fps maxed,

[Gorath Alpha]

For at least four years, the architectures of AMD (ATI that was) and nVIDIA diverged on complexity and expense, with the Radeons both less complicated and less costly.  Geforce GPUs kept on growing larger, and consuming more current, as the AMD designs were shrinking and becoming more efficient.  A Medium performance Radeon, such as an HD 6670, is well able to be cooled by a "thin" fan shroud assembly that fills up only the single slot it fits into, not taking any room from an adjacent slot.  

The 7n00 cards coming next month may be different in some regards.  The top of the line, HD 7970, reportedly will consume plenty of current, and has the potential to run hot, although it will have a noisy cooler on it that will keep it running at moderate thermal readings.  The lid is still tight about what the rest of the HD 7n00 cards will be like, and AMD's new hold on the fastest single core GPU pinnacle may not last long.  nVIDIA has a new generation of its own somewhere in the wings offstage.  

www.dailytech.com/AMD+Regains+SingleGPU+Performance+Crown+From+NVIDIA+For+Now/article23578.htm

[Towik]

Fredvdp wrote...

In case you weren't sure, the Geforce 210 is below the system requirements, just like the Pentium dual core. Some issues are to be expected.

I have 8800 GTS 640 and i have no problems , but you say a 210 that has more ROPs than mine is under recommended ?

Radeons work fine until you add simple 2xMSAA and so on , i need a new gpu soon and leaving my old as a physx , but i still don't know if my 1TB is not dying or maybe i should go with MB,CPU and RAM instead of one GPU

Modifié par Towik, 26 décembre 2011 - 04:28 .

[Gorath Alpha]

Towik wrote...

Fredvdp wrote...

In case you weren't sure, the Geforce 210 is below the system requirements, just like the Pentium dual core. Some issues are to be expected.

I have 8800 GTS 640 and i have no problems , but you say a 210 that has more ROPs than mine is under recommended ?

Of course.  The 210 is pure CRAP, as easily seen here next to one of the 8800 GTS cards.  (Was the 640 also called a "112"?)

www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php  (210 vs. late model "512" version)

www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php  (early 8800 GTS vs the 112 Shader version 8800 GTS)

Modifié par Gorath Alpha, 26 décembre 2011 - 06:03 .

[Towik]

Of course it's crap in these days , nothing to argue , please stop posting the same web all the time , seeing it once is enough .
Still my gpu is old , but i am not a loser that will invest over 3 in my region money for a new gpu every year.. cause that's just stupid in my eyes , just saying .
I am thinking about 570 or i5 on 1155 and some 1600 2x4 on cl8

But being honest here i think than i would have a huge bottleneck or what so ever.

on the note
is there any software that will run a game or anything else by uploading it first to ram and than playing from the ram?

[Gorath Alpha]

All of the 8800s, other than the "GS" managed to hold their own very well up through about a year ago, when some slipped from the top of the Medium performance ranks they'd all fallen into about 18 months or so ago, on down to only the middle zone of Medium.

A 210 was designed from the beginning to be cheap trash, available to OEMs in its 310/410 varieties at a cost per thousand that equates to maybe $14 - $15 each. Looking at that same site that allows side by side lineups of important specs, the 210 appears to mostly have been a re-stating of the same specs, but with a new architecture, that had resulted in the awful 8400 GS that was released five years ago, along with your far healthier old card.

This is not GPU Review:  

www.videocardbenchmark.net/video_lookup.php

Modifié par Gorath Alpha, 26 décembre 2011 - 05:24 .

[Towik]

I only know my is 4 years old G80 rev A3

I am not a hardcore gamer or anything like that . So maybe that's why i just don't need a big shark in my PC

Lately i have been thinking about changing my gpu and using 8800 as physx card

i think this is up to date , dunno if you can see it.
http://www.overclock.../view/id/956914

[Gorath Alpha]

OK, that's the original, first one, so its design was already a year old before you bought it. It's still hanging in, but, yes, it's not way up with the 112 and the 512 pair of GTS cards, still close to the High End border zone with Medium.

And I won't include any link to the comparison of yours with either of those. I'm still bewildered that you would ever think that nasty 210 was BETTER than any kind of 8800, even the very slowest of them, the GS.

Wondering who lied to you about the facts.

[Gorath Alpha]

Gorath Alpha wrote...

. . .  A Medium performance Radeon, such as an HD 6670, is well able to be cooled by a "thin" fan shroud assembly that fills up only the single slot it fits into, not taking any room from an adjacent slot.  

I would appreciate it if you knew of any single slot gpu's for an upgrade since you know so much about it.I am restricted to a single slot gpu since anymore it will be in place of my FSB, my PCI-E slot is located right next to it. Also i have a strict budget of $100. Have a 550W power supply. Also need to make sure it does not bottle neck the CPU. it is the pentium dual core E5700.

Actually, your CPU isn't exactly powerful enough to outrun a Medium Performance Radeon HD 6670.  It's been purposely damaged on its way through the Intel factory to reduce its selling price.  Before the cache RAM was mostly stripped out, it would have been a Core2Duo, but with only a fraction of the total remaining, its performance isn't in the same class as the full-power, fully equipped C2Ds and AMD Phenoms.  

www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx

XFX HD 6670.  Good brand, good warranty, and even a free game, for $75 after rebate. 

www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx

HIS HD 6670.  Another good brand, good warranty, also $75 after rebate, but no free game.  HIS' special area is excellent cooling systems without lots of noise. 

www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx

Sapphire HD 6670.  Only $65 after rebate, no free game, standard warranties.

How's that? 

G.

Modifié par Gorath Alpha, 27 décembre 2011 - 01:04 .

[Towik]

I wish i could buz at newegg , i live in Poland , the prices are way higher than you guys pay :[

anyway i have Q6600 GO @3000 at evga 780i p10 with 8gb ram OCZ 750 4-4-4-12 and evga 8800 GTS 640 and i was thinking about buying a 570 GTX [012-P3-1570-ER] and move my current GPU as physx
I have OCZ700MXSP-EU changed from a burned Chiftec 560W
I am not sure if that would work good .

i used a calculator to calculate if i would have enough power , but i dunno if this calculator uses the 570 with 3gb [dual gpu] or the single one , cause i want the other one.
._.

Modifié par Towik, 27 décembre 2011 - 01:20 .

[Gorath Alpha]

Towik wrote...

I wish i could buz at newegg , i live in Poland , the prices are way higher than you guys pay :[

anyway i have Q6600 GO @3000 at evga 780i p10 with 8gb ram OCZ 750 4-4-4-12 and evga 8800 GTS 640 and i was thinking about buying a 570 GTX [012-P3-1570-ER] and move my current GPU as physx
I have OCZ700MXSP-EU changed from a burned Chiftec 560W
I am not sure if that would work good .

i used a calculator to calculate if i would have enough power , but i dunno if this calculator uses the 570 with 3gb [dual gpu] or the single one , cause i want the other one.
._.

You have to take into account how many of us are buying graphics cards.  We've been addicted to computer games for ten or fifteen years longer, and some of us can be fanatical about replacing graphics cards relatively often (not me).  The total quantities being shipped result in greatly reduced handling costs per unit, and we get some of that back in prices that encourage the enthusiasts to buy cards more often than they really need to. 

You know that you are lucky that the cheap power supply didn't break loose in its death throes with a massive surge to take out more parts of the PC?  Those Chieftecs are among the worst of low quality PSUs. 

Personally, I like the GTX 560 Ti as being closer to the kind of value you can get from a Radeon than the 570 is.  How do the amperage numbers work on the 12 V circuits for the OCZ and the 570?  Those count more than watts.

[Towik]

I gave you the exact thing i have [PSU]
I dint play with PC [building and so on] for more than 2,5 years , i barely stripped my PC naked and redone it
As for the old PSU i had , hmmm let me find the box
CFT-560-A12S
now i have
OCZ700MXSP-EU [ i can always exchange to something else , until 1 month after buying , of course to a different OCZ]
http://www.newegg.co...&Tpk=OCZ700MXSP

the shop i bought says

intensity at a voltage of +12V1 25 A
intensity at a voltage of +12V2 25 A
intensity at a voltage of -12V 0.3 A

checked the GPUs
GeForce with CUDA GTX 570 EVGA 1280MB 2xDVI&mHDMI = 012-P3-1570-ER - 1469 PLN
GeForce with CUDA GTX 570 HD EVGA 1280MB 2xDVI&mHDMI = 012-P3-1571-KR - 1329 PLN
GeForce with CUDA GTX 560Ti EVGA 1GB DVI&HDMI = 01G-P3-1561-KR - 909 PLN

About the PSU
i know , i am lucky i think my CPU got kinda in the head , even the mobo maybe a little
i think i was working with a dying PSU for like more than 6 months
Not to mention
my cpu at this moment is 3000 at 1.32V [FSB 1,4] , speed 1500/4=x*8=3000
it got 80°C when did 1 hour Intel burn test at high , usualy i remember it should be 65 max when , before the psu was dying .

Not gonna bore you with the text , thanks for your time Gorath.

Edit:
i don't see the
012-P3-1571 at newegg , lOl . O_O

edit2:
i see it at evga.com
012-P3-1571-AR , clicking at KR goes to AR

Modifié par Towik, 27 décembre 2011 - 03:26 .

[Thandal N'Lyman]

ETermin wrote...

i have been told it is not a good gpu but I am limited to a single slot and have not seen any decent cards for a reasonable price. on the to do list for upgrades. This one has done better then expected and half wonder if the chip is from another set. crysis test ran 10 fps maxed,

I have a similar "single-slot / single power lead" restriction.  I've been pretty happy with my nVidia GT240 / 1GB.  It can only manage DX-10.1 (not 11) and there were some hiccoughs with BioWare's update for another game, but ME and ME2 run very smoothly!