Print

[PolarBearWY]

Where do you see a % of free memory in your OS?  WinXP for me states that I have a GB of memory, and 375,900 is free.

[cesium]

I think that MS knows what they are doing adding 256MB of ram, and leaving it at that. If they needed more RAM, they would add it. I dont think that MS would release a console that couldnt run all new games. They would expect that. I dont see why we are all fighting over something we cant really change, that is at the hands of MS.
Just my 2 cents.
-Cesium

[browndanielusn]

QUOTE (PolarBearWY @ Jun 27 2004, 01:34 PM)

Windows reports that it is using nearly all your memory (no matter how much you have) before it even starts running a program.  The OS of a PC uses about 85% of your memory with a 512MB system. Video resolution has nothing to do with system memory.  I don't know where you took your PC 101 class, but go retake it.

QUOTE

The OS of a PC uses about 85% of your memory with a 512MB system.

Try checking your system processes next time, twenty bucks says you have other programs eating up your memory that are not windows executables.  (i.e. adware, spyware).  There is no way in hell...I repeat no way in hell...that the os is using 435 MB of ram.  Did I say there was no way in hell...

QUOTE

Video resolution has nothing to do with system memory.  I don't know where you took your PC 101 class, but go retake it.

Well I've taken a little more than a pc 101 class (MCSE certified), and video resolution is affected by ram (i.e. speed from ram which in turn allows your video to use it's memory for pixel shading...)

You obviously have no idea what you are talking about.

P.S. Just in case I forgot, There is no way in hell the OS uses 435 MB of ram alone...

[xFusioNx]

QUOTE (browndanielusn @ Jun 28 2004, 09:42 AM)

Try checking your system processes next time, twenty bucks says you have other programs eating up your memory that are not windows executables.  (i.e. adware, spyware).  There is no way in hell...I repeat no way in hell...that the os is using 435 MB of ram.  Did I say there was no way in hell... Well I've taken a little more than a pc 101 class (MCSE certified), and video resolution is affected by ram (i.e. speed from ram which in turn allows your video to use it's memory for pixel shading...) You obviously have no idea what you are talking about. P.S. Just in case I forgot, There is no way in hell the OS uses 435 MB of ram alone...

Ok, I had to chime in on this one.

I'm MCP and a MS Pre Installation Specialist, and have TAKEN the MCSE test and I'm currently working on my MCSA.

Where does having an MCSE have ANYTHING to do with your video resolution being affected by your ram? It doesn't.

Now the theory on why it would affect it is true the ram speeding up process for various other video tasks, but... that has nothing to do with being an MCSE.

My 2 cents.

[desertboy]

QUOTE (Foe-hammer @ Jun 23 2004, 10:00 PM)

That sounds like MS is feeding a line of BS.  And what the heck is the "night rider led display panel"?  Personally i would take extra ram over size and looks for the xbox 2 anyday.

I think he was having a laugh, I doubt Oraganic was being seroius.


256 meg of ram will be more than enough ram, the one thing programmer have always taught us is they can do miracles if pushed.

It would be slightly unfair to use doom3 as an example anyway because it's not out yet and the xbox is getting middle aged now.

Cutting edge pc games on 3 year old hardware of course there might be issues but you can't future proof any hardware it's been proven time and time again. Even the shuttle's got to be replaced so what hope does a console have?

[browndanielusn]

QUOTE (xFusioNx @ Jun 28 2004, 06:07 PM)

Where does having an MCSE have ANYTHING to do with your video resolution being affected by your ram? It doesn't. Now the theory on why it would affect it is true the ram speeding up process for various other video tasks, but... that has nothing to do with being an MCSE.

just explaining that i have a little more background than a PC 101 class.  so in this aspect, it does has something to do about my argument

[PolarBearWY]

QUOTE (xFusioNx @ Jun 28 2004, 06:07 PM)

Ok, I had to chime in on this one. I'm MCP and a MS Pre Installation Specialist, and have TAKEN the MCSE test and I'm currently working on my MCSA. Where does having an MCSE have ANYTHING to do with your video resolution being affected by your ram? It doesn't. Now the theory on why it would affect it is true the ram speeding up process for various other video tasks, but... that has nothing to do with being an MCSE. My 2 cents.

Well, I wasn't going to comment on it but since you already did... hahaha... and thanks.  Any bonehead dumb_uck can pass the MCSE.  Any bonehead dumb_uck can get a college degree.  Having one, the other, or both mean nothing and do nothing for you in your attempt to make us think you are the authority.  I'll admit that I don't know everything but I have never seen my computer tell me I can't bump up my resolution because I didn't have enough memory.  I have, however, had my computer tell me I can't bump up my resolution because my monitor or video card won't support it.  Now, did you mean FPS?  Frames per second and resolution are NOT the same thing.  Resolution is defined as "the fineness of detail that can be distinguished in an image, as on a video display terminal."  Whether we are talking about a static image or a motion picture (lots of static images, viewed one after another), resolution is NOT dependent on system memory.  Have you ever seen your computer say it is low on resources?  Yes.  Have you ever seen it ask you to switch to 640x480x16 so that you can save on memory?  Hell no.

[browndanielusn]

QUOTE (PolarBearWY @ Jun 28 2004, 10:48 PM)

Any bonehead dumb_uck can pass the MCSE.  Any bonehead dumb_uck can get a college degree.  Having one, the other, or both mean nothing and do nothing for you in your attempt to make us think you are the authority.  I'll admit that I don't know everything

I'm not saying I'm an authority or a guru, there's always something more to learn.  But just because system memory does not "directly" effect fps (i stand corrected), it is a factor that contributes to the overall process.  BTW, those who ususally say anyone can pass this or that...usually couldn't pass it themselves.  But to make myself clear, I know everyone has the ability (if they try hard enough) to do anything they want, but someone people don't have the initiative to get off their ass and do it.

I'm done, really don't won't to get into a flame war.

[crossdawg]

QUOTE

By the way chances are friendtech will offer a xbox 2 with more ram then the normal xbox 2 when it comes out.

For some reason I just don't see this happening   .

It's only done for x-boxes to increase the homebrew possibilities, and some in-game benefit (claim).

These games will still be written for whatever specifications the xenon is built to, therefore adding more RAM will not help, and if it did, chances are there will be no way to add more RAM anyways.  If they're trying to cut costs and bulk, then why the hell would they leave an open RAM port lying there?  It'd be much more efficient to elimnate the second DIMM, or split the RAM through the two DIMMs.

[xFusioNx]

QUOTE (PolarBearWY @ Jun 28 2004, 04:48 PM)

Well, I wasn't going to comment on it but since you already did... hahaha... and thanks.  Any bonehead dumb_uck can pass the MCSE.  Any bonehead dumb_uck can get a college degree.  Having one, the other, or both mean nothing and do nothing for you in your attempt to make us think you are the authority.  I'll admit that I don't know everything but I have never seen my computer tell me I can't bump up my resolution because I didn't have enough memory.  I have, however, had my computer tell me I can't bump up my resolution because my monitor or video card won't support it.  Now, did you mean FPS?  Frames per second and resolution are NOT the same thing.  Resolution is defined as "the fineness of detail that can be distinguished in an image, as on a video display terminal."  Whether we are talking about a static image or a motion picture (lots of static images, viewed one after another), resolution is NOT dependent on system memory.  Have you ever seen your computer say it is low on resources?  Yes.  Have you ever seen it ask you to switch to 640x480x16 so that you can save on memory?  Hell no.

You're right dude you really are. About the resolution question anyway.

Not just anybody can pass an MCSE. I missed 6 questions and I'm scheduled for a retest.  

And I wasn't trying to sound like an "authority." Not at all. I brought it up because I know for a fact that being an MCSE has nothing to do with what he was talking about. That's all.

I only said that it affects the speeding up of various video related tasks. Not the direct viewing resolution displayed by your monitor.

Sorry to offend you there buddy. Or was that not intended to be offensive to me? Sorry if I'm misunderstanding.....

[sega27]

Take a look at PS2. Its 4mb of Video RAM can produce graphics that my 64mb Geforce2 cant dream of.

[Foe-hammer]

QUOTE (PolarBearWY @ Jun 28 2004, 10:48 PM)

I'll admit that I don't know everything but I have never seen my computer tell me I can't bump up my resolution because I didn't have enough memory.  I have, however, had my computer tell me I can't bump up my resolution because my monitor or video card won't support it.  Now, did you mean FPS?  Frames per second and resolution are NOT the same thing.  Resolution is defined as "the fineness of detail that can be distinguished in an image, as on a video display terminal."  Whether we are talking about a static image or a motion picture (lots of static images, viewed one after another), resolution is NOT dependent on system memory.  Have you ever seen your computer say it is low on resources?  Yes.  Have you ever seen it ask you to switch to 640x480x16 so that you can save on memory?  Hell no.

Good hell.  We are talking about video games here, not static pictures.  When referring to a game running at a certain res, you take into account fps.  Granted they are two different things, but resolution and fps go hand in hand when talking about video games, and if there is not enough ram or processing speed a game will run like shit at a high res.  Your heart and brain are also not the same thing, but one is not going to work without the other.  And just because your computer doesn't tell you something is wrong, doesn't mean a problem does not exist.  That's like relying on the dumby lights on your car dash to alert you that something is wrong.

[browndanielusn]

QUOTE (Foe-hammer @ Jun 29 2004, 06:55 AM)

Good hell.  We are talking about video games here, not static pictures.  When referring to a game running at a certain res, you take into account fps.  Granted they are two different things, but resolution and fps go hand in hand when talking about video games, and if there is not enough ram or processing speed a game will run like shit at a high res.  Your heart and brain are also not the same thing, but one is not going to work without the other.  And just because your computer doesn't tell you something is wrong, doesn't mean a problem does not exist.  That's like relying on the dumby lights on your car dash to alert you that something is wrong.

Finally someone understands where I was going with this...

You explained it better...

[STEVEHABS]

lol hmm your boss helping u make more money I thought things like that were a myth in this world.


and oh yeah enuff of the off topic please back to xbox

[ostov]

ehh, what about 256+128? or does that take to much space? Ram does not take much place so why not? I hope I did not say anything stupid now...