Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Completely Stable XP64 BF2 Install

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    4GBGB's of RAM will slow performance. Infact Windows XP pro non 64 bit will not even show its there. It will put it off as "private" memory for things that hardly ever get used. The reason you see no stutter if you are running 4GB's of RAM is probally because 2GB's of RAM that windows does recognize as being there is stopping this. I had the stutter on my system which I thought was a pretty good system. Upgraded to 2GB's of RAM and it disappeared. My PF Usage is still 1.13GB's of RAM but you know how that goes.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Gunny Highway
      The only thing holding me back from using x64 is the availability of a good software firewall, I don't like the Tiny Firewall, waiting for a firewall like Sygate or similar.
      why you guys don't go for a hardware router with built-in firewall?
      personal software firewalls are really just a placebo, they won't stop any serious threat and they come at a cost of system resources. and you free other cpu and ram because the router handles your PPP connection.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by [GU]LIZARD
        4GBGB's of RAM will slow performance. Infact Windows XP pro non 64 bit will not even show its there. It will put it off as "private" memory for things that hardly ever get used. The reason you see no stutter if you are running 4GB's of RAM is probally because 2GB's of RAM that windows does recognize as being there is stopping this. I had the stutter on my system which I thought was a pretty good system. Upgraded to 2GB's of RAM and it disappeared. My PF Usage is still 1.13GB's of RAM but you know how that goes.
        I'm sorry its patently ignorant statements like that that cause people problems.To Quote M$ (and Gunny)
        " Large memory support

        Windows XP Professional x64 Edition supports up to 128 gigabytes (GB) of RAM and 16 terabytes of virtual memory, enabling applications to run faster when working with large data sets. Applications can preload substantially more data into virtual memory, allowing rapid access by the 64-bit processor."

        You are completely wrong. BTW I have paging OFF. I can see and acsees all 4gb and the benches are great.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by bosx2
          retarded post, an XP64 does not make the game any more stable

          Who said it did? Thanks for the flowers! but the Retarded understanding of english is the issue.

          This thread is about XP64 being stable for BF2.

          Thank you for your comment Drive through.... NEXT

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by UomoD1Merda
            why you guys don't go for a hardware router with built-in firewall?
            personal software firewalls are really just a placebo, they won't stop any serious threat and they come at a cost of system resources. and you free other cpu and ram because the router handles your PPP connection.
            Very good advice I use a Snapgear VPN Hard firewall no performance hit at all

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by spyro415
              Is there anything in your set-up that is not needed? Like all the fans and the coolers, and network adapters and such? I'd like to see how much it would cost to build a PC, but i dont know exactly what i need. (besides mobo/ram/HD/powersupply)

              Thanks for that link, BTW.

              The HD coolers are there as I use RAID 0 so knock $100 off
              The Fans are like $7.99
              The case could be plain with an ordinary PS not a modular for $50
              What was important to me was
              MOBO/CPU
              RAM
              GFX
              Everthing else is you choice and the best you can afford is my preference.

              Comment


              • #22
                Computers are investments. If you spend the right ammount of money in the right places you can spend less next time!

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by UomoD1Merda
                  why you guys don't go for a hardware router with built-in firewall?
                  personal software firewalls are really just a placebo, they won't stop any serious threat and they come at a cost of system resources. and you free other cpu and ram because the router handles your PPP connection.
                  Won't stop any serious threat?
                  It works just fine and it is really about the person settings up the PC and operating the PC that sets the level of security, not the hardware or software.

                  If the person using a software/hardware firewall allows everything in firewall or just like if the person using the hardware firewall misconfigures his router, there is a problem, but there's no problem in the software firewall in itself.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    wow, 4 gigs of ram. I haven't seen that in a while.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Gunny Highway
                      If the person using a software/hardware firewall allows everything in firewall or just like if the person using the hardware firewall misconfigures his router, there is a problem, but there's no problem in the software firewall in itself.
                      naturally but you can't say that sw windows firewalls are equal to dedicated routers w/firewall... for a thousand reasons, first of which is that a sw firewall, being an application, filters the packets after they have been routed, let alone the fact that packets are already in user space memory and available to other applications...

                      but this was not my point. i was trying to say that a router releaves your system from the overhead needed to handle routing and filtering, battlefield 2 is a huge resource hog and this may help

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by UomoD1Merda
                        naturally but you can't say that sw windows firewalls are equal to dedicated routers w/firewall... for a thousand reasons, first of which is that a sw firewall, being an application, filters the packets after they have been routed, let alone the fact that packets are already in user space memory and available to other applications...

                        but this was not my point. i was trying to say that a router releaves your system from the overhead needed to handle routing and filtering, battlefield 2 is a huge resource hog and this may help
                        Yes it releaves resources, but saying that sw fw are just a placebo is probably cutting sw fw a little too short IMO.
                        Most ppl have a hard time configuring a software firewall, some ppl don't get that when a .exe changes that it has to be re-allowed again, how would these ppl configure a router/firewall properly, most wouldn't even know what a port is. :hmm: (and propbably haven't read the manual either)

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Gunny Highway
                          how would these ppl configure a router/firewall properly, most wouldn't even know what a port is. :hmm: (and propbably haven't read the manual either)
                          mmmmhhhh... i'd say adsl routers are now very easy as you usually have an html interface to configure them... but you have to take a peek at the manual at least...you're right, but that's the same for sw firewalls isn't that?
                          i mean, concepts of packet filtering are about the same in both situations, so why not going for the real thing if you start from scratch?

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            I have BF2 in windows xp and xp64. I found more stable and smoother BF2 gameplay under XP, but I believe it to be due to faster nvidia chipset and video drivers in XP probably due to more focus being put on speed in the XP code and many more interations provided for the 32 bit code so far.

                            Frankly, neither windows operating system are masters of memory handling. I have always found however, that 1GB has a huge positive impact and 2GB much less. Anything over that has been mostly unusued unless i'm compiling video.

                            Also, you will find that actual memory throughput (i.e. speed) is likely to be reduced as you ADD memory. You would think it's the opposite, but it's ALWAYS true for windows. It can be quite significant such that a rig running say 6000mb/s with 1GB might be 4800mb/s with 2GB.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X