Sweet Mother Gaia: RAM is Good...

[amileegirl]

I just bought a new PC.  Not the top of the line (my pockets aren't that deep), but with 1G RAM and much better video card.   

Listen.  Hear that?   No?  Exactly!   I had no idea it was possible to play Sims2 without the constant whir of a hard drive being written to constantly on a machine that didn't really want to load the Sims.  Who knew that that little green light actually could turn off.     I am now able to hear planes flying overhead again.  That's not all.  Now I know what everyone is talking about when they mention "Cinematics".   I was a little frightened the first time Daniel Pleasant diddled the maid and the woohoo movie played.   

 I had no idea sims could move that fast; little spazzed ants after you turn over their cushy rock.   Three time speed is, for the first time, effective!   I am actually having to re-learn how to play without having to constantly hit the pause button to get my bearings.  More than two sims in a downtown lot at a time...incon-th-eivable!

Little buttons, and tree leaves, and carpet fuzz, steady camera panning, and smooth motion...Oh My!

Guess this means I won't be able to paint the living room while the game loads, or cook dinner while I'm waiting for buy mode to appear.  My computer -- more awesome than me.

It's a whole new world for this avid, lurking, MATY-hack user.   

[KellyQ]

Good for you, amileegirl. I remember the joy of replacing my old computer (that couldn't keep up with Sims1) with a new one to run TS2 on.
Out of curiousity, what kind of computer did you get?

[amileegirl]

I have a Dell Inspiron 9600, 17 inch monitor (a little too ginormous for my taste but I'm getting used to it)
Intel CPU T2500 @ 2.00 GHz
1.00 GB RAM
GE Force Go 7800 Video

Dell was having a huge sale (22% off) and I got it for  a song at $1600 including a 3 year service plan.   I generally don't like to pay a lot for a laptop because they can be so hard to upgrade so I'm a cheapskate.   Just like I would never buy a brand new car unless my last name was Filthyrich    It's not exactly what I wanted but that's alright.   I was seriously thinking about pulling out all the stops but the price tag that came with the best of the best made my credit card whimper.  I wanted one of the newer XPS but they didn't have any left on sale and I've had good luck with my old Inspiron considering I put it through its paces.  My only complaint?   They seemed to have cut the power cord length by 1/3 which is really irritating. 

[KellyQ]

Hmmmm...I've been wondering about Dells. My home computers have always been Hewlett Packards, which I've had fairly decent luck with but we always buy Dells for work and the newest one I have, runs TS2 like a top (yep, I get to play sometimes at work ). Of course it does have a faster processor and a better video card then the one I have at home; getting to spend the boss's money things like that happen.
I know lots of people here build their own computers but I'm not in any way, shape or form up to that. I wonder what "name brand" would be more highly recommended? I'm sure Alienware would probably be first but then what?
Sorry, just rambling here, not enough coffee yet this morning to be too coherant.

[momtogirls]

I have the 9300, and I added ram to make a gig, it still writes to the hard drive alot, but its not too bad once I set up a user profile just for sims 2.  Mine just constantly ran out of virtual memory untill I did that.

I hope I can keep adding expansions, might be worth saving my pennies for a new one, should I need to upgrade.

[Paperbladder]

With that setup, your RAM is probably still upgradable unless Dell shoved 2-512MB sticks in there instead of a single stick.  Upgrading to 1GB from pretty much anything lower makes a drastic difference.

I believe the 7800 Go is also helping the game performance too, since it's sort of a high end card.  However, you really don't need the best card to play the thing well - a Geforce 6100 performs decently with smooth edges.  A better card will render the game better though, regardless.

[starrling]

I give you three months before you want more ram than a gig.  That's what happened to me.  *sigh*

[KellyQ]

I give you three months before you want more ram than a gig.  That's what happened to me.  *sigh*

I don't know, when I upgraded from 512 to a gig, I asked the tech about going to 2 and he said there wasn't any point to it.

[starrling]

I guess I'm just greedy then (and impatient).  But that's good to know - thanks.

[KellyQ]

I don't blame you, I really wanted the extra RAM but he said that I wouldn't see any improved game performance from adding it. The only thing that would actually improve the game for me would be to get a new processor. I have a 2.0 processor and apparently can only upgrade to a 2.2 which doesn't seem worth the money to me.

[Hegelian]

I wonder what "name brand" would be more highly recommended? I'm sure Alienware would probably be first but then what?

Are we talking desktops or laptops? The Alienware laptops are made by one of the major Taiwanese OEMs that manufacture the bulk of laptops that aren't from one of the big manufacturers; you're paying extra for the caché and fancy casework (such as it is). Frankly, the boutique PCs from operations like Alienware and Falcon Northwest are wildly overpriced—unless you think seven coats of hand-rubbed automotive lacquer will make your game run better. They do, after all, use the same parts you can buy yourself from Newegg et. al. (except they get theirs at wholesale).

I've made the buying decision for several PCs over the last couple years, both desktop and laptop, and from the major vendors selling online, the best values have been from HP. This may not have always been the case and may not be in the future, but right now, in the U.S., HP is probably your best buy. Over the years Dell has become more and more overpriced, especially in light of build quality. Also, my impression (an impression only) is that with HP you're less likely than in the past, and in comparison to Dell, to get a proprietary motherboard that is difficult to  upgrade or replace. Plus, HP is a much better company than is Dell.   

As far as desktops go for around US$600, you can get a PC that will perform as well or better than anything I could build myself for several hundred dollars more, buying the parts from a retail discounter like Newegg. Laptops are a dicier proposition, if only because for the same performance as an equivalent desktop you're going to pay about US$1000 more (the upshot being that unless you have a legitimate need for the portability, a laptop is a very poor choice from a cost/benefit perspective). Also, despite recent gains in hardware technology, laptops remain substandard as gaming machines. Only the fastest, hottest, heaviest, loudest laptops can match the gaming performance of a sub-$1000 desktop PC, and you're still stuck with the LCD screen, of which no current model looks as good with games as a US$180 19-inch CRT.

The other issue with laptops is build quality. The consumer models from the majors (HP, Dell, Toshiba, etc.) are all pretty flimsy from what I've seen, especially the keyboards, which have poor feel and often flex under normal use. The business models are more robust and have better keyboards, and are often a better value because they don't come loaded with all the worthless "extras" the consumer models have and which add to the cost of those machines. You may not get the latest mobile gaming GPU, but you can get close; HP has a model very similar to the Inspiron described here, wth the T2400 dual-core CPU, 1 GB DDR2 RAM (one module), and the ATI Mobility Radeon X1300 (but without the wide-screen display and three-year service plan) for about the same price (US$1549). However, there is no doubt that with the service  plan and the large display, amileegirl's Dell was a good buy at that price.

I have the 9300, and I added ram to make a gig, it still writes to the hard drive alot, but its not too bad once I set up a user profile just for sims 2.  Mine just constantly ran out of virtual memory untill I did that.

The only way to reduce the amount of unecessary disk access is to reduce the size of the Paging File (and disable Executive Paging by editing the Registry or using a utility like Cacheman XP), otherwise the virtual-memory manager will keep swapping out data from RAM whenever physical memory use gets to around 25% (I don't know the exact figure, but it's around there). If you let Windows manage the Paging File, it will allocate as much as half your available hard-drive space to virtual memory, and won't use even half your 1 GB of RAM. Every Windows installation is a bit different, so it may be necessary to experiment a bit, but in my experience (and this is in line with other recommendations I've seen) with 1 GB or more of RAM, a Paging File with an initial size of 100 MB and a maximum size of 800 MB should be plenty. With this setting, I get virtually no disc-swapping (no pun intended); as I write this, I have 890 MB of free RAM and my Paging File use is 8 MB.

I don't know, when I upgraded from 512 to a gig, I asked the tech about going to 2 and he said there wasn't any point to it.

Some applications will use all the RAM you can give them. Photoshop is one; TS2 is another. With 1.5 GB of RAM in my PC and my Paging File set as suggested above, my RAM usage when running TS2 (with no other apps running and my anti-virus turned off) peaks at around 1200 MB (1.2 GB).

[Paperbladder]

I just got a laptop from HP, and they upgraded the model to the dv5000t from the dv4000.  With this, they upgraded the processor to a dual-core(still trying to actually figure out if they ACTUALLY did this), upgraded the wireless card, graphics card, and changed the HDD type to Serial ATA instead of a Parallel ATA.  I got a letter about it in the mail a day after the thing got here.  I'll definately buy from them again, but directly this time since TechDepot was no help.

As for the screen, it's hard to find anything to fit the resolution.  TS2 does, but Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri doesn't.  I have to make my own wallpapers from 1600x1200 images.  I'm also looking for a distribution of Linux that will support the thing also, because Ubuntu doesn't.

[jsalemi]

Hmmmm...I've been wondering about Dells....
I know lots of people here build their own computers but I'm not in any way, shape or form up to that. I wonder what "name brand" would be more highly recommended? I'm sure Alienware would probably be first but then what?

I've had Dells for the last 4-5 years now, both desktops and laptops (currently a Dimension 8400 and Inspirion 6000, respectively), and never had a problem with them.  Reasonable prices when you get them on one of their special offers, decent options, and very easy to upgrade as you go along.  So that's my plug for Dell.

Oh, and did you know Dell owns Alienware now?  They're keeping them as a separate line, but I noticed in the latest Dell flyer I got in the mail that they have a couple of new higher-end XPS systems that look and sound suspiciously like Alienware systems...

[Hegelian]

I just got a laptop from HP, and they upgraded the model to the dv5000t from the dv4000.  With this, they upgraded the processor to a dual-core(still trying to actually figure out if they ACTUALLY did this), upgraded the wireless card, graphics card, and changed the HDD type to Serial ATA instead of a Parallel ATA.

So, you're saying they made this upgrade without charging you more? Cool! HP is a class operation (as corporations go), even if they did sell off their scientifc-instruments division a few years back.

There are a couple easy ways to check your cores. If you open the Performance tab in Task Manager, you should see two graphs for CPU use. If you have two cores and HyperThreading enabled, there should be four graphs. Also, the two (or four) cores should show up as separate entries in the Processor category in Device Manager. Or you can download the very useful CPU-Z:  http://www.cpuid.com/cpuz.php

[ZiggyDoodle]

The only way to reduce the amount of unecessary disk access is to reduce the size of the Paging File

I'm confused, Hegelian (actually, my normal state).  I run Windows XP and checked its instructions re the paging file:

To change the size of the virtual memory paging file
You must be logged on as an administrator or a member of the Administrators group in order to complete this procedure. If your computer is connected to a network, network policy settings might also prevent you from completing this procedure.

Open System in Control Panel.
On the Advanced tab, under Performance, click Settings.
On the Advanced tab, under Virtual memory, click Change.
Under Drive [Volume Label], click the drive that contains the paging file you want to change.
Under Paging file size for selected drive, click Custom size, and type a new paging file size in megabytes in the Initial size (MB) or Maximum size (MB) box, and then click Set.
If you decrease the size of either the initial or maximum page file settings, you must restart your computer to see the effects of those changes. Increases typically do not require a restart.

 Notes

To open System, click Start, click Control Panel, and then double-click System.
To have Windows choose the best paging file size, click System managed size.
For best performance, do not set the initial size to less than the minimum recommended size under Total paging file size for all drives. The recommended size is equivalent to 1.5 times the amount of RAM on your system. Usually, you should leave the paging file at its recommended size, although you might increase its size if you routinely use programs that require a lot of memory.
To delete a paging file, set both initial size and maximum size to zero, or click No paging file. Microsoft strongly recommends that you do not disable or delete the paging file.

So do I want to increase it or decrease it?  Am running a Dell Dimension 8400/Pentium 4, 3.20GHz, with one gig RAM (which I plan to update to 2 gig)

[kellinjar]

So do I want to increase it or decrease it?  Am running a Dell Dimension 8400/Pentium 4, 3.20GHz, with one gig RAM (which I plan to update to 2 gig)

Virtual memory doesn't really improve performance all that much, as far as increasing it goes. TS2 generally peaks around 1.5 GB so if you have 1 GB of ram and 1.5 GB of virtual RAM, increasing it won't do anything. Adding another GB of ram however will reduce page file usage and improve your performance. I also have the 8400 with the x800GT and its served me quite well for gaming. Probably next year I'll have the cash to actually build from scratch on my own, but I've been very happy with the 8400. My page file usage dropped drastically, and typically sits around 250 mb.  With 2 GB you could likely set it to 0, and even though programs generally won't need to access it, some will complain if its at 0 though.

[Hegelian]

The only way to reduce the amount of unecessary disk access is to reduce the size of the Paging File

I'm confused, Hegelian (actually, my normal state).  I run Windows XP and checked its instructions re the paging file . . .

So do I want to increase it or decrease it?  Am running a Dell Dimension 8400/Pentium 4, 3.20GHz, with one gig RAM (which I plan to update to 2 gig).

What Microsoft tells you isn't always how it really works.   

As I've pointed out elsewhere, The virtual memory manager and the RAM cache manager work at cross-purposes; and Microsoft's programmers took a sledgehammer approach to the Paging File, allocating by default about half your available hard-drive space to it. Of course, WinXP was designed back in 2000, and folks at home did not have 100-GB hard drives in their PCs, nor did they have 1 GB of RAM. The bottom line is, if you have more than 512 MB RAM (or even just that) and a large hard drive, left to its own devices WinXP will allocate way too much drive space to the Paging File, resulting in excessive disk access and an inefficient use of available RAM. So despite what Microsoft says, reducing the size of the Paging File will improve performance by keeping more data in RAM and reducing or even eliminating unnecessary disk access (especially if you disable Executive Paging).

Just how much total system memory TS2 will use isn't exactly clear. Here are two screenshots showing the actual RAM and Paging File use with the game running and one of my most complex lots loaded (massive quantities of custom content, seven playable sims, and the gardener). The first shows the game (on one monitor) and the desktop with CachemanXP open, showing current system status (on another monitor)—this is to show that the system status is with the game running. The second shot shows the system status, as reported by Cacheman:





Several things are apparent from this.  1) TS2 will use more than 1 GB RAM if it is available; 2) the game loads the CPU to 100% pretty much all the time, except when data is being loaded from the hard drive; 3) with the Paging File set to some reasonable size and Executive Paging disabled, the game uses very little virtual memory; 4) even if you set a maxmimum size for the Paging File that is lower than what Windows recommends, it will grow the file beyond the size you specify if it needs to (I have mine set to a maximum of 850 MB—50 MB on the C: drive and 800 MB on the E: drive). When the game began to load, disk space allocated to the Paging File was around 350 MB with 8 MB actually used. As the game loaded, the space allocated to the Paging File increased, but the amount of the Paging File being used actually decreased from 8 MB to 7 MB. Needless to say, I get virtually no disk activity while playing the game except when it is loading game data for the first time. (custom content, catalog icons, etc.).

[Diala]

I just bought a new PC.  Not the top of the line (my pockets aren't that deep), but with 1G RAM and much better video card.   

Listen.  Hear that?   No?  Exactly!   I had no idea it was possible to play Sims2 without the constant whir of a hard drive being written to constantly on a machine that didn't really want to load the Sims.  Who knew that that little green light actually could turn off.     I am now able to hear planes flying overhead again.  That's not all.  Now I know what everyone is talking about when they mention "Cinematics".   I was a little frightened the first time Daniel Pleasant diddled the maid and the woohoo movie played.

It IS nice, isn't it? Not too long ago, I upgraded my computer's video card from Geforce 4 to Gefore 5500 (I wanted to get a better video card than that, but I wasn't paying for it at the time), and I also upgraded the RAM from 256 to 1.26 GB (I added a stick of 1 GB RAM in there, and I have room for one more stick). Let me tell you, the improvement was amazing. I thought I had a decent computer until I upgraded it.

Yes, Cinematics. I didn't know they existed until I got the better video card. Ha ha, isn't that sad?

[sanmonroe]

I can't wait until the 64 bit systems become common and the next windows version is out (and patched a few times).

I needs me 8 gigs of ram.

[ZiggyDoodle]

Great reading!  That info is well worth printing and stashing in my things to remember file.  Will change my settings to 20/50 and see how it goes tonight. 

Appreciate the enlightenment.

[Hegelian]

I can't wait until the 64 bit systems become common and the next windows version is out (and patched a few times).

I needs me 8 gigs of ram.

The Vista public beta has been available for a couple days, in both 32- and 64-bit versions. It won't be available indefinitely though, so if you want it you'd better download it now. You need to register in order to get a product key; it's a 3.2 GB ISO file you burn to a DVD. Registration also puts you on the notification list for Release Candidate 1 when it becomes available. The beta (Beta 2) expires 01 June 2007.

Of course, I don't have a PC I can load it onto at this point in time (need to get me a lottery ticket!).

Will change my settings to 20/50 and see how it goes tonight.

Keep in mind that my settings are for a PC with two physical hard drives (or three, in this case). If you have just one physical drive, you may find that 20/50 is too small (then again, you may not). If you run into problems, you might try adusting this to 20/500 or 20/800.

If you have more than one physical drive, you can have the main paging file on a drive other than the boot drive (usually C: unless you are dual-booting OSes), but you need to leave a small paging file on the boot drive, hence the 20/50 setting (mine is actually 10/50, FWIW).

There is a performance advantage to having the paging file on a different physical drive from the boot drive (but no advantage to having it on a separate logical drive if you have only one actual hard drive). Perhaps most significantly, using a drive defragmenter like Norton Speed Disk (as opposed to the under-featured defrag that comes with WinXP), allows you to move the paging file to the beginning of the disk, as a non-fragmented file, which speeds up access. Also, and perhaps mostly if you have SCSI drives or your IDE drives are on separate channels, with the paging file on a separate disk, Windows can access system files and the paging file at the same time. SCSI was designed to support multiple devices, and SATA drives each have their own channel (no master and slave like parallel IDE drives), so you can, at least in theory, have simultaneous access of more than one drive. The IDE/ATA interface allows only one drive to be accessed at a time, even though you can have two drives on each channel (each motherboard connector is a channel, with one primary and one secondary device).



You can also gain some HDD performance if your drives currently use the FAT32 file system by converting to NTFS—as long as you don't want to boot to DOS or run Win98 from the same logical drive. You can do this with a command-line command. Note that this is a one-way process! For instructions, go here:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/307881/en-us?FR=1&PA=1&SD=HSCH

[kellinjar]

Just how much total system memory TS2 will use isn't exactly clear

Its actually pretty clear.
Have a look at your peak.
restart your computer and examine your peak.
Play the game for an hour.
Examine your peak.
You should aim above that number for your amount of ram to avoid page file usage.
You've got a peak of 1.3 GB, I've seen most people peak between 1.3 and 1.6 GB, so I always recommend 2 GB if someone wants to get the most ram that will help.
I never thought to compare this after adding each EP to see if it significantly impacted the peak.

[Ambular]

I just bought a new PC.  Not the top of the line (my pockets aren't that deep), but with 1G RAM and much better video card.   

...

Guess this means I won't be able to paint the living room while the game loads, or cook dinner while I'm waiting for buy mode to appear.  My computer -- more awesome than me.

It's a whole new world for this avid, lurking, MATY-hack user.   :D

Heh.  I know what you mean...I just upgraded my subpar GeForce 5200 to a 6800 Ultra, and man oh man, what a difference.  XD

I don't know, when I upgraded from 512 to a gig, I asked the tech about going to 2 and he said there wasn't any point to it.

They all say that, and they're all on crack.  I think they tend to assume anybody who doesn't have a tech degree is too dumb to realize you can multitask on a computer or something.  :p  I do pretty well with a gig and a half of RAM, but I've also got 256 MB of video memory on my card now.

[ZiggyDoodle]

f you have just one physical drive, you may find that 20/50 is too small (then again, you may not). If you run into problems, you might try adusting this to 20/500 or 20/800.

I do have just one physical drive.  I used 100/800 at first but when I closed the game there was an XP warning sign stating that my virtual memory was too low and Windows was going to change it.  I went back in and increased the setting.  As you said, this is going to take a bit of experimentation.

[sanmonroe]

I can't wait until the 64 bit systems become common and the next windows version is out (and patched a few times).

I needs me 8 gigs of ram.

The Vista public beta has been available for a couple days, in both 32- and 64-bit versions. It won't be available indefinitely though, so if you want it you'd better download it now. You need to register in order to get a product key; it's a 3.2 GB ISO file you burn to a DVD. Registration also puts you on the notification list for Release Candidate 1 when it becomes available. The beta (Beta 2) expires 01 June 2007.

Of course, I don't have a PC I can load it onto at this point in time (need to get me a lottery ticket!).

Will change my settings to 20/50 and see how it goes tonight.

I would rather wait until it is full release and patched a few times. SO many problems with games on it still.