Extra ram yes or no?

I am currentyly running on a Amd athlon 4000+ Single core, 2GB ram and a radion x1650 512mb on Windows xp. It's running better then my new laptop with a dual core processor. I'm thinking of upgrading to 3GB ram. Will I notice any difference? I have now 4.5 star.

I am currentyly running on a Amd athlon 4000+ Single core, 2GB ram and a radion x1650 512mb on Windows xp. It's running better then my new laptop with a dual core processor. I'm thinking of upgrading to 3GB ram. Will I notice any difference? I have now 4.5 star.

Might process a bit quicker mate, but not a major increase in speed. Not 100% though but thats my guess.

Yes, but your processor could do with being better. Single core is a bit old school. Your dual-core laptop should be much quicker unless that has a crap dual-core or low ram.

Max it out at 4gb. That's as much as XP can handle anyway and Ram is always great to have in quantity. Also i don't understand why aren;t you on win7.

yes mate you should upgrade your ram and you should notice a difference.

Max it out at 4gb. That's as much as XP can handle anyway and Ram is always great to have in quantity. Also i don't understand why aren;t you on win7.

Maybe because it looks like an older computer? XP and 7 are about the same for FM performance anyway.

OP, go for 4GB. 3.5GB is the most that XP will recognise but it's better to have too much that too little right?

Nah it's not too old for 7. And as you said the speed will be the same, just why not have something that works better

Nah it's not too old for 7. And as you said the speed will be the same, just why not have something that works better

Cost? Im running Vista right now and I can say that XP is much much better than that. I suppose if XP runs fine then why change it?

Vista is the ubershit of operating systems. 7 equals XP on performance and is built for newer machines while XP works with newer machines after several service packs. So you better move to 7 to get most of your PC even if it's not brand new. After all XP was released when? 2001 ?

Vista is the ubershit of operating systems. 7 equals XP on performance and is built for newer machines while XP works with newer machines after several service packs. So you better move to 7 to get most of your PC even if it's not brand new. After all XP was released when? 2001 ?

But on the OP's setup there is no need to, even if he put in 4gb ram.

I didn't say it needs it but it would benefit

I am currentyly running on a Amd athlon 4000+ Single core, 2GB ram and a radion x1650 512mb on Windows xp. It's running better then my new laptop with a dual core processor. I'm thinking of upgrading to 3GB ram. Will I notice any difference? I have now 4.5 star.

3Gig max on 32bit (assuming you have 32bit XP) plus being a socket 939, it would be better to drop the divider and OC than bother with droping in an extra stick. Not worth upgrading mate, even if you got a stick from ebay or whatever. Budget for a home build or save up for a new base unit, imho

Thank you for replying. I know Its not a good economic decision. And i'm already going to buy a new system when FM 2011 gets out. Currently playing 7 leagues from top to bottom. And I would like to add the Brazilian and Argentinian too with 10.3 on the same speed. Thats the only reason that I would buy this ram. I don't want a massive increase of my general speed. Fm is the only game I play, and unfortunately i'm ably to load only 2 savegames every year. And besides of working and studying it's my only hobby.

Fm players aren't logical anyway. I defended my dots several years in many arguments against my wife.

I have 4gb and it runs the game faster, but if anyone has 2gb always upgrade as games coming out these days will need more than 2gb to run smoothly and play, my advice is always upgrade.

FM does use threading, well there is an option for it, but tbh you would expect better results. I have a AMD3800 single core (3GB RAM, XP32), dual 2300mhz Intel (laptop, 3GB, XP32) and a quad core (athlon2600, 4GB Vista64), the single is of course slowest but not THAT slow that it's unplayable. The dual and quad are about same processing speed, only the loading times differ (and it's 3GB and 4GB). The difference with the single core is still big but that's becasue that pc is like more than 3 years old, the rest isn't a year old.

Have you a Socket 939 or a Socket AM2? I did not this (should have realy) and have you got the following?

http://products.amd.com/en-us/DesktopCPUDetail.aspx?id=82&f1=&f2=&f3=&f4=&f5=&f6=&f7=&f8=&f9=&f10=&f11=&f12=&f13=

I was under the impression that unless you are running a 64bit OS you can only utilise 3GB of RAM at any one time - hence the push to make FM 64bit compatible.

I have dualcore laptop on 1.6 ghz and 2 g ram.So if i change my xp to 7 will FM run better?

Yeah that is right. Running 64bit Vista with X2 2Gig matched pairs. On 32bit, it only sees 2.5. Comes down to the OS too I believe as to what is seen and whats not. As long as the Direct X has been optomised higher up, it should do.