Performance problems... 6 replies

Please wait...

WindowsVistaGeek19

Cum catapultae proscriptae, erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt.

50 XP

10th November 2006

0 Uploads

1,322 Posts

0 Threads

#1 11 years ago

Ok, so heres how it goes. I downloaded the Crysis demo a while ago, and my computer practically died. It was like watching a slideshow, and this was on all low settings! If I pick the default settings, Crysis thinks I should be playing on Med-High. My system: Dell Vostro 1500 1.6 ghz C2D Proc, 800 mhz FSB 1 GB DDR2 667 MHZ RAM 8600M GT 256 MB VRAM Gfx Card 120 GB HDD, 5400 RPM So here's my question. What is causing the serious performance drain? I looked on the internet and I saw people with the same gfx card and running it on med-high setting with a decent framerate. So, am I correct in assuming that the processor and the RAM are the ones slowing everything down? I plan on upgrading to 4gb's of ram and Vista 64 bit. Do you think I'll see any kind of performance increase? Or would it be more important to upgrade the processor to something like the t7500?




>Omen<

Modern Warfare

50 XP

1st January 2005

0 Uploads

7,395 Posts

0 Threads

#2 11 years ago

Did you ask them what drivers they were using? I've read that Nvidia released at least 3 beta drivers just for Crysis.




WindowsVistaGeek19

Cum catapultae proscriptae, erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt.

50 XP

10th November 2006

0 Uploads

1,322 Posts

0 Threads

#3 11 years ago

I heard the beta drivers (169 series) help performance, but when I attempt to install them with a modded INF (for mobile card support) it just says that it has failed to install because the driver is not better then the one already installed, and this is after I did a clean wipe of my gfx card driver before installing.




Bs|Archaon

I would die without GF

50 XP

15th March 2006

0 Uploads

5,910 Posts

0 Threads

#4 11 years ago

Chances are that you don't have enough RAM and it's thrasing the (slow) hard drive in a vain attempt to get more memory; particularly if it's got VIsta on it. Be careful with RAM upgrades though, many laptops can only take 2GB (i.e. 2x1GB) maximum, and even if it can take more 2GB sticks that will fit in a laptop are still quite expensive.

As for the drivers, you'll have to wait until nVidia or Dell release an updated driver. The normal nVidia drivers aren't supposed to work with their mobile chips, whether you like it or not.




WindowsVistaGeek19

Cum catapultae proscriptae, erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt.

50 XP

10th November 2006

0 Uploads

1,322 Posts

0 Threads

#5 11 years ago
As for the drivers, you'll have to wait until nVidia or Dell release an updated driver. The normal nVidia drivers aren't supposed to work with their mobile chips, whether you like it or not.

Actually, I got the newest beta driver (169.09) working a few minutes ago, and it's a god sent!

Be careful with RAM upgrades though, many laptops can only take 2GB (i.e. 2x1GB) maximum, and even if it can take more 2GB sticks that will fit in a laptop are still quite expensive.

My laptop has 2 slots that support up to 2 gb's in each. You can also get 4 gb's of SO-DIMM DDR2 667 mhz RAM off Newegg for 130 USD.

The normal nVidia drivers aren't supposed to work with their mobile chips, whether you like it or not.

They seem to work pretty fine for thousands of people on the net with nVidia mobile chips. Modded INF's FTW!!! So the question is, what's more important? Upgrading the CPU or the RAM?




Bs|Archaon

I would die without GF

50 XP

15th March 2006

0 Uploads

5,910 Posts

0 Threads

#6 11 years ago

RAM, by far.




WindowsVistaGeek19

Cum catapultae proscriptae, erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt.

50 XP

10th November 2006

0 Uploads

1,322 Posts

0 Threads

#7 11 years ago

That's good, cause it was also cheaper then the t7500, costing half as much.