Memory for Doom 3
From all the comments that have been posted, there seems to be the unquestioned assumption that more memory will improve Doom 3 performance. The reality is that we have not been able to confirm objectively that assumption. The built-in benchmark for Doom 3, accessed from the console, was used to test common memory amounts on an Intel 875 platform, an Athlon 64 Socket 939 platform, and an A64 Socket 754 platform.
It was surprising that there were no real performance differences between 512MB, 1GB, and 2GB of memory in our benchmarks with the built-in Demo1. The only memory amount that shows lower performance is 256MB on the Socket 754 platform.
Perhaps the built-in Demo1 does not stress the system enough to really reveal performance differences in total memory. We did check memory usage in the console and found Doom 3 used memory up to about 1.5GB if it was available, so we are puzzled why smaller memory amounts did not impact measured performance.
We are looking for more sophisticated methods to test the impact of total memory on Doom 3 performance. For now, the best we can say is that 512MB or higher seems to be effective. If you have 256MB, upgrade to 512MB. We can also say from a purely subjective point that a Doom 3 system seems more responsive with at least 1GB of memory. Loading Doom and switching back to the screen is much faster with 1GB than 512MB.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
52 Comments
View All Comments
Wesley Fink - Sunday, August 8, 2004 - link
#29 and #30 -For $750 (after you added the value motherboard you forgot) you have:
1) A Video Card that is half as fast as the $998 Value System when playing Doom 3
2) A CPU that is 40% slower than the $998 Value system in Doom 3
3) A 17" Monitor instead of a 19" Monitor
4) NO CD or DVD at all
So for $250 savings (25%) you end up with a system that is a cumulative 60% slower than our Doom 3 Value System when playing Doom - with a smaller monitor and NO CD/DVD. That doesn't sound like value to me.
Did you not see the CPU charts for Doom 3 that show the Athlon XP at the bottom of perfromance charts? http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?... I also wish it were not so, but wishing will not change the performance we actually measured.
pliers - Sunday, August 8, 2004 - link
#29 link130 you also forgot to include a dvd or cdrw combo.link130 - Sunday, August 8, 2004 - link
oops, add $55 for a shuttle nforce2 ultra mboardlink130 - Sunday, August 8, 2004 - link
I agree with Avalon on the value pc. $1000 is ridiculous. For $1000 I can almost build a socket 939 3500+ system.This is My VALUE PC that can play doom3 at 10x7 high quality no problems
Total cost including shipping:
$690 - As built below
If I choose a 6800 instead of the 9800pro then just add $90 to run the game extremely well. Which is still FAR below the cost of $1000.
Bought mostly from newegg:
AMD AXP-M 2400+ @ 2.4ghz 1.7v - $77
Thermalright ALX-800 Heatsink + 80mm Fan - $21
Samsung 512mb 400mhz @ 2-3-3-7 - $83
WD 80gb 7200rpm 8mb IDE - $60
Powercolor 9800 Pro - $200
Thermaltake 420w PSU - $41
Logitech 640z 5.1 Speakers - $55
Aluminum ATX Case with 2 Fans - $35
XDS 17in X-Flat Monitor -$115
as you see, all my parts are good quality yet extremely cheap
link130 - Sunday, August 8, 2004 - link
Avalon - Sunday, August 8, 2004 - link
My mistake with the raptor drive. No need to point it out three times. I know perfectly well how to read, it's just a matter of remembering an older article.#26 - I can play it VERY well. Don't tell me I have to go buy a new $1000 system to play the game well, when my cheaper old rig does that already.
SKiller - Sunday, August 8, 2004 - link
#20 The guide is for people who want their system to play D3 *well*. When you fork over the money for a whole new system just so you can play 1 game (and maybe future games with eqivalent or greater requirements), you don't want it to play just OK. You want that system to play it *well*. Anything less would be a big waste of money. If you can't sepnd $1K on such a system, then you can't play it *well*, you *may* be able to play it OK, but then this guide is not for you.Embryo - Sunday, August 8, 2004 - link
LOL!pliers - Sunday, August 8, 2004 - link
#21 avalon if you had read the article correctly about raptor hds it was about using raptor hds in a raid-0 configuration on a desktop system not about using a single raptor hd on a desktop system. You must be reading this article wrong also [quote] We also used a 74GB 10,000RPM SATA hard drive for the fastest boot and Doom 3 load you can get short of high-end SCSI, plus a 250GB Hitachi with quiet fluid bearings to store the games, downloads, images, and add-ons that a hard-core gamer will accumulate. [/quote] Yes there is a mention of a raptor hd and another hd but just having two hard drives in a system doesnt qualify them as a raid-0 setup.ps: And if the main goal was just to be able to play doom3 im sure a review of a system with a 1.5ghz cpu, 384MB ram, a gefore 3, and a ata66 hd from 3-4 years ago could be mentioned but who wants to go out and buy that as your new "value" doom3 system?
Wesley Fink - Sunday, August 8, 2004 - link
The 6800 was selected for the Value System because it costs $278 vs. $200 for a 9800 PRO. That $78 buys you DOUBLE the performance at 1024x768 medium res in high quality - 80.1FPS vs.42.6. The 6800 also provides PLAYABLE frame rates at High res - something the 9800 PRO can not do.The two lowest priced cards to generate PLAYABLE (above 30FPS) rates at the low 640x480 resolution were the 9600XT and the 5700 Ultra. These cards are about 50% to 65% the price at $140 to $180. While they are playable at low res, moving to 1024x768 they drop to a barely playable 25.5 FPS - about 1/4 the performance of the 6800. If you need to save $100 to $140 on the value system price you could choose a 9600XT or 5700 Ultra and still play Doom 3 at 640x480 or 800x600 at playable rates.
In the end this is a Doom 3 Buyers Guide. We could try to sugar-coat the facts but would you really want us to? For a more traditional Value System you need to look at our Entry Level Buyers Guide.