🚀 go-pugleaf

"Marshall" <marshall@nospam.com> wrote
> With 2GB of RAM in this box, I can't remember the last time my
> system slowed down or even burped due to something having to
> be retrieved from the harddrive and loaded into memory during
> in-game action. 1GB is the minimum I would even consider, for
> running todays games.

I got Far Cry and first I tried to run it with all the details set
to HIGH (ha, xp1700+, 512megs DDR400, R9600pro
128mb) but it was quite terrible, hard drive screaming all
the time and no talk about playability. Then I noticed that
lowering texture details to medium alone (every other detail
still set to High) completely made the swapping go away
and levels loaded up a LOT faster. I didn't notice any big
differences in texture quality between High and Medium
but game still was quite a piece of visual candy.

So for those who are praising how 1Gb is the "absolute
minimum" for Far Cry... There are details you can adjust
separately, you know, like textures that eat RAM like
hell! I don't think that anyone is going to get blind or die
watching "only" medium detail textures ;-)