So you upgraded your Video Card, CPU or OS and the game does not seem any faster?

[Cassea]

In an attempt the answer these questions once and for all I hope they can sticky this <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY<img mce_tsrc=" />" /><span style="color: #0000ff;">Question:</span>I added a new faster Video Card and the game does not seem any faster?<span style="color: #ff0000;">Answer:</span><i>EQ2 is very CPU dependant and your game will only run as fast as the slowest part. In many cases things that normally run on your Video Card in other games, runs on your CPU in EQ2 such as shadows. This means that adding a new video card does not always speed up EQ2. If you upgrade your Video Card and you see little or no improvement in speed then your CPU is probably holding back the game.</i><span style="color: #0000ff;">Question:</span>I upgraded from a single (1x) core CPU to a dual (2x) or quad (4x) core and the game does not seem any faster or even slower?<span style="color: #ff0000;">Answer:</span><i>EQ2 was programed when single core CPU's were the norm and as such EQ2 (and many many other games to be fair) do not use more than one core. Multi-core CPU's help a little in that the game will run on one core and the operating system (OS) and other background programs will use the other core or cores but many times multi-core CPU's run a bit slower than their single core counterparts.Example:A 3000mhz (1x) core computer runs a total speed of 3000mhz (3000 x 1)A 2500mhz (4x) core computer runs a total speed of 10,000mhz (2500 x 4)But because EQ2 (and many other games) only use the one core it matters little if you have 1 core or 1000 cores because EQ2 only "sees" the basic speed and in this case...EQ2 sees your old CPU speed to be 3000mhz and your new CPU speed to me 2500mhz so you just "downgraded" your speed for EQ2.</i><span style="color: #0000ff;">Question:</span>My new machine ran Windows XP and my new machine runs Vista and the game seems a bit slower?<span style="color: #ff0000;">Answer:</span><i>Vista runs games a bit slower than XP does. It uses more memory and has more overhead. Many games, including EQ2, were programed before Vista was released and as such these games are not "optimized" for the new Operating System. This means Vista will run EQ2 at about a 15% performance drop over XP. Vista runs EQ2 very well and this small drop in speed is normal just as Windows XP ran some Windows 98 programs a bit slower when the switch to that OS occured.</i><b><span style="color: #0000ff;">The double whammy effect!</span></b>Some people are upgrading from singel core computers to multi-core computers and at the same time moving from XP to Vista. This "double whammy" hits you because you are not only seeing a small drop in speed due to Vista but also (in many cases) moving from from a faster single core CPU to a slower multi-core.<span style="color: #ff0000;"><b>So can I do anything to help?</b></span>Well you can add more memory if you have less than 2gig. Memory is cheap (at least DDR2) and adding more memory to 2gig for XP and Vista 32-bit and 4gig for Vista 64 can help.Adding a new video card can help but understand that not all video cards are created equal and the numbers they use can be confusing. Some people think that an 8600, for example, is faster than a 7800/7900 because the number is larger. This is not the case. If you want to see "relative speed" of Video Cards see this chart:<a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/graphics-cards/3dmark06-v1-0-2-hdr-sm3-0-score,538.html" target="_blank">http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/...-score,538.html</a>I hope this info helps. If you have any questions please ask them here. We have many excellent SOE reps and also some great players who are good with hardware. While we can't turn slower hardwar into faster hardware we can often help tweak things or provide suggestions.-JBCorrection: My example regarding CPU clock speed only works within the same CPU "family" AMD 1x, 2x, 3x and 4x CPU's are all basically the same but with more cores so this works well with AMD. With intel the P4 and Dual core are basically the same and the Core Two Duo 2x and 4x are the same and about 75% faster than the P4's so in the case of Intel, moving from a P4 to a Core Two Duo will yield a large improvement.

[DJPre]

I am attempting to fully understand this CPU usage as it pertains to EQ2.If one were to purchased a dual core cpu could EQ2 be assigned to run solely onone core and all other programs on the other?If so, then wouldn't the analogy of stating that a new [multi-core] CPU at 2500mHzbe a downgrade be false? Considering that ALL programs including EQ2 would bevying for process speed from a single 3000mHz core which would lower the overallspeed assigned to each process running.EXAMPLE:process A uses 20mHzprocess B uses 100mHzprocess C uses 3mHzprocess D uses 27mHzprocess E uses 232mHzprocess F uses 365mHzprocess G uses 253mHzThese processes add up to 1000mHz being used before EQ2 is launched. So, in essenceyou have only 2000mHz left in a single core 3000mHz for EQ2 whereas if you can assigna core to EQ2 using a multi-core @ 2500mHz you would have 2500mHz for EQ2.?.?.?.?.?

[Cassea]

Yes you are correct in that EQ2 will run on a core all to itself but unless you are running some pretty intensive background programs the "station keeping" so to speak of keeping your OS on a separate core is not very CPU intensive.My example is only one case but it does strike the point that you need to be very aware of your "supposed" upgrade when you make a move on a new system. We all like to brag that we have a new quad core but in far too many occasions people focus on the "quad" and not on the MHZ which can be even more important. This is also made worse by the fact that the computer companies know that "quad" sells and that MHZ does not. People see the word quad and often forget that a faster Dual core is better for games. It's hard enough to find things for two core to keep busy with... 4 cores? Usually those other two cores go unused. Someday as new games/programs are written from the ground up to be able to better use all those cores we'll see the real benefit but right now the "smart" people select faster dual cores over slower quads.I'm not knocking people who buy quad core CPU's but in the case of...3000mhz 2x core vs 2500mhz 4x coreWithout question the 3000mhz 2x core is the better deal. Not only is the 2x core cheaper but it's faster. EQ2 sees 3000mhz vs 2500mhz and the second core is used for non-EQ2 functions. On the quad core? Well those extra two cores are just wasted. You paid for something most people will never use and you paid dearly for a 4x vs 2x core.I'm not posting this to [Removed for Content] people off. I know many people have quad core CPU's but facts are facts. You can brag about how fast you quad core is but in the end it's really slower than dual cores for most games.Single core? Well upgrade to a 2x or 4x if you want but make sure that you do not lower your "MHZ" speed when you do so.... IE going from a 3000mhz 1x core to a 2500mhz 2x core will slow down EQ2 without question but at least going from 1x to a 2x core does allow other non-game functions to run on that second core.Going from a 2x 3000mhz to a 2500mhz 4x core is just plain stupid. If you did it don't fret... I've done my share of stupid things too <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY<img mce_tsrc=" />" />You do have one consolation... eventually "new" games will start coming out that fully use multi-cores. This will not be EQ2 ever period. Even if Sony was to hack on some multi-core routines they would never fully use the extra cores. You really have to program a game from the very ground up to use multiple cores.-JBP.S. Your example of adding up a ton of other programs running CPU intensive tasks is correct but let's be honest... how many people are really running all that stuff in the background while they play? If you want to defrag, watch movies, burn DVD's, calculate PI to the nth degree while designing houses in a CAD program all while you're on a raid in EQ2... well by all means a quad core is for you <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY<img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />" />Right now as I type this post my CPU core #1 is running at about 2% and the second core 0%. This means that in EQ2 maybe 2% will be used for non-EQ2 features. Let's assume that you are using motherboard sound (I have a real sound card that does not steal many CPU cycles) and bump that up to 10%.3000mhz 1x core = 2700mhz EQ2, 300mhz non-EQ23000mhz 2x core = 3000mhz EQ2, 300mhz non-EQ2 on second core, 2700mhz unused on second core2500mhz 4x core = 2500mhz EQ2, 300mhz non-EQ2 on second core, 2200mhz unused on second core, cores 3 and 4 0% usedEven a single core 3000mhz beats a 2500mhz 4x core in EQ2 for average users.

[woolf2k]

regarding going from one core to 2 core comment - isn't neccessary true. because the technology is different between the one and 2 core... the core 2 is designed to run many more instruction in less clock cycles so even though it may run at a  slower clock than the previous single core ... the core 2 will be faster. on quads... a good use of quads is if you multi box... you'll be able to run multiple eq2 clients giving each client it's one core making it possible to run each game smoother... ofcourse you have to have a graphics card that can handle the additional graphic data  and enough system memory to handle more than one client.

[Cassea]

The tech "can" be different between 1x and 2/4x techs.With AMD the 1x and 2x are basically the same. The 3x and 4x is slightly better but they often run at a slower clock speedWith Intel you have a real mess. The P4 and Dual Core are basically the same and the Core Two Duo's 2/4x are the same but "much" faster (about 75% faster) over the older tech.So yes this is a factor and I should have explained it better. At least with AMD the differences between the 1x, 2x and 4x are so slight that my statement is correct.With intel, going from a P4 single core or even a Dual Core to a Core Two will be faster provided that you are at least the same speed MHZ.Example:AMD 1x 2000mhzAMD 2x 2000mhzAMD 3x 2000mhzAMD 4x 2000mhzwill all run a single core at about the same speed (yes a 1x core will take a 10% hit because it has to share CPU time with the rest of your system)Intel P4 1x 2000mhzIntel Dual Core 2x 2000mhzwill all run a single core at about the same speed (yes a 1x core will take a 10% hit because it has to share CPU time with the rest of your system)Intel Core Two 2x 2000mhzIntel Core Two 4x 2000mhzwill run about 75% faster than the same speed P4 or Dual Core because the Core Two core can do more work per CPU cycle.The problem is that the Core Two's often run MHZ-wise slower than the P4's so if you do the math (very very basic calculations here)Core Two 2000mhz runs at about the same speed as a P4 3500mhzThere is ZERO difference in EQ2 between a Core Two 2x and 4x CPUMy point to the post was to explain a possible reason why people who upgrade see little or even less performance in EQ2.Clearly there is more to CPU speed than MHZ but also there is more to speed than adding more cores.Just do your homework before you upgrade. The one statement you should remember for single core games is that a 2x core will "always" be better than a slower 4x core within the same family.-JB

[haaaaha]

I want to advance my video card ,but I am not sure whether it will make big difference with my old cpu.AMD Athlon 64, 1800 MHz (9 x 200) 3000+3GB DDR ramNVIDIA GeForce 6600 GT (128 MB)(PCI-E)any info would be appreciate

[Cassea]

<cite>haaaaha wrote:</cite><blockquote>I want to advance my video card ,but I am not sure whether it will make big difference with my old cpu.AMD Athlon 64, 1800 MHz (9 x 200) 3000+3GB DDR ramNVIDIA GeForce 6600 GT (128 MB)(PCI-E)any info would be appreciate</blockquote>Well yes and no. Your CPU needs to go to see any real change... at least in EQ2. The 6600 is an 8 pipe (each pipe can do one thing at a time) video card that either runs it's memory at 64 or 128bit.... prob 128bit. If you were to upgrade you probably would not get higher FPS with EQ2 (because EQ2 runs so much off your CPU and not your video card) but you could run at higher resolutions and turn on more graphics features....In other words you might see some extra FPS but the game would look better... especially at higher resolutions.At least you have a PCIx16 card so any video card you do buy would work fine in an upgraded system. What motherboard do you have? You might be able to pop in a cheap new CPU for very little $$$.As far as recomendations for decent video cards that will not break the bank...1. Nvidia 9600GT2. ATI 3850/3870Both lines are great values for the $$$ and will run rings around your 6600 for under $130. Yes there are faster ATI and Nvidia cards and yes they are great but not very well matched with your slower CPU.Hope this helps-JB

[haaaaha]

thanks for the advice<img src="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" />MB : MSI K8N Neo4 Series (MS-7125) (4 PCI, 1 PCI-E x1, 1 PCI-E x4, 1 PCI-E x16, 4 DDR DIMM, Audio, Gigabit LAN)it's socket939...so I think I can't upgrade cpu without changing the whole set.But I only can afford upgrade for video card.I heard that 8800series had problem with eq2,do 9600series have the same problem??thanks for your time<img src="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/images/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" />

[Cassea]

<cite>haaaaha wrote:</cite><blockquote>thanks for the advice<img src="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" />MB : MSI K8N Neo4 Series (MS-7125) (4 PCI, 1 PCI-E x1, 1 PCI-E x4, 1 PCI-E x16, 4 DDR DIMM, Audio, Gigabit LAN)it's socket939...so I think I can't upgrade cpu without changing the whole set.But I only can afford upgrade for video card.I heard that 8800series had problem with eq2,do 9600series have the same problem??thanks for your time<img src="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/images/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" /></blockquote>Well for $29 you can upgrade your 1800mhz (3000+) to a 2400mhz (3800+) at Newegg<a href="http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103571" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...N82E16819103571</a>This will help you alot. The new cpu will not have a huge difference but at $29 it will give you enough of a boost to allow the new video card some breathing room.The 9600GT runs EQ2 just fine as I have been using it for months.  The 8800's are nice cards too but I would not spend too much on a video card if I was you unless you were going to move it to a much faster system soon. Better to pop in that $29 CPU and a cheap Vid card and then save your pennies for the eventual system upgrade that you will need. Do not discount the AMD's. The new AMD/ATI's are really sweet and the 3850's and 3870's (same card but the 70's run a bit faster) run EQ2 very very well.You can get a 512meg version if you want to turn on the high res textures but I would not spend much more. The 9600GT's all have 512meg onboard I think.This 9600GT is a steal at $105! ($99AR)<a href="http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814133216" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...N82E16814133216</a>This ATI 3870 is also a nice card for $129<a href="http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102719" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...N82E16814102719</a>The 9600GT is the better deal even if it runs about 5% slower than the ATI.So for $29 and $105 you can have a nice bump in speed with a newer CPU and Video Card. While this is no Core 2 Duo *smiles* or one of the new $300-$400 vid cards I think you will be happy with the bump in speed from your current setup.Now if you will be buying a new system in the next 6 months then I say hold off and save the $$$ but if $$$ is tight and you need at least a year of use then this is a great "cheap" upgrade for you.-JB-JB

[Vonotar]

I'm interested in the comments regarding on-board sound, does that really use a noticable number of cycles?I'm 'upgrading' to a basic soundcard at the moment (due to my computer manufacturer being stingy on the number of outputs for 5.1!) so I'll see if I notice a difference.

[Cassea]

<cite>Evaine@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>I'm interested in the comments regarding on-board sound, does that really use a noticable number of cycles?I'm 'upgrading' to a basic soundcard at the moment (due to my computer manufacturer being stingy on the number of outputs for 5.1!) so I'll see if I notice a difference.</blockquote>Most onboard sound lacks a DAC which is basically a CPU for processing sound. What "most" onboard sound does is to offload the required processing that used to be done on "real" sound cards which had a DAC to your CPU. Now this is usually not a big deal these days in the age of multi-core CPU's and real fast computers but back in the day this could take from 5-10% of your CPU time. Today that number is more like 2-3% but could be more if you turn on special sound effects that have to be processed by your CPU like surround sound or digital effects like EAX and such.Now EQ2 likes to use every last CPU cycle that you can toss at it... on one core only so any stolen CPU cycles that go toward your sound card "could" be used by EQ2. If you have a multi-core CPU then "usually" the game will run on one core and the OS and sound on the other core but this is not 100%.Now what happens with Vista and people with Creative Labs and other "real" sound cards is that EQ2 (and most other older games and many newer) use the old Directsound. Vista does not support Directsound but uses the newer (and better) OpenAL standard (XP also can use OpenAL) so when you run a game in Vista that uses Directsound the sound is not able to run off the DAC and must be run off your CPU. In other words under Vista even dedicated sound cards run in slow software mode when running a game that uses Directsound.Now what Creative Labs has done (Only for Audigy 2/4 and X-Fi cards) is to come up with a driver that will intercept Directsound calls and translate in into OpenAL so that these cards can run in fast hardware mode.If you have motherboard sound I would not worry about it unless you are running a slower CPU (mhz-wise) and if so you might want to consider running with just basic stero sound.Hope this explains some things.-JB

[Buckminster]

Thanks to 'JB' for all the good info posted here, in clear language. I'm sure it's appreciated by many.I've got a semi-related question about video card upgrades. I play on a mid-range rig:Athlon64 x2 4800+ (65nm/65W part, 2.5GHz, no overclocking)2G PC3200ATi HD3870 512M videoI recently splurged on a 22" 1920x1200 LCD display, which is lovely, but it has dropped my FPS a bit across the board, presumably from all the extra pixels I'm forcing the box to render. I was looking at doing a CPU upgrade, but there aren't any reasonable jumps that don't use a 125W CPU, which my mobo won't support. However, I'm wondering if going to an HD4850 1GB vidcard might help boost my FPS a little bit, given the resolution I'm trying to push. If I'm still going to be completely CPU-bound, I'll probably just deal with 10fps in heavy raid combat until I can afford to put together a C2D or Nehalem rig next year.Another thought - has anyone had any success with binding EQ2 to run only on the second CPU core, to try to squeeze every last cycle out of their dual-core box?Any insights and discussion would be welcome!

[Smirk]

<cite>Buckminster wrote:</cite><blockquote>Thanks to 'JB' for all the good info posted here, in clear language. I'm sure it's appreciated by many.I've got a semi-related question about video card upgrades. I play on a mid-range rig:Athlon64 x2 4800+ (65nm/65W part, 2.5GHz, no overclocking)2G PC3200ATi HD3870 512M videoI recently splurged on a 22" 1920x1200 LCD display, which is lovely, but it has dropped my FPS a bit across the board, presumably from all the extra pixels I'm forcing the box to render. I was looking at doing a CPU upgrade, but there aren't any reasonable jumps that don't use a 125W CPU, which my mobo won't support. However, I'm wondering if going to an HD4850 1GB vidcard might help boost my FPS a little bit, given the resolution I'm trying to push. If I'm still going to be completely CPU-bound, I'll probably just deal with 10fps in heavy raid combat until I can afford to put together a C2D or Nehalem rig next year.Another thought - has anyone had any success with binding EQ2 to run only on the second CPU core, to try to squeeze every last cycle out of their dual-core box?Any insights and discussion would be welcome!</blockquote>an upgrade to athlon 64 x2 6000+, 4gb ram and a motherboard would be around as much as a radeon 4870 and give you more in eq2, your 3870 is still a very decent card.oops i read wrong, saw it was a 4850 you were looking at, though you can still get those parts very cheap!

[Buckminster]

<cite>Smirkna@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite></cite>an upgrade to athlon 64 x2 6000+, 4gb ram and a motherboard would be around as much as a radeon 4870 and give you more in eq2, your 3870 is still a very decent card.oops i read wrong, saw it was a 4850 you were looking at, though you can still get those parts very cheap!</blockquote>True - though what I'm really curious about is if going to a larger framebuffer (1GB on the 4850 vs. 512MB on the 3870) will net me any video performance boost on the bigger display. When I was running on a 1650x1080 20" widescreen, my FPS didn't get hammered quite as hard when the action got heavy, and dropping below 10fps on raid named fights isn't helping me do my usual job of healing MT.  <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/385970365b8ed7503b4294502a458efa.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" />  <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/97ada74b88049a6d50a6ed40898a03d7.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" />I was actually looking at the upgrade path you mentioned, but if I'm going to replace mobo, proc and RAM (and thus the OS, as XP won't get me past 2GB), I'm into a $600ish upgrade. Intel-chipset mobos just seem to start right around "stupid expensive." Much as I prefer going with AMD for price/performance, EQ2's dependence on the CPU kinda pushes me toward the Intel C2Ds with their 6MB L2 caches and higher single-core performance. It's interesting that my wife's 24" iMac, running a 2.8GHz C2D, 2G RAM, and an ATi HD2600Pro, delivers roughly equivalent performance to my box, although I can crank the texture resolutions higher without loss of framerate.

[Smirk]

<cite>Buckminster wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Smirkna@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite></cite>an upgrade to athlon 64 x2 6000+, 4gb ram and a motherboard would be around as much as a radeon 4870 and give you more in eq2, your 3870 is still a very decent card.oops i read wrong, saw it was a 4850 you were looking at, though you can still get those parts very cheap!</blockquote>True - though what I'm really curious about is if going to a larger framebuffer (1GB on the 4850 vs. 512MB on the 3870) will net me any video performance boost on the bigger display. When I was running on a 1650x1080 20" widescreen, my FPS didn't get hammered quite as hard when the action got heavy, and dropping below 10fps on raid named fights isn't helping me do my usual job of healing MT.  <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/385970365b8ed7503b4294502a458efa.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" />  <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/97ada74b88049a6d50a6ed40898a03d7.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" />I was actually looking at the upgrade path you mentioned, but if I'm going to replace mobo, proc and RAM (and thus the OS, as XP won't get me past 2GB), I'm into a $600ish upgrade. Intel-chipset mobos just seem to start right around "stupid expensive." Much as I prefer going with AMD for price/performance, EQ2's dependence on the CPU kinda pushes me toward the Intel C2Ds with their 6MB L2 caches and higher single-core performance. It's interesting that my wife's 24" iMac, running a 2.8GHz C2D, 2G RAM, and an ATi HD2600Pro, delivers roughly equivalent performance to my box, although I can crank the texture resolutions higher without loss of framerate.</blockquote>well, you can get a cheap core 2 duo setup with a p35 mobo, 4gb ram and a cpu, preferably e8400 too. and while the gfx might help a lot in other games you have to remember eq2 is very cpu bound, your radeon should keep up in that res toothough if you decide to get a new gfx, at least get the cheaper 512mb version and save up for cpu/mb upgrade. check this link if you dont take my word for it hehe<a href="http://www.guru3d.com/article/radeon-hd-4850-2-gb-gddr3-review/1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://www.guru3d.com/article/radeo...-gddr3-review/1</a>

[Buckminster]

Good review pointer, Smirkna, thanks very much!Guess I'll be saving my pennies for a bit for a new CPU/mobo/RAM/OS package.  At least I should be OK without buying another case.  <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/97ada74b88049a6d50a6ed40898a03d7.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" />

[Cassea]

When moving to a higher resolution the added burden of addition pixels is almost entirely on the video card. Yes EQ2 may be using your CPU to calculate shadows and a few other things that normally goes on the video card but the burden of resolution is on the video card.In other words your AMD CPU should run EQ2 the same as it did before providing your video card can support the added resolution.So pop in a faster video card and you are in business. No need to upgrade your CPU unless the fps was already too slow for you before you upgraded your resolution. (remember to turn off font smoothing for a free 10-30% boost in FPS!)Now about framebuffers. A video card normally reserves 2x the resolution for a framebuffer (3x if you have tri-buffering turned on which your should if you are running on an LCD along with vertical sync)So at 1650x1080 your video card uses for a framebuffer:2x = 3.5meg3x = 5.34megThis is insignificant on video cards with 256meg or 512meg of onboard VRAM.Yes some additional memory is used for other things but the framebuffer is not the issue here. Any 512meg card is just fine. Adding more memory can actually hurt because they often use slower memory (it's cheaper) to help keep costs down. VRAM is expensive stuff!If you have a choice of getting a slower video card with more memory or a faster card with less memory always pick the faster card... provided it has at least 256meg.512meg is the sweet spot as it allows you to run with ultra high textures if you do not mind the studdering.You see no matter how much memory your video card has, it still has to load textures from your hard drive on the fly. Yes once loaded the texture will seldom need to be reloaded but the problem with ultra high textures is not that you cannot fit them with a 512+ meg video card... it's that the ultra textures are 4x the size of high textures and this extra size means it takes longer to load them and as such you get studdering while the textures are being loaded. Once loaded everything is smooth but this is why, when you enter an area with a large number of players, that your fps drops like a rock while all the new textures are being loaded from your hard drive to your VRAM.Perhaps if SOE did something like LOTRO does and allow pre-caching of textures from your hard drive you your system memory (for those of us with 4gig or more) then this studdering would be less.It's far far faster to load textures from system RAM to video RAM rather than the slow slow hard drive to your VRAM.Now about the 3870 vs the 4850 (the 4870 is just a faster version of the 4850)<a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php?card1=566&card2=547" target="_blank">http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards...6&card2=547</a>3870 vs 4850Bandwidth: 72gb/63.5gbPixel Fill Rate: 12400/10000mpsTexture Fill Rate: 12400/25000mpsNow resolution uses your pixel fill rate or how many pixels your video card can "paint" in one second. As you can see the 3870 is actually faster than the 4850 because the 3870 is clocked faster (bandwidth) so if bumping resolution was actually being limited by your fill rate and you would see a drop in fps. This is not the case. Both cards can support 1920x1200 very well. What is the issue is the texture fill rate and as you can see the 4850 is twice the speed of the 3870 (I do not talk about shaders because EQ2 just does not use them right now as shaders did not really exist when the EQ2 engine was being designed which is why what should be done in shaders is currently being done on our CPU's)So the bump from 1650x1080 to 1920x1600 means:106mps to 180mps = 70% boost in required video card power. Since the 4850 is 100% faster than the 3870 and this would work well for you.BTW these are very very (did I say very) rough calculations and there is much more that is going on inside your video card but it's simplistic enough so that everyone understands... I hope <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

[Derolak]

<p>Hi, I'm purchasing a new laptop strictly to play EQ2.  I will have an Intel® Core^TM 2 Duo Extreme X9000(2.8GHz/800Mhz FSB/6M L2 Cache),  4 gigs of RAM and have the option of three video cards.  Could you please advise on which will run EQ2 the best.  These are my options for my video card:</p><p>NVIDIA® SLI^TM Dual GeForce® 8800M GTX with 1GB GDDR3 Memory</p><p>NVIDIA®SLI^TMDual GeForce®8700MGT with 512MB GDDR3 Memory</p><p>NVIDIA®GeForce®8700M GT graphics</p><p>Thanks in advance</p>

[haaaaha]

<cite>Cassea wrote:</cite><blockquote>Well for $29 you can upgrade your 1800mhz (3000+) to a 2400mhz (3800+) at Newegg<a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103571" target="_blank">http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...N82E16819103571</a>This will help you alot. The new cpu will not have a huge difference but at $29 it will give you enough of a boost to allow the new video card some breathing room.The 9600GT runs EQ2 just fine as I have been using it for months.  The 8800's are nice cards too but I would not spend too much on a video card if I was you unless you were going to move it to a much faster system soon. Better to pop in that $29 CPU and a cheap Vid card and then save your pennies for the eventual system upgrade that you will need. Do not discount the AMD's. The new AMD/ATI's are really sweet and the 3850's and 3870's (same card but the 70's run a bit faster) run EQ2 very very well.You can get a 512meg version if you want to turn on the high res textures but I would not spend much more. The 9600GT's all have 512meg onboard I think.This 9600GT is a steal at $105! ($99AR)<a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814133216" target="_blank">http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...N82E16814133216</a>This ATI 3870 is also a nice card for $129<a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102719" target="_blank">http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...N82E16814102719</a>The 9600GT is the better deal even if it runs about 5% slower than the ATI.So for $29 and $105 you can have a nice bump in speed with a newer CPU and Video Card. While this is no Core 2 Duo *smiles* or one of the new $300-$400 vid cards I think you will be happy with the bump in speed from your current setup.Now if you will be buying a new system in the next 6 months then I say hold off and save the $$$ but if $$$ is tight and you need at least a year of use then this is a great "cheap" upgrade for you.-JB-JB</blockquote><p>Hi ,here I am again.<img src="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/images/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" />I decide to upgrade the major parts of my old system.<img src="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/images/smilies/385970365b8ed7503b4294502a458efa.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" />Below are parts I am going to buy :</p><p>Intel Core2 E8400Asus P5QL-E2G DDR2-800 X2</p><p>And I am seeking some suggestions about video card.There are three fit my budget.</p><p>chaintech 8800GT    512mbsparkle    9600GT    1Gsparkle    9600GSO 768mb</p><p>Although I am aware that 8800gt outperform 96series,but I am wondering if larger video memory would be more adaptable when I dual boxing on high quality texture in 1280X1024.</p><p>As cpu, will e5200 be enough for dual boxing or I still need e8400??? (After all it is very welcome to save $60.<img src="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/images/smilies/499fd50bc713bfcdf2ab5a23c00c2d62.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" />)</p>

[Cassea]

Well it depends. 512meg of VRAM is needed if you want to use Ultra Textures so if you dualbox you "may" need more but I cannot say for sure. The reason I cannot say is that I do not know how the game works with textures and VRAM.When you dualbox you are technically running two games at the same time. When you do this you would think that the video card just divides the VRAM in half and give each game half. This is not what happens. In fact the VRAM is used "as needed" and fills up as both games keep putting in more textures. Here is where is gets a bit interesting (and maybe someone who knows more than I can chime in) - since you will be running two copies of the same game you will invariably be using the same textures in both instances of the game... esp since, while dual boxing, both tunes will be in the same area thus having to access the very same textures.Now does the VRAM have to have two copies of the exact same texture or is the video drivers smart enough to know that it's the same texture and access the same texture for both instances with only one copy?My guess?The driver is not that smart and yes you will need twice the VRAM because the computer does not know, or care, that you are running the same game twice and using the same textures and as such will have to reserve in VRAM duplicate data.All three Video cards are good but if you are going to dual box and want to turn on "ultra" textures then get at least 768meg of VRAM. If "high" textures are fine (and they do load alot faster so this is a BIG bonus because ultra high textures are 4x the size) then get the cheapest of the three because to be honest with you... EQ2 will run the same on all three.The real question is what resolution you will be running at and what "other" games you will be playing <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />P.S. The GSO would be a bad pick if you are running at high resolution. While it's a bit faster than the GT version it moves from 256bit memory to 192bit memory and as such the fill rate drops pretty bad. This is not an issue at the lower resolutions such as 1024x768 or maybe 1280x1024 but anything higher and you want a GT9600GT vs 9600GSO<a href="http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php?card1=563&card2=557" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards...3&card2=557</a>

[Trinyx]

<span style="font-size: 11px;" class="Apple-style-span"><img src="/eq2/images/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" /></span>

[Meridia]

<p>Thanks for the info...  I'm building a new machine from scratch (and want the best performance on EQ2).  What would you build? <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />   I've always been partial to AMD/ATI but am flexible. <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p>

[Cassea]

<p><cite>Meridia wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>Thanks for the info...  I'm building a new machine from scratch (and want the best performance on EQ2).  What would you build? <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" />   I've always been partial to AMD/ATI but am flexible. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" /></p></blockquote><p>If you are building for EQ2 then get: (and are partial to AMD/ATI)</p><p>1. AMD X2 3.1mhz CPU</p><p>2. ATI 4850 Video Card (3850/70 would be fine also if you want to save some $$$)</p><p>3. Vista 64</p><p>4. 2 sticks of 2gig DDR2 memory (4gig total)</p><p>The Vista haters will tell you to skip it but Vista runs EQ2 just fine and by going with a 64-bit OS you allow yourself to access more than 3gig of memory. Sure EQ2 does not "need" 4gig of memory or even a full 2gig but any extra memory is used my Vista as a hard drive buffer will will help speed up the system. Heck... for another $50 you can even go with 8gig of memory which is what I run but truth be told 2 sticks of memory run slightly faster than 4 sticks of memory so you can start with 4gig and move up if you need to later. With a 32-bit OS (XP or Vista 32) you are stuck with no more than 3gig of memory no matter how much you add to your computer.</p><p><a href="http://www.newegg.com" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">www.newegg.com</a> is a wealth of information. Read the user reviews and you will gain very usefull knowledge.</p><p>Hope this helps</p>

[acuraman77]

<p>I've read through your post and found it to be very informative, I'm looking to make a cpu upgrade soon and im currently running one of those fancy phenom x4's and I'm less than pleased with the performance.</p><p>9750 phenom x4 2.4 oced(2.6)  now I was looking to swap this out with a Athlon 64 X2 6400 3.2GHz  my question lies with the mysterious L1 L2 L3 cache numbers. How important are they? if you look at the cpus and compare the cache sizes the phenom wins but will it out perform the x2 in the context of EQ2?</p><p>any insight you can give me on this matter would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.</p><p>current system specs:9750 amd Phenom X4 2.4MSI K9N2 platinum mobo2x zotac 8800 gts 512 gpu amp edition80gig raptor 10k sata 250gig 7200 sata600w psu2gig 1066 ddr2 G-skill ram</p>

[Bottjeremy]

<p>Since this has not been updated in a while, i thought i would throw in my 2 cents.  I upgraded from a Core 2 Duo that i had overclocked from 3.0 GHZ to 3.5 GHZ, to a Core i7-860 that i have overclocked to 3.6GHZ.  Since i upgraded, i have seen 2X performance boost.  It seems like the new i7 architecture works great with the current Eq2 engine.  Bottom line, clock for clock, i7 CPU's work great as compared to newer Intel core 2 DUO cpu's(I had a Wolfdale). </p><p>1 other thing to discuss in regards to the current eq2 engine.  I tried a ATI Radeon 5850. and was not seeing a increase of FPS per say, but i was able to crank up the quality of the graphics.  I was able to pull all the levers to max in graphic detail, as well as turn shadows on, and still keep the same FPS.    I returned this vid card because it was locking my computer up.  Purchasing the Nvidia Geforce 480 in a couple weeks instead.</p><p>Bottom line is, FOR THE MOST PART and based on my testing:</p><p>Increase Frames per second(FPS) = CPU speed</p><p>Increase quality of graphics = Vid card</p><p><span style="font-family: arial black,avant garde;">I7-860 @ 3.6ghz </span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial black,avant garde;">8gb Corsair XMS DDR3 1600mhz ram</span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial black,avant garde;">EVGA 8800gt x(2) Single card enabled since SLI is not supported in EQ2  <span style="text-decoration: underline;">Geforce 480 coming soon</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial black,avant garde;">Gigabyte P55-UD4P Motherboard</span></p><p><span style="font-family: Arial Black;">Windows 7 64bit</span></p>

[Qiao Elu]

<p>Nothing like reviving an old thread!</p><p>I wanted to reply to the question that was posed (over a year ago) about the differences between L1, L2, and L3 cache on the CPU with the intent on choosing the best value for EQ2 performance.</p><p>Since EQ2 is mainly single core locked, your best bet is to get a dual core CPU with as much L2 cache as possible.  The reason for this is that L3 cache is a pool of instructions that all cores can share.  This is a very good performance boost for multi-core aware applications like Handbrake.  If only one core of your multicore CPU is active, it can take up the majority of space available in the L3 cache but since EQ2 isn't running on more than one core having an L3 cache is mostly wasted.  I say mostly because it *will* hold some instructions that would otherwise have to reside in system RAM so it's not a total waste.</p><p>On AMD chips, you have the option of getting a CPU with either 512KB or 1MB of L2 cache.  Since L2 is much faster than L3, you are better off with something like an Athlon II X2 255 with 2 cores running at a stock speed of 3.1 Ghz with each core sporting 1MB of L2 versus a Phenom II X2, (X3, X4 or X6) running 512K of L2 and  6MB of L3. The lack of an L3 isn't noticed in your performance because the faster L2 cache is double the size in the Athlon II.</p><p>I can't comment on Intel chips other than they do have larger L2 cache amounts than AMD.</p>

[MMORefugee]

<p>ATI has good hardware and prices, but unless you want to fiddle with drivers and options constantly I recommend avoiding them for the time being, you'll get more for your money out of an Nvidia card. (Long term ATI owner.)</p>

[DevontheGnome]

<p><cite>MMORefugee wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>ATI has good hardware and prices, but unless you want to fiddle with drivers and options constantly I recommend avoiding them for the time being, you'll get more for your money out of an Nvidia card. (Long term ATI owner.)</p></blockquote><p>I think this is the opposite of true right now. ATI is really targeting the value markets aggressively. As far as fiddling with drivers i'm not sure what you mean. Occasionally new drivers come out and thats a good thing that both companies do.</p>

[zipper761882]

<p>I am a long time pc builder and a long time owner of both ATI(Now AMD Radeon) and Nvidia.  In my experience neither one of them does any better.  I had a Geforce 7800GTX that I bought brand new back in the day for 700 collars.  This card lasted me about 3 years.  I then had a Radeon HD 5750.  This card lasted me a littler over 2 and costed less than 200 dollars if I remember right.  Just recently I purchased a more modern Radeon HD 6950 2gb.  This card is only about 2 months old and works great so far. </p><p>My point is, don't buy into any hype surrounding either brand.  Both cards of roughly equal price range will perform almost equal(Nvidia is a bit more expensive but not by much).  I've heard people say they have had driver issues with ATI cards but I have never once ran into this issue, so its more than likely just a passed down rumor by Ncidia fanboys.  No different than the ATI fanboys claiming Nvidia cards die faster and can;t overclock as much.  It is all lies.</p>

[Gyee]

<p>So, since the thread was revived a little, I will bite. With some of the game changers settling in and new ones coming out. </p><p>How much performance gains are realized with the following in current day eq2. </p><p>1)Going from Windows XP, Vista -> 7.</p><p>2)Going from ~3GB -> 8(+)Gb ram </p><p>3)Going from single core -> dual core -> quad(or more) core</p><p>4)Going from from pre-Direct X 10.0 cards(Shader 1.0) -> Direct X 10.1/11 cards(Shader 3.0+)</p><p>5)Going from 5400/7200rpm hhd -> 10000 rpm hhd -> SATA II SSD -> SATA III SSD</p><p>6)Going to a chipset the supports ssd caching(intel z68 )??</p><p>Even the budget landscape for pc's has evolved since 2008 pretty sificantly. The game itself has evolved sigficantly in with the recent releases. What are some of the factors that have evolved?</p>

[kanecha]

<p><span><em>A 3000mhz (1x) core computer runs a total speed of 3000mhz (3000 x 1)A 2500mhz (4x) core computer runs a total speed of 10,000mhz (2500 x 4)But because EQ2 (and many other games) only use the one core it matters little if you have 1 core or 1000 cores because EQ2 only "sees" the basic speed and in this case...EQ2 sees your old CPU speed to be 3000mhz and your new CPU speed to me 2500mhz so you just "downgraded" your speed for EQ2.</em></span></p><p>[Removed for Content]... How many people LOLed at this? This day and age a 2,000mhz vs a 3,000mhz does not mean the 3,000mhz wins at all. It's not been about clock speed for years now. Or we all would be just having a cluster of p4's lol...</p><p>This thread has a lot bad information in it and very out dated to today standards. I think should be able EQ2 having more conflicting issues then anything.</p>

[Brigh]

Yes outdated information given that you can check the box for mult-core and GPU shadows in display performance options.

[retro_guy]

<p><cite>Brigh wrote:</cite></p><blockquote>Yes outdated information given that you can check the box for mult-core and GPU shadows in display performance options. </blockquote><p>Multi core? When did they add multicore support??</p>

[Wingrider01]

<p><cite>retro_guy wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Brigh wrote:</cite></p><blockquote>Yes outdated information given that you can check the box for mult-core and GPU shadows in display performance options. </blockquote><p>Multi core? When did they add multicore support??</p></blockquote><p>they added minor mutlicore support about a year ago or maybe longer, the application is still not truely SMP (symetrical multiprocessor programming) written, so take this with a grain of salt</p>

[MMORefugee]

<p>The multicore is a lie.</p><p>The kind of FPS you'll see on this PoS engine will lead to 60+ at Ultra in Skyrim/Metro2033/Every other game in existance.</p>

[Gyee]

<p><cite>MMORefugee wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>The multicore is a lie.</p><p>The kind of FPS you'll see on this PoS engine will lead to 60+ at Ultra in Skyrim/Metro2033/Every other game in existance.</p></blockquote><p>So, here we are at the end of 2011. We have new intel and amd new architectures.</p><p>AMD clearer has focused on faster multicore processors at the expense of single threaded applications. See bulldozer.</p><p>The new Sandybridge and soon Ivybridge architectures certainly have shown pc gaming benefits including memory channels, bus speeds, and memory size.</p><p>Anyone provide updates on how eq2 performs on integrated graphics?</p><p>Performance on llano/bulldozer architecture?</p><p>Performance on intel graphics 2000/3000?</p><p>For example, I have a pentium D 820 with 3gb or ram and GT 220. I get 7 fps in Moors of Ykesha but 61fps in cove of decay and run on extreme performance with an average fps range of 17-25.</p><p>Just looking for processor, memory, video card  to situation fps performance.  FPS is only half the battle. there's also zone times load times, etc. Just thought I inquire with the players/developers.</p>

[Tallithia]

<p>I am trying to decide bits n parts for a new computer.  I 'get' how a comp basically runs in an overall way, but I get overwhelmed with the details.  lol I am one of those that knows what I want until I look at the menu kinda people <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" />My budget is $700.00 but would do a happy dance to bring that down some.  Reading through this thread I am gaining a better understanding but doesn't help me make any decisions.I plan to go with Newegg for my purchase.  I ONLY need the computer itself, no monitor (have a 22 inch widescreen Acer) no mouse etc.I just need to know exactly what CPU, Graphics and sound card specific to request, and I think they can figure out, if I go with putting one together vs a 'buy this model purchase'.  Anyone that can give me a 'list' would be much appreciated.  <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" /></p><p>This is a comp my friend got for his daughter.  But she doesn't have eq2 loaded on it so not sure how it runs the game.<p style="font-family: verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; color: #d2c5a9; background-color: #221f1c;"><span style="font-size: 8.5pt; font-family: Tahoma; color: #333333; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">ModelGamer EXTREME 923i</span><span style="font-size: 8.5pt; font-family: Tahoma; color: #333333;"><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">TypeGaming</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">ProcessorIntel Core i5-2320 3.0GHz</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">Processor Main Features64 bit Quad-Core Processor</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">Cache Per Processor6MB L3 Cache</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">Memory8GB</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">Hard Drive1TB</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">Optical Drive 124X DL DVD+/-RW Drive</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">GraphicsAMD Radeon HD 6770 1GB</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">Audio8 Channels</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">EthernetGigabit Ethernet</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">Power Supply600W</span></span></p><span style="color: #d2c5a9; font-family: verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; background-color: #221f1c;"><span style="font-size: 8.5pt; font-family: Tahoma; color: #333333; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">Operating SystemWindows 7 Home Premium 64-Bit</span></span><span style="background-color: #221f1c; font-size: 8.5pt; font-family: Tahoma; color: #333333;"><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">Special FeaturesXion Echo Black ChassisCPU</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">CPU TypeIntel Core i5</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">CPU Speed2320(3.00GHz)</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">L3 Cache Per CPU6MB</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">CPU Socket TypeLGA 1155</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">CPU Main Features64 bit Quad-Core ProcessorGraphics</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">GPU/VPU TypeAMD Radeon HD 6770 1GBMemory</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">Memory Capacity8GB DDR3</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">Memory SpeedDDR3 1333</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">Memory Spec4GB x 2</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">Memory Slot (Total)2</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">Memory Slot (Available)0</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">Maximum Memory Supported16GBHard Drive</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">HDD Capacity1TB</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">HDD InterfaceSATA IIOptical Drive</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">Optical Drive Type24X DL DVD+/-RW DriveAudio</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">Audio Channels8 channelsCommunications</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">LAN ChipsetIntegrated</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">LAN Speed10/100/1000MbpsFront Panel Ports</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">Front USB2</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">Front Audio Ports1Back Panel Ports</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">PS/22</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">Video Ports1 VGA</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">Rear USB6</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">RJ451 port</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">Rear Audio Ports3 portsExpansion</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">External Bays4 x External 5.25" drive bays</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">Internal Bays5 x Internal 3.5" drive bays</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">PCI Slots (Available/Total)1 x PCI-Express x16</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">Keyboard TypeiBUYPOWER USB Deluxe KeyboardPhysical Spec</span></span></p>