Hi, im developing a game. whose lower end requirements its a pentium3 with a gforce, or a powerfull enough compatible card (shaders not needed for low end).

The question is how much memory should I target?
Posted on 2001-11-15 14:50:12 by dxantos
Afternoon, dxantos.

As far as I know, the current crop of PCs are coming out with 128Mb standard. However, when you take into account how long it will take to develop your proggy, then the standard may be 256Mb by the time you're finished (or, in my case, 512Mb ;) ).

Also, if you're targeting gamers, then they're more likely to have extra ram on their PCs - so double the figure.

Then, again. Are you talking about PC memory, or graphics card memory? With modern graphics cards, the memory on the card is more important (for all of those detailed textures).

Posted on 2001-11-15 16:25:38 by Scronty
You're targetting a pentium3 with a geforce or similar powerful card.
Well, 128 is the standard, but that will *very* soon be 256 megabytes,
and a lot of people already have this amount (especially people
with p3/geforce).

I personally have 512 megs, because it's so neat having everything
you need in your file cache, and enough ram to use a ramdisk or
keep very large data files in memory. And sure it also helps the
few times when I launch a game.

If you're talking about gfx card ram, the standard on that hardware
is 32 megs. I'm afraid it will be pushed up to 64megs within long,
especially with those very powerful geforce3 boards.
Posted on 2001-11-15 16:47:43 by f0dder
I thought 64megs (computer, not gfx card) was minium and 128 the standard.
Posted on 2001-11-15 17:41:39 by Eóin
It's worth to remember that those "minimum requirements" on
games usually mean "sure, it'll run, but you gotta be happy to have
Posted on 2001-11-15 17:47:08 by f0dder
My minimum standard is 512, and so was the company that I worked for until last week...

Although my old 98se machine in the other room has 384 (I can swear it's slower than with 128)... but I'm about to increase my minimum to 1GB since it's so cheap these days.

Posted on 2001-11-15 18:06:20 by _Shawn
You say your box is *slower* with 384 than 128? Hmm... I know some
motherboards don't cache ram above 128 megs, which gives a
dreadful performance impact... that might be it?
Posted on 2001-11-15 18:15:55 by f0dder
#1 - 512mb, 1.3GHz, GeForce3
#2 - 256mb, Dual 550, VooDoo3k
#3 - 256mb (laptop) :)

I'm not buying another machine until I can get Dual 2+GHz with a couple gigs of memory with a different memory bus in a laptop with 1600x1200 resolution and atleast a two hour battery...
Posted on 2001-11-15 20:59:08 by bitRAKE
Btw, there's a difference between "standard" and "how much do *I* have".
512 is sweet, but it defo aint standard ;)
Posted on 2001-11-15 21:22:00 by f0dder
Standard is the average of what is had, no?

For me 256 is standard. For where I work 128 is standard. :)
Posted on 2001-11-15 21:48:03 by bitRAKE
For the company I work for the standard for NT4 is 128MB and for Windows 2000 or XP that is 256.

Posted on 2001-11-16 14:24:19 by SamiP
Soon I'm getting a 2GHz P4 with 256 RDRAM :grin: (today I'm sitting at a P2 350 MHz with 64 mb ram :( ).

Question: Why is RDRAM sooooooooo expensive??????

Posted on 2001-11-17 08:56:10 by Delight
RDRAM is new technology. It has a bit slower access time, but a
much higher throughput. And RAMBUS who invented it requires the
manufacturers to pay them a bunch of money to be allowed to
manufacture it.
Posted on 2001-11-17 09:24:56 by f0dder
I'd aim for 64

don't forget it's the minimum you're aiming for. And rule number 2: a lot of people do not upgrade single components but buy a new PC say every 3-4 years, so a low minimum is standard IMO :(
Posted on 2001-11-18 17:35:34 by Hiroshimator
Hiroshimator, don't forget this is the game programming forum...
gamers tend to upgrade their gear a lot more than other people ;).
Posted on 2001-11-18 17:54:25 by f0dder
well I know a lot of 'gamers'... you'd be surprised :(

one of my friends has a GF3, disks in RAID 0, everything you'd expect but only 64 MB RAM :-/

somehow almost all of them have. The 'big' ones have 128
Posted on 2001-11-18 20:42:55 by Hiroshimator
Weird. Truly weird. f00lz =)
Posted on 2001-11-18 21:11:20 by f0dder
I think what the Hiroshimator is implying is that programmers...game or otherwise try to build programs that require the minimum amount of memory sold with any new system at that time. I have downloaded games that were small and just kicked ass with low ram and video memory.
I have a lot of the big first person shooters and i find that Q3 by ID software has less glitches than any other under minimum requirements. Thats just good prgramming.
Posted on 2001-11-18 22:46:20 by titan

I think what the Hiroshimator is implying is that programmers...game or otherwise try to build programs that require the minimum amount of memory

You need a "should" berween "otherwise" and "try". Because most
programmers are, unfortunately, not very interested in supporting
hardware that have specs very much lower than their development

Yeah, quake3 has very few glitches. It's pretty solid programming.
But really, it's not a very sophisticated engine :). It's basically quake1
tech with a few additions here and there. It does allow for nice
games though, and it hasn't even been pushed to its full potential.
Return to castle wolfenstein will probably show exactly what you
can use an unsophisticated (but rock-solid) engine for. Quake3
does use a bit of RAM though.

Now, look at the original post.

Hi, im developing a game. whose lower end requirements its a pentium3 with a gforce, or a powerfull enough compatible card (shaders not needed for low end).

If you set a plain geforce card and pentium3 as the *lower end*
requirements, it would be a bit silly to limit yourself to 64 megs
of ram :). I'd like to see game boxes advertise *realistic minimum*
values, not "15 frames per second and major glitches when there's
more than 3 monsters visible" requirements. If you want big levels
and lots of monsters, aiming for 128 mb might be a good choise.
For a realistic minimum. But it of course all depends on the game
engine and methods used.
Posted on 2001-11-19 08:18:27 by f0dder