Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
Trying to understand everyone's mental and emotional interpreting of a situation isn't hardware related.
Why couldn't you have just asked this as a question within the thread you already have about your hardware regarding Fortnite.
I mean Fortnite isn't even on Steam so.... yea.
Overall I don't see why there needs to be a discussion regarding facts. 4GB is not enough, for any PC you playing games on. Even if it's for Grandma to play indie BigFishGames and Pogo on.
4GB RAM hasn't been enough since Vista/Win7 came out. Again if it was for basic stuff; homework, web browsing, playing media files... OK not a big problem. But for games no. Because the game itself needs at least 4GB RAM all by itself.
You could easily solve that by going on Ebay and grab another stick of 4GB DDR2. Assuming the PC has 1x 4GB already and not 2x 2gb or 4x 1gb
Do all Q6600 PCs support a 1x 4GB DDR2? 4GB modules were so rare in the DDR2 era that compatibility is iffy.
My Core 2 Duo with DDR2 does not support 4GB modules, and there were numerous reports of incompatibility back when I was interested in upgrading it at all.
If one is mad about him using only 4GBs, then one should probably be just as mad about the even more insane suggestion to buy 1x 4GB of DDR2 off of eBay. Also, he has 4 slots last I heard, which means 16GB of RAM.
The Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 is a cpu for high performance 32-bit 4GB DDR2 computers, with a wide range of compatibility with retro 16-bit software, and legacy DRM solutions like SecuROM (NFS Underground 1).
This CPU is useful for what are still considered "more modern" titles which require a 64-bit Operating System, such as Resident Evil 7, wherein Windows 11 64-bit tends the benefits of 8GB of RAM.
I am probably in agreement with whoever is "mad" in that 4GB of RAM does not "test the limits" of the Q6600. It kneecaps it, and instead tests the limits of 4GB of DDR2. We're not interested in the limits of what that spec of RAM can do...
Anyway, if it works for you with 4 GB RAM, ignore those having issues with it. But the reactions should be expected, as most people consider 4 GB borderline or outright too low for Windows 10/11 in 2023.
Mismatching CPU FSB and RAM Speed could be part of the OP's performance issues, but generally this discussion is more about the lack of RAM for 64-bit games.
The post where people are "mad" seems to be a thread about how it doesn't work for Fortnite.
Which leaves the question of whether 8GB of RAM, paired with the "Tiny 11" mod of Windows 11, might achieve some level of performance with the GTX 750.
Upgrading the GPU might not be worthwhile, but general consensus is that upgrading the RAM is worthwhile for running a modern OS.
Well for modern games, the hardware is a problem.
For maybe decade old games, you will be fine. Somewhere in between, it is game dependent.
Maybe you could do a not so expensive upgrade to the Q9550 or so.
https://valid.x86.fr/mivedb
It has 8 GB RAM and I wouldn't imagine wanting to use it with 4 GB. Even on Windows 7, doing "nothing" it can use 2 GB to 3 GB, even towards 4 GB, and modern games will take another few GB (if not more) like nothing. More so on modern Windows, and even if you use a tweaked installation, modern software and games will still need what they normally do. Tweaking the OS to RAM use levels from 15 years ago doesn't turn back the use of everything else to that time, too. Many things today may struggle to cope with 4 GB.
But there's also a possibility the tweaks to the OS may be playing a role?
But the CPU will also play a part. I feel like Sandy Bridge is the new Core 2 for me; that is, it's simultaneously the lowest I'd want to use while at the same time being remarkably usable for most things. The Core 2 used to be what fulfilled that criteria in my opinion, but I feel that has passed now. Even in lighter tasks at times, it feels sluggish. Not everything scales linearly with IPC, either. I've come to have the impression that as stuff ages, sometimes it does so exponentially. This is why I feel my old 2500K was closer in "general usability" to my current Ryzens than it was to the Core 2s, despite being much closer to it in both age and IPC. Sandy Bridge hasn't quite passed that rapidly deteriorating point, whereas I feel the Core 2 has in the last 5 or so years.
If you were interested in modern games, a Sandy Bridge (or even Haswell to be safer on instructions) with 8 GB RAM would have been infinitely better, even for the role of 2010s/light games. The Core 2 is a favorite of mine, but it's not going to get any better for it for what you're trying to do. It's good for really general use roles and late Windows XP era time period PCs. It can do lighter 2010s stuff, but in your case with 4 GB and since you're also looking to go for modern, currently developed live service stuff (Fortnite), you're likely going to be running into issues.
Why are you so ignorant?
EDIT: Look on metacritic, for the best games of 2012. On the top 10 (even the top 50, more than likely), there's not a single game on there that isn't playable with 4GB of system RAM. They all recommend 4GB, and very few list it as a minimum requirement...which is still playable. IMAGINE GAMES OLDER THAN 2012, YOU SHOULD HAVE ZERO PROBLEMS AT ALL.