AndersSchm Posted October 16, 2016 Share Posted October 16, 2016 So 64 bit FM is coming and we'll all be able to use all that spare RAM to play with Bolivian and Eritrean Football Leagues running on full detail. So at what point does adding more RAM become futile in the quest for Football Manager performance? I assume at some point once you have enough RAM for all of the database to be loaded into RAM there isn't any point in adding more but how much would this actually be? Any theories or do we need to wait for the beta to experiment? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
englandmanager Posted October 17, 2016 Share Posted October 17, 2016 have to test it out, i reckon 8gb will do some lovely stuff on performance Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robioto Posted October 17, 2016 Share Posted October 17, 2016 I have 16GB, it'll certainly be interesting to see how much difference it makes, but we won't know until we try it out in the beta. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
englandmanager Posted October 17, 2016 Share Posted October 17, 2016 10 minutes ago, Robioto said: I have 16GB, it'll certainly be interesting to see how much difference it makes, but we won't know until we try it out in the beta. I do too, as someone who loads up 8 nations and 20 odd leagues I can't wait to see if I can load everything up and still have good performance Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forameuss Posted October 17, 2016 Share Posted October 17, 2016 Some people need to temper expectations a bit. The way some are going on about it, can only see them being disappointed by the boost in performance there will be. Of course there's going to be one, but probably not as much as an optimisation in processing would. You'll be able to store more in memory, but what benefits that will bring are unknown at this stage. Processing is still going to be the bottleneck. As for the original question, depends really. Depends how much FM will make use of. Just because eleventy squillion Gbs of memory are addressable doesn't mean that that potential limit would be reached. It might only make proper use of a set amount, rather than being scalable (unlikely, but possible). Plus some people can have 8Gb and see a big boost because they don't really do anything else on the laptop. Others might have that but be running a lot at the same time. Just use as much as you can have, there's no "useful" benchmark beyond the recommended specs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robioto Posted October 17, 2016 Share Posted October 17, 2016 3 minutes ago, forameuss said: Some people need to temper expectations a bit. The way some are going on about it, can only see them being disappointed by the boost in performance there will be. Of course there's going to be one, but probably not as much as an optimisation in processing would. You'll be able to store more in memory, but what benefits that will bring are unknown at this stage. Processing is still going to be the bottleneck. To be fair any boost will just be a bonus for me. My PC is pretty good and can comfortably load 100,000 players with all major and semi major European league on with some of the the lesser leagues as background leagues with completelt aceptable performance. We'll see though, hopefully only another few days until the beta. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
englandmanager Posted October 17, 2016 Share Posted October 17, 2016 i'm pretty sure processors gain advantages at 64 bit too Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fabioke Posted October 17, 2016 Share Posted October 17, 2016 I would already be happy with a 5% or 10% increase in speed. People need to remember it's only the first step. Not needing the WoW64 layer would already allow for small gains. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edgarthewise Posted April 28, 2017 Share Posted April 28, 2017 Hey everyone, I'd like to revive this discussion now that FM 2017 has been out for a while. Shopping for a new laptop. Windows 10 64 bit. I only load at most 2-3 nations, 4-5 leagues in a save, but I do like to get the Huge Database patch (i.e. 15k-20k players loaded), and the community facepacks/logopacks/kitpacks (which measure in GBs). Do you think I'll gain any performance by buying 16GB of RAM versus 8GB in FM 17? Any wild guess for the next few editions? All comments much appreciated! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennytee Posted April 28, 2017 Share Posted April 28, 2017 No it won't help at all for FM17 I don't think I've seen it use over 5gb. Thats not to say it won't help in future though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaeltmurrayuk Posted April 28, 2017 Share Posted April 28, 2017 It might help if you run a load of other memory intensive programs along with FM, though if the laptops you are looking at have upgradable RAM (and have at least one fee RAM slot) you can also grab a laptop with 8GB RAM and add another 8GB at a later date, depending on your options I'd go for a laptop with a better processor with 8GB RAM instead of a worse processor with 16GB RAM as the CPU Is more important and cannot be upgraded in future. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lichborne Posted May 1, 2017 Share Posted May 1, 2017 FM is processor intensive. I am playing it in 2nd gen quad core i5 laptop with 4 gb ram. Never seen FM using more than 2.5 GB Ram but during simulation of other leagues I have noticed processor usage went up to 30-40%. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edgarthewise Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 On 4/28/2017 at 12:15, michaeltmurrayuk said: It might help if you run a load of other memory intensive programs along with FM, though if the laptops you are looking at have upgradable RAM (and have at least one fee RAM slot) you can also grab a laptop with 8GB RAM and add another 8GB at a later date, depending on your options I'd go for a laptop with a better processor with 8GB RAM instead of a worse processor with 16GB RAM as the CPU Is more important and cannot be upgraded in future. Sadly, the models I'm looking at (Thinkpad X1 Carbon / Dell XPS 13) have the RAM soldered on the motherboard. I know the CPU counts the most, but I'd feel stupid if FM turned out to be RAM limited. I guess I'll go for 8GB and get the fastest SSD I can afford. Thanks everyone for your wisdom! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
borivoje213 Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 SSD will do you fine. I tested creating a RAM drive with FM running from it in its entirety and there was no perceivable performance difference between that and an SSD. PS: Samsung 850 Evo, performance, reliable, and relatively reasonable in price for what you get. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.