Faster processor or more RAM?

I'm sure this is the oldest question out there. But I want to get better performance out of Medieval 2 Total War and Kingdoms. Which won would have a better impact on performance; a faster CPU or more RAM? Right now I have an Athlon XP 3000+ that runs at 2.17 GHz and I have 1 GB of DDR RAM.

note: It looks like if I wanted a faster CPU and my mobo is a socket A, and the fastest socket A processor out there is like 2.2 GHz so I'd have to get a new motherboard if I'm correct. And cost is a big factor to me.

I'm sure this is the oldest question out there. But I want to get better performance out of Medieval 2 Total War and Kingdoms. Which won would have a better impact on performance; a faster CPU or more RAM? Right now I have an Athlon XP 3000+ that runs at 2.17 GHz and I have 1 GB of DDR RAM.

note: It looks like if I wanted a faster CPU and my mobo is a socket A, and the fastest socket A processor out there is like 2.2 GHz so I'd have to get a new motherboard if I'm correct. And cost is a big factor to me.

Vuud

Well. You already have the recommended amount of ram for both those games.

2.2 ghz is hardly a worthy upgrade either.

Are you sure you have a good enough video card?

You'd be better off buying/building a new pc.

As well as 2gb of ram I was thinking of also getting the Radeon HD 2400pro. My only problem with it is that it's PCI and not AGP. Also it says it's DX10, but could I still use it with XP and dx 9.0c?Vuud

I'd bet that the HD2400 wouldn't even match your X1600 in speed. You can run a DX10 card under XP (using DX9 mode, of course), but the HD2400 is one of those DX10 cards that you wouldn't want for gaming no matter what OS you're using!

I'd recommend holding off 'till you can afford a brand new PCIe-based computer.

Change MY mind after my last post.

I sounded British there for a second.

Change MY mind after my last post.

I sounded British there for a second.

Vuud

Jolly good sir! Now for some tea and scones...

[QUOTE="Vuud"]

Change MY mind after my last post.

I sounded British there for a second.

kruesader

Jolly good sir! Now for some tea and scones...

Come on! Lets go and have sex with our cousins and vote for a terrible president, Cletus!

Whoops went a little American there for a second..

*On Topic*

I'd just save money for a PCI-Express based motherboard and everything else you want to go with it.

[QUOTE="kruesader"][QUOTE="Vuud"]

Change MY mind after my last post.

I sounded British there for a second.

riggers29

Jolly good sir! Now for some tea and scones...

Well I do, on rare occasions, but I ain't British. :roll:

The real weak point of an Athlon XP is it's FSB speed. Slows everything down. That's why they couldn't keep up with the last of the Pent 4 Northwoods. No matter what you add to this rig, it's never going to run newer games like they're supposed to be run. I suppose if you're stuck with it, upgrading the memory would be the first thing, followed by the video card, but seriously. It's not really worth it on this system. :(

BTW - The fastest socket A proc ever released was the XP 3200+ "Barton" core. It had a 400Mhz FSB. Not worth the upgrade from an XP 3000+ IMO...