881 réponses à ce sujet

[Arrtis]

is nividia GT 220 good enough?
1024mb

[Gorath Alpha]

ladyofpayne wrote...

Game will work on Radeon X1600?

Absafraginlootly wrote...

sigh* I wish I could remotely read this stuff, would make these system spec announcements for games so much more useful. With numbered stuff it's not so bad, if your number is lower then thats not good but with the named stuff how do I know what is higher and what is lower?

Still, if it turns out not to function on my computer I can always install it on one of the new fancy smancy family computers, won't be able to play as often but at least they are new enough that I'm sure it will work.

Pull this reference up to see where the differently numbered and named cards relate to one another:

http://social.biowar...58/index/128343

It should be noted that an X1600 is well below the HD 2600 in anyone's benchmarking.

Jonp382 wrote...

Geforce GT 320 1024 Ram

Your graphics card is a slightly gimped version of the GT 240. You can find some benchmarks for the GT 240 and take 80% of that number for an estimate as to how fast your GT 320 is.

I don't know if there are any recent benchmark reviews with the GT 240, though.

WHICH of the two very different GT 240s?  Good one = GDDR5, poor one = GDDR3.  Meanwhile, I've looked it up myself, and it is a different design than the 240, either of them.

Spectre_Moncy wrote...

GT320 is simply a rebadged GT210 which is not as good as 9800GT/8800GT.

Wrong.  It's a 9600 GSO renamed to the new name, nowhere hear as awful as the 210 / 310 pair.

Pitrus wrote...

BP20125810 wrote...

Do you guys think my new Radeon HD 4650 would be able to handle DA2 at decent (not minimum)settings?

Edit2: I'm just going to rewrite all of the post instead.

I'm going to need some more info. Is it the 4650 with 1GB or 512MB? Is it the DDR2 or the DDR3 version? And is it in a laptop or a desktop?

When a Mainline graphics card has 512 MBs, it is already at the maximum that any 128 bit memory system can handle in a game.  Anything beyond that is simply marketing SCAM tactics. 

Arrtis wrote...

is nividia GT 220 good enough?
1024mb

It's a borderline part, about like a 9400 GT, so it's roughly the same as the minimum:

http://www.gpureview...1=443&card2=617

[Shadesofsiknas]

Gorath Alpha wrote...

[When a Mainline graphics card has 512 MBs, it is already at the maximum that any 128 bit memory system can handle in a game.  Anything beyond that is simply marketing SCAM tactics. 

Hi Gorath,

Would you mind sheding a little light on this? Is there no benefit at all having 1Gb - 2Gb of Vram?

Thanks

Modifié par Shadesofsiknas, 04 janvier 2011 - 05:39 .

[Gorath Alpha]

It's a matter of internal bandwidth.  If the memory system has only a 128 bit wide gate, then it has a normal limit of 256 MBs of VRAM it handles in 128 MB chunks.  Under various situations within the gaming context, if its core speed is good, and the RAM speed as well, then it manages to swap around a pair of 256 MB chunks, for a total of 512 MBs. 

High End cards all have 256 bit memory systems, and quite a few even more than that.  Those, therefore, will normally be dealing with 512 MBs with infrequent access offered to a full GB.  The larger the memory system bandwidth, the greater amount of VRAM a given GPU will be able to handle in a game.  This isn't saying that there aren't occasions in which RAM beyond the max might be used in a non-game situation; I simply cannot envision such a case right now. 

G

[Shadesofsiknas]

Ah I see. I was planning to pick up a HD 5850 at the end of the month/ Ive been looking at the 2Gb version but I only need the 1Gb at most on this card then?

[Gorath Alpha]

As things stand with Direct3D and the state of both Windows and game development progress, the odds are that we will be doing things far differently before the limitations in today's graphics are a problem.  Personally, I really doubt that I'll be buying more VRAM on a single cored GPU card than a single GB in the next couple of years.  Again, this is a very volatile area; PCs have been changing extremely rapidly throughout the lifetime of the X86 hardware (30 years), although progress is much slower the last few years. 

If the cost differences between 1 and 2 GBs are priced at only a relatively smallish part of the total, and both will have the exact same quality of VRAM (which isn't always the case), I might be tempted to go with 2 GBs and hedge my bets. 

[Shadesofsiknas]

Gorath Alpha wrote...

As things stand with Direct3D and the state of both Windows and game development progress, the odds are that we will be doing things far differently before the limitations in today's graphics are a problem.  Personally, I really doubt that I'll be buying more VRAM on a single cored GPU card than a single GB in the next couple of years.  Again, this is a very volatile area; PCs have been changing extremely rapidly throughout the lifetime of the X86 hardware (30 years), although progress is much slower the last few years. 

If the cost differences between 1 and 2 GBs are priced at only a relatively smallish part of the total, and both will have the exact same quality of VRAM (which isn't always the case), I might be tempted to go with 2 GBs and hedge my bets. 

 http://www.amazon.co...94168537&sr=1-2
Im drifting between this 6870 or

edit:correct link

http://www.amazon.co...94168031&sr=1-1

This 5850.

The 6870 is much better priced but only has the one Gig.

Got any thoughts on which is the better purchase?

Thanks again.

My current rig is..

AMD Phenom II x 4 BE @3.2Ghz
Asus M4A77T Mobo
8Gb ddr3 ram
HD 4850 512mb
Hitachi 500GB simpledrive
Thermaltake tr2-550w pp
Chasis - Thermaltake M9
Win7 Home Ed

Modifié par Shadesofsiknas, 04 janvier 2011 - 07:17 .

[steven20011]

all on max:D

[Lasseda]

kentan900 wrote...

Lasseda wrote...

I don't know if my processor can handle it. It's um.. 1.66ghz I think, but I really can't afford an upgrade right now lol

Do you guys think it might push through? I play DA:O just fine and a few other online games like LOTRO and Atlantica Online. Or does anyone know where I can find a cheap but quicker processor? lol

Are you playing on  laptop or a desktop computer?

I'm playing on a laptop.

Dell Inspiron 1720.
var fctb_tool=null;
function FCTB_Init_7b0178410609426c9f4b7369bb44a4d4(t)
{
fctb_tool=t;
start(fctb_tool);
}

[Gorath Alpha]

Personally, I like the HD 5850 better than the 6870.  If you compare the latest 68x0 cards to the 58x0 cards, you'll see they appear to be refreshes of the HD 5830. 

http://www.gpureview...1=635&card2=614

I have to run some errands, so I have only dropped in for a couple of minutes and haven't pulled up your two proposed Amazon UK  parts yet (edited there).  The HD 5850 is closer to the more recent HD 6950 in some ways, but that uses a new generation architecture.  AMD had planned to produce the HD 6nn0 cards on TMSD's 32 nm wafers, and they would have been all new right about now, but six months ago, plus or minus, TMSD announced that they were giving up on 32 nm and skipping ahead to 28 nm. 

To avoid letting nVDIA take advantage of the delay, they decided to refresh most of the HD 5n00s and give them the 6n00 names, with the exception of the HD 5800s, which had been too expensive to produce at the price points they needed to reach, so they did redesign their HD 6900s for the 40 nm process, and did keep the lower end HD 5n00 cards in production while considering what the rest of the HD 6n00s would amount to.  

OK, here's a comparison, just to see the pricing, even if the Egg doesn't ship to Britain. 

www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx

They had eight models in stock, including the Toxic 2 GB card, for $290 USD.  The other seven are all 1 GB, most under $200.  I don't think that Toxic is worth $290 USD.  

Modifié par Gorath Alpha, 05 janvier 2011 - 03:45 .

[Demyx_IX]

Or a HD5650..

Modifié par Demyx_IX, 04 janvier 2011 - 11:42 .

[Crimea River]

I have an ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3400 for my video card.  Would that work with it?

[Gorath Alpha]

Sorry, no it cannot, at least not and look or play anything close to the way it was designed to look and to play.  It's roughly HALF as good as the official minimum:

www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php

That's two desktop cards, and on average, laptop cards, particularly low end ones, are 10 to 30% slower than the same model for desktops. 

Modifié par Gorath Alpha, 05 janvier 2011 - 02:42 .

[Crimea River]

Aw. :/ I hope my desktop can run it then; it just got a new video card installed in it, though it's acting up a lot. I wish I could look it up. >_< Thanks for helping me, though. If video cards in laptops can be upgraded, I'll probably do that if it won't run on my desktop.

[Gorath Alpha]

Crimea River wrote...

Aw. :/ I hope my desktop can run it then; it just got a new video card installed in it, though it's acting up a lot. I wish I could look it up. >_< Thanks for helping me, though. If video cards in laptops can be upgraded, I'll probably do that if it won't run on my desktop.

Only the very top (expensive) Sager PCs still have that option (AFAIK, Sager only makes laptops) .

Modifié par Gorath Alpha, 05 janvier 2011 - 04:23 .

[Taint Master]

Arrtis wrote...

is nividia GT 220 good enough?
1024mb

Nope.

Post here to support a DA2 benchmark before release!

[Gorath Alpha]

Taint Master wrote...

Arrtis wrote...

is nividia GT 220 good enough?
1024mb

Nope.

Post here to support a DA2 benchmark before release!

You're wrong, unless you are reading something special into the question that I'm not seeing.  But the correct answer was already posted:

"It's a borderline part, about like a 9400 GT, so it's roughly the same as the minimum:

http://www.gpureview...1=443&card2=617 "

[Crimea River]

Gorath Alpha wrote...

Crimea River wrote...

Aw. :/ I hope my desktop can run it then; it just got a new video card installed in it, though it's acting up a lot. I wish I could look it up. >_< Thanks for helping me, though. If video cards in laptops can be upgraded, I'll probably do that if it won't run on my desktop.

Only the very top (expensive) Sager PCs still have that option (AFAIK, Sager only makes laptops) .

Ah...thank you for your feedback anyway...gah, maybe I should just get a console and buy the console version.  >__<  Nah, not whining...just a bit tipsy...maybe it'll be okay, or maybe I'll have the right card on my desky, if it'll ever work, since I got a new card in it anyway...NVidia something-or-other on that one.  Yeah, I know nothing about video cards...

Sorry if this post is weird.  I'm a bit tipsy at the moment...

Modifié par Crimea River, 05 janvier 2011 - 05:00 .

[Taint Master]

Gorath Alpha wrote...

Taint Master wrote...

Arrtis wrote...

is nividia GT 220 good enough?
1024mb

Nope.

Post here to support a DA2 benchmark before release!

You're
wrong, unless you are reading something special into the question that
I'm not seeing.  But the correct answer was already posted:

"It's a borderline part, about like a 9400 GT, so it's roughly the same as the minimum:

http://www.gpureview...1=443&card2=617 "

Well that depends on what you consider "running" it. I mean sure it technically can load and display the game... but not very well and not with any of the visuals turned up.

Check out Crysis' minimum requirements:
OS - Windows XP or Windows Vista
Processor - 2.8 GHz or faster (XP) or 3.2 GHz or faster* (Vista)
Memory - 1.0 GB RAM (XP) or 1.5 GB RAM (Vista)
Video Card -256 MB**
Hard Drive - 12GB
Sound Card - DirectX 9.0c compatible

Think the game is even worth playing with that?

Modifié par Taint Master, 05 janvier 2011 - 04:39 .

[Shadesofsiknas]

Gorath Alpha wrote...

Personally, I like the HD 5850 better than the 6870.  If you compare the latest 68x0 cards to the 58x0 cards, you'll see they appear to be refreshes of the HD 5830. 

http://www.gpureview...1=635&card2=614

I have to run some errands, so I have only dropped in for a couple of minutes and haven't pulled up your two proposed Amazon UK  parts yet (edited there).  The HD 5850 is closer to the more recent HD 6950 in some ways, but that uses a new generation architecture.  AMD had planned to produce the HD 6nn0 cards on TMSD's 32 nm wafers, and they would have been all new right about now, but six months ago, plus or minus, TMSD announced that they were giving up on 32 nm and skipping ahead to 28 nm. 

To avoid letting nVDIA take advantage of the delay, they decided to refresh most of the HD 5n00s and give them the 6n00 names, with the exception of the HD 5800s, which had been too expensive to produce at the price points they needed to reach, so they did redesign their HD 6900s for the 40 nm process, and did keep the lower end HD 5n00 cards in production while considering what the rest of the HD 6n00s would amount to.  

OK, here's a comparison, just to see the pricing, even if the Egg doesn't ship to Britain. 

www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx

They had eight models in stock, including the Toxic 2 GB card, for $290 USD.  The other seven are all 1 GB, most under $200.  I don't think that Toxic is worth $290 USD.  

Big difference in the price after currency conversion. Even after shipping costs it would still be a lot cheaper to buy from across the pond.

What Im wondering is which card will be more future proof. Ive been reading on a few review sites that the 6870 is better with DX 11 and tesselation than the 5850. I dont want to find myself replacing my new card next year.

[Gorath Alpha]

Shadesofsiknas wrote...

Gorath Alpha wrote...

Personally, I like the HD 5850 better than the 6870.  If you compare the latest 68x0 cards to the 58x0 cards, you'll see they appear to be refreshes of the HD 5830. 

http://www.gpureview...1=635&card2=614

OK, here's a comparison, just to see the pricing, even if the Egg doesn't ship to Britain. 

www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx

They had eight models in stock, including the Toxic 2 GB card, for $290 USD.  The other seven are all 1 GB, most under $200.  I don't think that Toxic is worth $290 USD.  

Big difference in the price after currency conversion. Even after shipping costs it would still be a lot cheaper to buy from across the pond.

What Im wondering is which card will be more future proof. Ive been reading on a few review sites that the 6870 is better with DX 11 and tesselation than the 5850. I dont want to find myself replacing my new card next year.

Since the HD 5830 and HD 5850 are going to have had the same features and functions, if you want more of the tesselation, it's the HD 69x0 trio** you want to think about, not a 68x0, or the latest Geforce, one or the other.  Several stateside companies offer shipping overseas, but VAT will still have to be sorted out on your end.  I think that Directron and TigerDirect may both have shipping arrangements. 

** I've said "trio", even though the HD 6990 has yet to appear.  It will be similar to the 5970, with two cores, when it is available. 

Gorath

[Gorath Alpha]

Taint Master wrote...

Well that depends on what you consider "running" it. I mean sure it technically can load and display the game... but not very well and not with any of the visuals turned up.

You're going to have to consider that I offer advice on a variety of forums on video card matters, and have made allowance for the hugely divergent individual aspects of human sensoriums.  I would have agreed with you had the question used the term "well" or "nicely".  By saying borderline, I've covered the capabilities of such a product quite well enough.  Personally, I wouldn't want to use such a card for long. 

Five years or so ago, it seemed as if everyone I knew was upgrading PCs, including myself, and sinc many of my friends and family members come to me for that sort of thing, I had all kinds of hardware through here relatively shortly after TES4 Oblivion was released.  There were some ridiculously bad System Requirements.  I owned four working PCs then, not counting an older laptop.  Three had Geforce FX 5n00 cards, and one had a Geforce 6600 GT.  Not one of those was a proper part for that game, in my view. 

And yet, hundreds of people downloaded Asp's OldBlivion to run the game using SM 1.4 textures instead of SM 2, with the attendant loss in quality, because the high end FXes had been re-engineered to add the prior year's GF4 pixel shader capability (Dx8), effectively creating a 1 1/2 core chip. 

I tested Oblivion, eventually, with a sizable array of cards, and until the Gefore 8800 GT, there was no nVIDIA card that did it justice (too few shader units).  Radeons were handling it just fine from the X800 Pro and onward from there.  After years of trying to convince Intel chipset video chip owners that all they could do was beat on a dead horse, I'm trying to sound a little less negative, save for that particular foolishness. 

[Shadesofsiknas]

Gorath Alpha wrote...

Shadesofsiknas wrote...

Gorath Alpha wrote...

Personally, I like the HD 5850 better than the 6870.  If you compare the latest 68x0 cards to the 58x0 cards, you'll see they appear to be refreshes of the HD 5830. 

http://www.gpureview...1=635&card2=614

OK, here's a comparison, just to see the pricing, even if the Egg doesn't ship to Britain. 

www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx

They had eight models in stock, including the Toxic 2 GB card, for $290 USD.  The other seven are all 1 GB, most under $200.  I don't think that Toxic is worth $290 USD.  

Big difference in the price after currency conversion. Even after shipping costs it would still be a lot cheaper to buy from across the pond.

What Im wondering is which card will be more future proof. Ive been reading on a few review sites that the 6870 is better with DX 11 and tesselation than the 5850. I dont want to find myself replacing my new card next year.

Since the HD 5830 and HD 5850 are going to have had the same features and functions, if you want more of the tesselation, it's the HD 69x0 trio** you want to think about, not a 68x0, or the latest Geforce, one or the other.  Several stateside companies offer shipping overseas, but VAT will still have to be sorted out on your end.  I think that Directron and TigerDirect may both have shipping arrangements. 

** I've said "trio", even though the HD 6990 has yet to appear.  It will be similar to the 5970, with two cores, when it is available. 

Gorath

I would pobably end up needng a new psu if I went 69c0 route and I dont have cash there for getting into all that. My rig is only a few months old and Im stretching it getting a new gpu already.

Thanks for the advice.

[Astrojeet]

Should work fine on my laptop.

But 7GB hard drive, what is all that about?

[charmingcharlie]

Astrojeet wrote...

But 7GB hard drive, what is all that about?

That is how much hard disc space the game needs for installation.