881 réponses à ce sujet

[DPB]

stickmanhenry wrote...

Aren't the recommended specs the same as Origins?
Or am I reading this wrong?

They're the same as the ones originally announced, before they lowered them from quad/triple core to dual core, and the memory recommendation is higher here (4gb vs 3gb in Vista/7).

[Lord Atlia]

The noobness of this question may blow some people's minds away but I was debating getting this game for PC or PS3 and the big question I have is about processors. Are the number of cores more important or the GHz, I was looking at a laptop for the near future with a core i7 1.73GHz turbo boost 2.93 and have no clue where that falls between the minimum and recommended specs.

[psychocandy]

Lord Atlia wrote...

The noobness of this question may blow some people's minds away but I was debating getting this game for PC or PS3 and the big question I have is about processors. Are the number of cores more important or the GHz, I was looking at a laptop for the near future with a core i7 1.73GHz turbo boost 2.93 and have no clue where that falls between the minimum and recommended specs.

its a bit more tricky a question tbh....but gaming wise, Ghz is more important than cores

[Yenkaz]

Psychocandy: True, but the special part about Intels new processors is the ability to shut down cores while overclocking the rest, so I would say go for it.

[Loerwyn]

psychocandy wrote...
its a bit more tricky a question tbh....but gaming wise, Ghz is more important than cores

Not necessarily. Architecture is usually the biggest factor. My 2.2GHz E4500 would knock the socks off a 2.2GHz Pentium D (Or whatever the dual core Pentiums were called), but an i3 at a lower clockspeed might "beat" my processor. GHz is only better than cores if the game is poorly coded, or isn't coded to take advantage of multi-core systems. You've got at least four factors in it - Speed, Architecture, Software and Cores. No one aspect is going to tip the scale in any direction, but they all can have huge impacts on performance.

[SandyWB]

I think I'm good in every regard other than the CPU. I have Intel® Core™2 Duo CPU E6750 @ 2.66GHz.

I could play Dragon Age: Origins on max without as much as a hickup even though I didn't meet the recommended specs in CPU, do you guys think it will be the same for me with Dragon Age 2?

Modifié par SandyWB, 23 décembre 2010 - 03:35 .

[psychocandy]

OnlyShallow89 wrote...

psychocandy wrote...
its a bit more tricky a question tbh....but gaming wise, Ghz is more important than cores

Not necessarily. Architecture is usually the biggest factor. My 2.2GHz E4500 would knock the socks off a 2.2GHz Pentium D (Or whatever the dual core Pentiums were called), but an i3 at a lower clockspeed might "beat" my processor. GHz is only better than cores if the game is poorly coded, or isn't coded to take advantage of multi-core systems. You've got at least four factors in it - Speed, Architecture, Software and Cores. No one aspect is going to tip the scale in any direction, but they all can have huge impacts on performance.

i did say it was a tricky question, or more to the point a more complex  question, not many games utilize all cores, bad company recomends quads, but its still Ghz thatll count more for gaming when defining duals over quads and to a greater extent hex's

[steven20011]

bought a whole new PC for this, bring it on!

[BurtonSD]

Just got my GTX460 yesterday, i'm good to go!

[weinde]

Will it work on this???
Procesor: Intel Core 2 Quad Q9400 2.67GHz
Graphich card: ATI RADEON 4870 HD
RAM: 4GB
windows 7

[errant_knight]

Hmmm.... I've got more than the minimum, but slightly less than the recommended. I should be good, but may have to drop my graphics quality a tad.... On the other hand, I'm using XP not windows 7 or Vista, so maybe not.

Modifié par errant_knight, 23 décembre 2010 - 05:29 .

[Loerwyn]

weinde wrote...

Will it work on this???
Procesor: Intel Core 2 Quad Q9400 2.67GHz
Graphich card: ATI RADEON 4870 HD
RAM: 4GB
windows 7

Yes.

[PSUHammer]

OnlyShallow89 wrote...

psychocandy wrote...
its a bit more tricky a question tbh....but gaming wise, Ghz is more important than cores

Not necessarily. Architecture is usually the biggest factor. My 2.2GHz E4500 would knock the socks off a 2.2GHz Pentium D (Or whatever the dual core Pentiums were called), but an i3 at a lower clockspeed might "beat" my processor. GHz is only better than cores if the game is poorly coded, or isn't coded to take advantage of multi-core systems. You've got at least four factors in it - Speed, Architecture, Software and Cores. No one aspect is going to tip the scale in any direction, but they all can have huge impacts on performance.

And, at the end of the day, the GPU is still the single most important piece of the gaming rig in terms of performance. 

[PSUHammer]

SandyWB wrote...

I think I'm good in every regard other than the CPU. I have Intel® Core™2 Duo CPU E6750 @ 2.66GHz.

I could play Dragon Age: Origins on max without as much as a hickup even though I didn't meet the recommended specs in CPU, do you guys think it will be the same for me with Dragon Age 2?

Yes...and you could probably get away with overclocking that badboy.  The Core2Duo line are great and easy overclockers.  You can push 3gHz with that processor.

Anyway...the last facet of my new i7 system I built is the GPU.  I have a RADEON 4890 which isn't too shabby, still.  But, the new Nvidia GTX 570 and the 69xx series ATI boards are looking good in the $350 range.  I think I will wait until February to see if prices drop a bit but I am going with one of those two before DA2 and The Witcher 2 are released.

Modifié par Hammer6767, 23 décembre 2010 - 08:33 .

[SandyWB]

Thank you for the reply. Not really ready to get a new computer just yet, and Bioware games are pretty much the only ones I don't play on my PS3... Dragon Age should really be played on a PC, and I've enjoyed Mass Effect on my PC as well.

[Katsunami]

Why is it the case that as a recommended card, the nVidia has to be MUCH faster than the ATI one?

Looking at this chart, the 8800GTS is much faster than the Ati 3850.

I can play Dragon Age 1 with my current system, maxed out at 1280x1024. (E8500 dual core, 9600GT, 8GB.) The average speed is about 32 FPS in crowded places such as the Denerim market. This is thanks to the FTGUI large font mod, by the way. Otherwise, I would (still) play at 1024x768. I wonder if my system would run DA II in the 1024x768 resolution. The computer is about halfway between the minimum and recommended specs.

As I can run all games I currently own (DA:O / DA:A is the newest) just fine, I hope I don't have to upgrade the computer just for DA II. (From experience, I know that the minimum specs are normally not really playable...)

Edit: I just compared Dragon Age 1 and 2 because I thought the system requirements did not change much since DA1. I was right. The minimum was upped a bit, but the recommended system requirements for DA1 are exactly the same:

• CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad 2.4Ghz Processor or equivalent
• RAM: 4 GB (Vista) or 2 GB (XP)
• Video: ATI 3850 512 MB or greater
• NVIDIA 8800GTS 512 MB or greater
• DVD ROM (Physical copy)
• 20 GB HD space

If this is indeed the case, I can assume that I can run DA2 just fine on 1280x1024, if fonts are readable, and 1024x768 would not be a problem.

(For people that are asking: Yes, I still have a 19 inch monitor because it is the size that has the largest dot pitch, which is neccesary for me.)

Modifié par Katsunami, 24 décembre 2010 - 01:26 .

[Yenkaz]

You should be fine, just maybe not completely maxed out, but with high settings.

The 9600GT is very close to the 8800 GT/GT.

As for the ATi cards, Bioware games often perform better on them:

http://www.tomshardw...Effect,771.html

See how the HD3850 does compared to stronger Nvidia cards, some engines/games do better on one brand than another, but again - you have no real reason to worry.

Modifié par Yenkaz, 24 décembre 2010 - 04:47 .

[Starflower2525]

Will my Computer run Dragon Age2? My specs are:



CPU - Intel ® Core ™ i7 CPU 860@2.80GHz

CPU Speed - 2.79GHz

RAM - 60GB

OS- Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium Edition (Build 7600), 64-bit

Video Card - Get Force GT 220

Video RAM - 3.7GB

Free Disk Space - 831.8GB

DVD-ROM - HL-DT-ST DVD + -RW GH50N ATA Device

[Loerwyn]

Yes, but your graphics card isn't great, so you might want to consider upgrading it in the near future if you wish to play titles like DA2 more often than not.

[RocShemp]

I have the following system:



Microsoft Windows 7 Professional 64-bit

Corsair XMS3 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM

Intel® Core™ i5 CPU 750 @ 2.67GHz

ATI Radeon HD 5670

MSI P55M-GD41 Mainboard



Clearly DX11 is out of the question for me but I assume the game will look good regardless. That said, I do hope to upgrade my video card (and add an extra 4GB of RAM as well) in the (relatively) near future.

[Yenkaz]

Yeah it will work well @ highish settings. We do not know how much dx11 will impact performance yet.



Starflower: This really shows how many computers are sold whole with excellent specs.. and then a low-end GPU - which is really starting to matter as even general software that can use GPU acceleration is becoming common.



That said, medium settings will probably work okay at non-huge resolutions.

[Katsunami]

Yenkaz wrote...
You have no real reason to worry.

Seeing that the recommended specs are the same as Dragon Age 1, I'm thinking that Dragon Age 2 will run just fine on this computer. 1280x1024 is the max my current 19 inch screen can do. I might upgrade to a 22 inch screen. Should I upgrade to a 22 inch screen, I would probably still run my  games in 1024x768, or maybe 1280x800 for the ones that support it.

Because of bad eyesight, I cannot play most games over 1024x768 on a 19 inch. The letters and GUI gets too small. (On the bright side, I don't have any issues with the fact that a game gets a bit blurry, so I can get away with a slower graphics card. I even play Baldur's Gate 1 at 640x480 without any problems ) DA:O fixes this with the FTGUI mod, and Neverwinter Nights scales the GUI to a certain extent. Most other games do not, however, and I wonder if DA2 will FINALLY have a fully scalable GUI and font. That day would make me buy a HUGE graphics card.

With Dragon Age II (probably) covered, the only other game I would have to look into is The Witcher II. All my current games, with DA:O being the newest, run fine on this system. For my daily tasks, I don't need anything faster (yet), but if I upgrade, I'm thinking to replace the complete computer. This one is approaching the life span of 3 years. (At the time of buying it, it was in the upper middle class.) Maybe June, the month in which it hits three years, would be a nice time to upgrade both the computer and monitor.

Modifié par Katsunami, 25 décembre 2010 - 01:13 .

[PSUHammer]

Katsunami,



Everything in your system is fine except the graphics card...which will be tested by the Witcher 2 more than DA2. You may want to look at upgrading to a decent newer mid tier cgraphics card. The rest of your system's life would be greatly extended.

[Starflower2525]

My compurter is nearly 2 years old so I am not suprised about the Graphics card and such but I can't afford to buy anything for it at the moment not with my job anyway. I can play Dragon Age Origins all right on full settings it only stutters a bit in areas like the mages tower begining

[D34dw4lk3r]

I don't have any problems with PC configuration because of my work for croatian gaming television and my job to play a game in full detail to give a honest and realistic opinion to public.

Of course, I could play also on X360 or PS3, but DA franchise is reserved primary for PC.



Lucky me