16 réponses à ce sujet

[Gorath Alpha]

DA2 Official Minimum System Requirements and VGA Ranking

The original of this advice was in the Demo's Tech Forum before DA2 was going to be on the shelves in the states, and I still think it would be good to have this right here in this forum with all of the complaining going on here (it should be noted that I do not consider these to be "highly demanding" requirements at all).

DA2 System Requirements

      Minimum:
      OS: Windows XP 32-bit with SP3
      OS: Windows Vista 32-bit with SP2
      OS: Windows 7 64-bit
      CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo (or equivalent) running at 1.8 GHz or greater
      CPU: AMD Athlon 64 X2 (or equivalent) running at 1.8 GHz or greater
      RAM: 1 GB (1.5 GB Vista and Windows 7)
      Video: Radeon HD 2600 Pro 256 MB (should be 2600 XT or X1800
           GTO)
      Video: NVIDIA GeForce 7900 GS 256 MB cards (unless this should be
          7800 GS)
      Disc Drive: DVD ROM drive required
      Hard Drive: 7 GB
      Sound: Direct X 9.0c Compatible Sound Card Windows Experience
          Index: 4.5

Current Rankings in Shader Performance Order (and see my next comment for the Recommended Requirements):

- nVIDIA Geforce GTX 580
- ATI Radeon HD 6900 series (so far)
- ATI Radeon HD 5900 series
- nVIDIA Geforce GTX 480
- ATI Radeon HD 5800 series
- nVIDIA Geforce GTX 470
- ATI Radeon HD 6800 series
- NVIDIA GeForce GTX275 - 280 - 285 - 295 - 460 and 465
- ATI Radeon HD 5700 series
- NVIDIA GeForce GTX260
- ATI Radeon HD 4800 series
- NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250
- NVIDIA GeForce 9800 series
- NVIDIA GeForce 8800 series
- ATI Radeon HD 5600 series
- ATI Radeon HD 4700 series
- NVIDIA GeForce 9600 series
- ATI Radeon HD 3800 series
- ATI Radeon HD 4600 series
- ATI Radeon HD 2900 series
- ATI Radeon X1950 series
- ATI Radeon X1900 series
- NVIDIA GeForce 7900 series ( nVIDIA Official Minimum for DA2 )
- ATI Radeon X1800 series
- ATI Radeon X850 series     ( ATI Official Minimum Card for DAO )
- NVIDIA GeForce 7950
- ATI Radeon X800 series ( Dx9.0"b" only, though, & same for X850 )
- ATI Radeon HD 3690
- NVIDIA GeForce GT 240 (DDR5 version)
- NVIDIA GeForce 7800 series
- NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GTS
- ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT  (Much more LIKELY as "Practical" DA 2 Minimum)
- ATI Radeon HD 3650
- NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GT
- NVIDIA GeForce 6800 Ultra
- NVIDIA GeForce GT 230
- ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro  ( ATI Official Minimum Card for DA2 ~~ seems wrong )

(The Official nVIDIA DAO Minimum was wrong and is way below here in the ranks, and various relatively recent cards, such as the HD 6800s, don't have the right benchmarks available yet for addition to the list)

You will be too unhappy with the results to enjoy the game, if you try using recent Geforces numbered n20, n10, n05, or the older ones numbered n100, n200, n300, and at least two n400s, the 7400 and 8400.  Radeons numbered below n500, such as the HD 5450, HD 4350, and HD 3450 will similarly give you misery, and, of course, the Intel onboard Chipset Video Chips will do that same disservice as well (and, indeed, anyone's onboard Video is in that class).

[Gorath Alpha]

Just a reminder here.

[Gorath Alpha]

Perhaps this will be of assistance (JR York IV)

[Gorath Alpha]

Someone new came in, wanting to use Chipset quality graphics instead of the real thing, so here it is, back to the top.

[Gorath Alpha]

Gorath Alpha wrote...

Someone new came in, wanting to use Chipset quality graphics instead of the real thing, so here it is, back to the top.

This time it's one of nVIDIA's discrete laptop cards that is worse than some current Chipset video chips the new member tried to use.

[Gorath Alpha]

Gorath Alpha wrote...

As noted, even the HD 5450, although slow, has far more shader processing power (many more shader processors), so it will still win the beauty contest at displaying the full range of graphics. Fusion is expected to be better than a 5450, even for its base graphics (not referring to the Netbook Fusion APUs, in the news at CES today, but they also should be better).

IMO, over the long haul, the news about nVIDIA's own version of ARM is likely to be more of a milestone than Sandy Bridge.

The least powerful Radeon, for desktop or laptop, is the HD 5570, when gaming is any kind of factor at all in the selection process for a personal computing system. The equivalent Geforce is the 440.

And you know, I don't recall what the criticism quoted above, about AMD's bottom ranked card, was comparing it to, but probably Sandy Bridge's in- CPU chip version of Chipset Video.

[Redneck1st]

Gorath Alpha wrote...

Just a reminder here.

Will have to admit that I'm using the ATI Radeon HD 5670 and have no problems with the game what so ever even after several play throughs of the game. I feel it's one of the better graphics cards out there for the price. As for the other requirements I've more than blown them out of the water.<LOL> 

[Gorath Alpha]

It sat on top of Toms Hardware's Best Bang for a Buck a long time (although not as long as the HD 4670 did).

[Redneck1st]

Gorath Alpha wrote...

It sat on top of Toms Hardware's Best Bang for a Buck a long time (although not as long as the HD 4670 did).

Suprised that a hardware store is selling computer stuff.  Hardware business must be really slow.<LOL> 

[Gorath Alpha]

Seems as though now is a good time for this article to be back on top.

[Gorath Alpha]

Someone else came through thinking that the 8 in an elderly Geforce 8400's name had a meaning, other than to identify the generation. It's still a worse choice than a 7600, even a GS model, and especially than the official minimum Geforce.

[Gorath Alpha]

Selene Moonsong wrote...

Unfortunately, NVIDIA has been giving itself a black eye when it comes to releasing drivers. With my next computer, I'm going with Radeon instead of NVIDIA just because of the driver issues.

First, my apology for plucking the comment from its current thread.  A member had complained about poor game performance, despite the cost and specifications for his particular Geforce graphics card.  There were a couple of comments, including one of my own, about nVIDIA being less well served by its software engineers' efforts in the past couple of years than in the past. 

Standling all alone, the fact that nVIDIA is struggling with drivers seems such a simple thing to correct, just hire good people, and put them to work.  But it hasn't been quite that simple.  nVIDIA has had no viable relationship with any X86 processor producer since AMD purchased ATI, and in fact, has had really poor relations with Intel. 

The future for computing and for gaming is moving into smaller form factors and combined functions, with smartphones taking away sales from Netbooks, as the new phones grow more capable.  Tablets have been taking away sales from the less costly of laptops, and desktops are becoming dinosaurs, with fewer and fewer buyers interested in the quality and level of performance offered.  They want a small, ultra portable, and extra cheap device.  They are passing up good graphics that way, of course.

Both AMD and Intel have been developing new products to respond to these trends, with the Sandy Bridge from one, and various Fusion APUs from the other.  They both can weather the shift in demand that will end up eliminating the most lucrative range of graphics cards, the Low End, which will be replaced by the wholly integrated combination of Chipset, GPU, and multiple processor cores. 

Without sales at the low end, nVIDIA has no future selling consumer graphics cards, without expanding its marketing range, which it has begun to do by licensing a Smartphone processor design to modify and integrate its graphics and chipset technology into.  It has also continued to allow its GPUs to increase in size and complexity, which effectively prices its mid-level products out of contention, but makes the high end most suitable as a CPU for special (costly) applications. 

I'm sure that the same personnel trying to create drivers are also involved in software development at both ends of new developments for their longterm survival, and just not having enough hours in the day to handle it all any more. 

It is my opinion that nVIDIA has enough cash surplus that they could have hired new people, but they simply can't expect the graphics card business to support them that much longer, and want to keep expenses for a dead end to a minimum.
 
Gorath

[Gorath Alpha]

We had a member trying to run the game with only an elderly nVIDIA onboard chipset video chip (or the equivalent as a Notebook card), and even though I haven't found any appropriate newer game's benchmarks for late model graphics cards (so they aren't included yet), this list is still comparatively current.

Modifié par Gorath Alpha, 21 décembre 2011 - 06:22 .

[Gorath Alpha]

If anyone knows of any extensive benchmarks for any of the Bethesda and Bioware CRPGs that can be used for the latest generation of graphics cards, tell me; since Toms Hardware dropped the original Dragon Age, there's been no compatible benchmarking I've seen.

[Gorath Alpha]

No word yet?

[Gorath Alpha]

We have a new arrival wanting to use a Radeon X1550 as if it was a current product instead of a veritable antique, and a puny, terrible antique as well.

www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php

Modifié par Gorath Alpha, 28 avril 2012 - 03:17 .

[Gorath Alpha]

It is now Mid-May, and even new arrivals have stopped visiting with any regularity.  The next time we can expect any kind of upsurge here will be when the publicity for DA-3 begins ramping up, although DA:O will probably benefit more from that activity.  When the newest of new arrivals get here at that point, many will have quite new laptops that simply are unsuitable for games.  98% of those available for sale are in that category, and even the majority of desktops are being sold, once again, without any usable video solution included. 

I hope that we get a good source for game-based benchmarks from which to update the leading message in this thread, before the DA-3 influence is felt in here. 

Modifié par Gorath Alpha, 20 mai 2012 - 05:38 .