724 réponses à ce sujet

[delijoe]

OriginalGUmby wrote...

how much over Intel Core 2 Single @1.6 is my Pentium® D cpu 3.20ghz?

How can it be so low?

Pentium Ds aren't true dual cores... they're not much better then P4s really...

[flem1]

Eh, you should be OK. The Pentium D did poorly next to good single-core A64s back in the day, but games were only rudimentarily multithreaded back then.

[flem1]

delijoe wrote...

Pentium Ds aren't true dual cores...

Nonsense.  Unless you mean to tell me that a Q6600 isn't a true quad.

[aaniadyen]

I dunno, I really want to run this game at max settings at the highest res I can. I posted my specs here before...and I know i can't on my current comp. Was wondering if I could run some upgrades by you guys and let me know what you think. (edit: res is 1680x1050)

Current build is Q6600
EVGA 8800 GTX 320
3gb of ram

Was thinking of replacing the gpu with a
http://www.newegg.co...N82E16814130339

and my ram is corsair XMS2 with a CAS latency of 4.4.4.12, I'd just be buying another 1gb stick of the same stuff.

Modifié par aaniadyen, 29 octobre 2009 - 06:37 .

[Packetdancer]

Matthew Moore wrote...

Macbook Pro (2009)

Windows 7
Intel Core 2 Duo 2.6ghz
4 gb Ram
Nvidia 9600gt 256mb

Speaking as someone who has this laptop... if you're on the 15-inch model, with 1440x900 resolution on the screen, you should be fine at medium-high settings, based on my own gaming experiences with the machine.  If you're on the 17-inch model, I think you're going to want to turn the specs down a bit.  The 9600M GT is quite capable at 1440 or so, but if you go above that the card starts to show the 'M' pretty clearly.

[flem1]

Your 8800GTS 320mb will already run it on high at that res. Wait for Nvidia's DX11 cards to upgrade, or at least near Black Friday -- prices now sort of suck. The 9800GTX+ isn't enough of an upgrade to spend $140.

Also, another GB of RAM will get you exactly nothing, for this game anyway.

edit -- forgot to say that if you have 32 bit Windows, most of the 4th gig will be wasted in literally everything due to OS memory address limits.  Get Win7 64 first if you haven't. 

Modifié par flem1, 29 octobre 2009 - 06:49 .

[flem1]

If you were a game programmer, what on earth were you doing with a Mac?

Modifié par flem1, 29 octobre 2009 - 06:43 .

[aaniadyen]

flem1 wrote...

Your 8800GTS 320mb will already run it on high at that res. Wait for Nvidia's DX11 cards to upgrade, or at least near Black Friday -- prices now sort of suck. The 9800GTX+ isn't enough of an upgrade to spend $140.

Also, another GB of RAM will get you exactly nothing, for this game anyway.

Ok, thanks for the advice.

[Packetdancer]

As a note, folks might want to post their OS, not just the hardware.  In my own experience, XP will sometimes handle a game slightly faster than Vista will on the same hardware.  (And even the dev's own recommended-specs are different for the minimum, or the RAM amount differs in the recommended, based on the OS.)

[flem1]

Packetdancer wrote...

As a note, folks might want to post their OS, not just the hardware.  In my own experience, XP will sometimes handle a game slightly faster than Vista will on the same hardware.  (And even the dev's own recommended-specs are different for the minimum, or the RAM amount differs in the recommended, based on the OS.)

Actually this is no longer true, with recent games on decent systems anyway:

chart

Obviously this will change if you have under 2gb RAM or something...

(edit -- actually, what you say may still be true in some games, but these days it's likely to be the reverse, etc.)

Modifié par flem1, 29 octobre 2009 - 06:50 .

[Dead Heero]

Craig McDermott wrote...

Dead Heero wrote...

crevus wrote...
If you really want to impress me buy yourself a graphic card nvidia gtx 295 or the ati radeon 5870...the 16 gigs ram are overkill...my xp can only use 3 although I have 4gigs ram...quad core is good and will serve you well in the near future and the sound blaster doesn't matter anyway...

16 gigs of RAM isnt over kill with a x64 based system (if you want to use all 4 that you have get a 64 bit OS), and it isnt one quad core its 2 quad cores. The graphic cards were the best when i bought them and i dont see the need to upgrade yet. the sound card came with the system and is nice for suround sound head phones or a 7 speaker set up.

You didn't even name the exact CPU that you have, or your sound card.  There are a million different Xeons and X-fi's.  Also your ancient dual 9800's are going to bottleneck long before you need 16GB of RAM in any game.

My processors are Intel Xeon X5472 3.0 GHz quad cores.
Sound card is a Creative Soundblaster X-Fi XtreamGamer edition.
The 9800 GT released in April of 2008 how is that ancient? its just over a year and a half old. how often do you change Vid cards? every few months?
The 16 gigs of RAM are not just for gaming, i do alot of video/picture editing, Video conversion and rendering for CG art. The RAM is well used.

[Packetdancer]

If you were a game programmer, what on earth were you doing with a Mac?

And who says the MacBook Pro is my *only* computer? 

More seriously, my Mac conversion happened after I left game development, and the MBP, in dual-boot configuration, is still one of the best Windows laptops I've yet found.  I like my MBP as I can have Windows (and a decent mobile gaming rig) or Mac (and all my UNIX development tools) in a single laptop.  I've used the MBP for mobile gaming before, particularly when I'm on the road for work and bored out of my mind in a hotel room, so I do have a fair experience with the MBP as a gaming laptop.  

However, I don't really plan to run DA:O on that.  My desktop is a much happier gaming setup than any laptop is going to be.

 

[Packetdancer]

Obviously this will change if you have under 2gb RAM or something...

I'd say that it also changes if you're dealing with DX9 versus DX10 with a card that just squeaks by for DX10 support.  For instance, an 8800GT may /support/ DX10, but you're likely to get a better framerate in DX9 without all of the nifty DX10 dynamic shadow voodoo.  For instance, when running on an 8800GT, I found that LotRO in DX9 mode could handle decently high settings even at 1920x1200, but as soon as you turned on DX10 support, the change in how shadows were done meant either the resolution had to go down, or the sliders had to drop several notches to maintain a decent framerate on the same machine. (Even though the screenshots admittedly looked a great deal cooler!)

So if a game determines DX9/10 support by your OS rather than letting you pick and you have a card that struggles more with DX10 than with 9, you may find you have to turn the settings lower in DX10 than you would in a DX9 game.  I don't actually know how DA:O handles DX9 versus DX10 (though obviously, there's DX9 support or this wouldn't work on XP *at all*), so I can't say whether this applies for certain to DA:O.

Modifié par Packetdancer, 29 octobre 2009 - 07:08 .

[rpgmastermind]

Why is the fact that you have the dvd rom so important does this effect anything. plus i asked this before for medium but with the new post do you think i can max this...

--------------------------------------------

xp home 32-bit

3.25 ram

BFG Nvidia 8800 gts 640 oc

AMD Athlon 64x2 3.01 ghz

[Packetdancer]

Why is the fact that you have the dvd rom so important does this effect anything. plus i asked this before for medium but with the new post do you think i can max this...

Because if you buy the box from a store, the game presumably comes on a DVD rather than a Great Whopping Pile of 5 CDs, or whatever.  So, without a DVD-ROM drive, you're not going to have a lot of luck with the install.



That's why they put the bit about physical copy after the DVD-ROM.  Obviously, if you are getting a digital copy off of Direct2Drive or Steam, you do not need a DVD-ROM as there's no DVD to install.

Modifié par Packetdancer, 29 octobre 2009 - 07:12 .

[Kharkiv]

I got my new comp. about half a year ago fully equipped so should run smoothly on full settings

[Yenkaz]

stfb1055 wrote...

windows vista going update to windows 7
Amd Phenom™ II x4 955 Processor 3.20ghz
Quad Core
8gb ram
ATI Radoeon 4800 series

correct me on graphic card i alway spelling wrong xD

The Ati Radeon series include many different graphics cards from the 4350 to the 4890.

Which will run the game anywhere from very badly to maxed out.

Please expand on which card you have, the rest of your hardware will run the game at any setting.

Forget what I wrote, as flem points out, I'm an idiot.

Modifié par Yenkaz, 29 octobre 2009 - 08:19 .

[Yenkaz]

Rankith wrote...

P4 3.6Ghz CPU
4G ram
GeForce 8800GT
Windows XP

How am I lookin? 

Medium probably, your processor is your main bottleneck, with pretty much any C2D you could run at high.

[flem1]

Yenkaz wrote...

stfb1055 wrote...

windows vista going update to windows 7
Amd Phenom™ II x4 955 Processor 3.20ghz
Quad Core
8gb ram
ATI Radoeon 4800 series

correct me on graphic card i alway spelling wrong xD

The Ati Radeon series include many different graphics cards from the 4350 to the 4890.

Which will run the game anywhere from very badly to maxed out.

Please expand on which card you have, the rest of your hardware will run the game at any setting.

Uh what?  He didn't say Radeon series or even Radeon 4000 series; he said Radeon 4800 series.  Any of those cards (4830, 4850, 4870, 4890) should either come close to or easily max the settings.

[flem1]

Packetdancer wrote...

So if a game determines DX9/10 support by your OS rather than letting you pick and you have a card that struggles more with DX10 than with 9, you may find you have to turn the settings lower in DX10 than you would in a DX9 game.  I don't actually know how DA:O handles DX9 versus DX10 (though obviously, there's DX9 support or this wouldn't work on XP *at all*), so I can't say whether this applies for certain to DA:O.

Actually I believe there's no DX10 path in Dragon Age at all, which may be one of the reasons some of the reviews complain about graphics...

I blame Xbox.  :innocent: (I'm kidding -- please don't start the console flame war here.)

Modifié par flem1, 29 octobre 2009 - 07:49 .

[faiz_reds]

Windows XP

AMD Athlon 64 x2 2.01GHz

3gb RAM

ATI Radeon HD 4670

[Achromatis]

Win XP

2gig RAM 667 or 666 cant remember

Athlon dual core 4600 clocked at 2.6ghz

Geforce 9600GT 512mb



I know Ill be running med-high, Im just wondering about the video card. Does anyone know how a 9600 512 compares to a 8800 512? Ive been eyeballing those 9800GTs with 1gig ram...

[Packetdancer]

Actually I believe there's no DX10 path in Dragon Age at all, which may be one of the reasons some of the reviews complain about graphics...

I blame Xbox.  :innocent: (I'm kidding -- please don't start the console flame war here.)

Tsk.  Well, yes, that would explain a few things.  And would indeed mean that the OS version you have is certainly less relevant to your performance!

[LilSwiftOne]

My Laptop Preference
OS: Windows 7 Ultimate, 64bit
CPU: Intel® Core™ i7 Processor
Graphics Card: ATI CrossFireX - Dual 1GB ATI Radeon HD 4870
Ram: 8GB Dual Channel DDR3 1333MHz

Modifié par LilSwiftOne, 29 octobre 2009 - 08:18 .