Hi there,
So my PC's graphics card is a fair few years old...
I've been playing Dragon Age: Origins on my Xbox 360. But I was curious about seeing if I could install it on my six year old Desktop PC.
As far a Minimum Specs goes my old PC is seems to mostly fit. It could use a bit more RAM, and I've been planning to expand that anyway...
But then there's the Graphics Card. I have a 256mb GeForce 6200SE Turbocache card in my tower. Came with the PC.
In every other respect the specs match. But will this be likely to give me any obvious problems?
Anybody know?
Will my ageing graphics card run DA:Origins?
Débuté par
Robert Trevelyan
, avril 24 2011 08:24
Retour en haut
#2
Posté 24 avril 2011 - 08:30
Gorath Alpha
-
- Members
- 10 605 messages
Certainly. It's an extremely well known requirement. The game relies on SM 3 pixel shaders heavily, and not only are those partly broken on all Geforces related to that poor seven year old antique (more than "aging", it's got one entire leg, and part of the second, already in the grave, it's so old), that thing was slower than snot in the arctic when it was brand new, and hasn't gotten any faster.
Here are the minimum requirements for XP and Vista and the recommended system requirements.
Windows XP Minimum Specifications
OS: Windows XP with SP3
CPU: Intel Core 2 Single (or equivalent) running at 1.6Ghz or greater
AMD 64 (or equivalent) running at 2.0Ghz or greater
RAM: 1 GB or more
DVD ROM (Physical copy)
20 GB HD space
Video: ATI Radeon X850 256MB or greater (this is clearly wrong)
NVIDIA GeForce "6600 GT" 128MB or greater (and this one is more wrong)
(Note: IMO, the practical choices for the two video cards above should be the Radeon X800 Pro, and the Geforce 6800 GS, at least, for small textures - it will take a Radeon X1650 XT (or X1800 GTO, same thing, almost) for medium or better textures)
INTEL'S GARBAGE (Graphics Chip) IS NOT SUPPORTED, and there is an interesting possibility that male party characters are easier to choose than female when using substandard video solutions, such as Intel's.
The 6200 has about 15% of the available speed of the 6600 GT, which isn't good enough for "Medium" textures, so it has to be running low resolutions, low quality settings, and small texture files, and it will still show up running slowly & jerkily from time to time.
A 6200 can't render clouds in a virtual sky, ripples on water, wind in leaves, rain drops falling, it was a $15 card when new, after all.
Here are the minimum requirements for XP and Vista and the recommended system requirements.
Windows XP Minimum Specifications
OS: Windows XP with SP3
CPU: Intel Core 2 Single (or equivalent) running at 1.6Ghz or greater
AMD 64 (or equivalent) running at 2.0Ghz or greater
RAM: 1 GB or more
DVD ROM (Physical copy)
20 GB HD space
Video: ATI Radeon X850 256MB or greater (this is clearly wrong)
NVIDIA GeForce "6600 GT" 128MB or greater (and this one is more wrong)
(Note: IMO, the practical choices for the two video cards above should be the Radeon X800 Pro, and the Geforce 6800 GS, at least, for small textures - it will take a Radeon X1650 XT (or X1800 GTO, same thing, almost) for medium or better textures)
INTEL'S GARBAGE (Graphics Chip) IS NOT SUPPORTED, and there is an interesting possibility that male party characters are easier to choose than female when using substandard video solutions, such as Intel's.
The 6200 has about 15% of the available speed of the 6600 GT, which isn't good enough for "Medium" textures, so it has to be running low resolutions, low quality settings, and small texture files, and it will still show up running slowly & jerkily from time to time.
A 6200 can't render clouds in a virtual sky, ripples on water, wind in leaves, rain drops falling, it was a $15 card when new, after all.
Modifié par Gorath Alpha, 24 avril 2011 - 08:37 .
#3
Posté 24 avril 2011 - 08:35
Moondoggie
-
- Members
- 3 742 messages
Where the heck did you get a PC with one of those in it? I never saw one of those when it was brand new nevermind these days. You managed to uncover a lost relic.
#4
Posté 24 avril 2011 - 08:49
Robert Trevelyan
-
- Members
- 365 messages
Moondoggie wrote...
Where the heck did you get a PC with one of those in it? I never saw one of those when it was brand new nevermind these days. You managed to uncover a lost relic.
Back in 2004 as an off the shelf, Compaq jobbie. Was never intended as a gaming PC. But back in the day I managed to run Oblivion on it fairly smoothly. This was shortly before I acquired an Xbox 360, and then pretty much used that exclusively up until the present day.
I only ask out of curiousity, as I fancied toying around with some modded content, which obviously I cannot do on 360...
Like I say, while it's still running XP, in every other respect it should be be up to the job.
Can anybody recommend a suitable card which could bridge the gap?
Take it as read I'll be boosting the RAM up to 2GB, and the processor is 3 GHZ.
#5
Posté 24 avril 2011 - 09:01
Gorath Alpha
-
- Members
- 10 605 messages
There is no Pentium P4 that meets the game requirements, and nVIDIA stopped making the AGP kind of video graphics card six years ago, when their 7n00 generation was new (and Oblivion was also). No one has sold PCs that came with AGP for well over five years now.
AMD kept authorizing its partners to produce AGP cards until two years ago, so there are still some Radeon HD 4670s fot PCs that old to be found at places such as Newegg, but IMO, it's a waste of money when the CPU is Intel's old crap instead of what AMD was selling at the time.
AMD kept authorizing its partners to produce AGP cards until two years ago, so there are still some Radeon HD 4670s fot PCs that old to be found at places such as Newegg, but IMO, it's a waste of money when the CPU is Intel's old crap instead of what AMD was selling at the time.
Modifié par Gorath Alpha, 24 avril 2011 - 09:02 .
#6
Posté 24 avril 2011 - 09:11
Robert Trevelyan
-
- Members
- 365 messages
It depends. I'm no PC snob. I don't need perfection. I'd prefer playable. If the game truly is unplayable on the processor, sure. But replacing a graphics card is far cheaper than building a new PC from scratch.
#7
Posté 24 avril 2011 - 09:13
Gorath Alpha
-
- Members
- 10 605 messages
www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx
The above link is to the AGP cards that Newegg had available when I originally answered. There are nine of them ~~ however, the first two don't amount to much of an improvement (HD 3450s). The cheapest one is $60, before any rebates, and isn't anything special, it's an HD 3650 card from a brand name I have no knowledge about.
The first Radeon HD 4650 listed is no better at all. It has the old type plain DDR memory instead of the GDDR3 type, and this particular summary list omits the better one I already spotted there, for $70, for which a rebate may have existed.
The "best" graphics that there is at present for the AGP video bus is the HD 4670, but at $105, after rebate, it costs as much as that antique old PC is worth (because of the cachet attached to laptops, ignorant owners have been giving away perfectly decent desktop PCs and buying new laptops that aren't nearly as good as platforms for game-play). It is common these days to find complete desktop setups at thrift shops for $125 to $150 that are much more powerful than the average $600 laptop, and therefore a much better choice than attempting to drag an old Model T of a computer from the dark ages into the 21st century.
The above link is to the AGP cards that Newegg had available when I originally answered. There are nine of them ~~ however, the first two don't amount to much of an improvement (HD 3450s). The cheapest one is $60, before any rebates, and isn't anything special, it's an HD 3650 card from a brand name I have no knowledge about.
The first Radeon HD 4650 listed is no better at all. It has the old type plain DDR memory instead of the GDDR3 type, and this particular summary list omits the better one I already spotted there, for $70, for which a rebate may have existed.
The "best" graphics that there is at present for the AGP video bus is the HD 4670, but at $105, after rebate, it costs as much as that antique old PC is worth (because of the cachet attached to laptops, ignorant owners have been giving away perfectly decent desktop PCs and buying new laptops that aren't nearly as good as platforms for game-play). It is common these days to find complete desktop setups at thrift shops for $125 to $150 that are much more powerful than the average $600 laptop, and therefore a much better choice than attempting to drag an old Model T of a computer from the dark ages into the 21st century.
Modifié par Gorath Alpha, 01 mai 2011 - 11:19 .
#8
Posté 01 mai 2011 - 03:47
Robert Trevelyan
-
- Members
- 365 messages
So I DID plump for the UE digital download while it was on sale on the EA store. And yes, my graphics card struggles. Set to the very lowest of specs the game runs pretty smoothly. Set medium to high it staggers like a drunk at beer festival... 
As far as can tell from nvidia's site (http://www.nvidia.co...geforce6200_pci) the card is PCI-E. So I figure that I should be able to swap it out for a newer 1GB card, which will make playing the game a little easier on the eye, and less staggered at a decent resolution.
Any suggestions? nVidia or Radeon bias?
As far as can tell from nvidia's site (http://www.nvidia.co...geforce6200_pci) the card is PCI-E. So I figure that I should be able to swap it out for a newer 1GB card, which will make playing the game a little easier on the eye, and less staggered at a decent resolution.
Any suggestions? nVidia or Radeon bias?
#9
Posté 01 mai 2011 - 07:21
RaenImrahl
-
- Members
- 5 386 messages
MarkRobLives wrote...
So I DID plump for the UE digital download while it was on sale on the EA store. And yes, my graphics card struggles. Set to the very lowest of specs the game runs pretty smoothly. Set medium to high it staggers like a drunk at beer festival...
As far as can tell from nvidia's site (http://www.nvidia.cgeforce6200_pci) om/page/the card is PCI-E. So I figure that I should be able to swap it out for a newer 1GB card, which will make playing the game a little easier on the eye, and less staggered at a decent resolution.
Any suggestions? nVidia or Radeon bias?
DAO is very CPU intensive... so depending on what kind of CPU you have in your beloved relic, getting a brand new GPU might not give you as much of a performance boost as you'd think.
#10
Posté 01 mai 2011 - 07:38
Gorath Alpha
-
- Members
- 10 605 messages
nVIDIA's 6200 SE was produced for AGP, for plain old type PCI, and for the PCIe(16) video bus, and cards for those different busses cannot be exchanged with one another. You are better off looking on the producers' site for the original system seven years ago, be it Compaq, Dell, HP, whoever, to find what bus was used.
If it is AGP, as is entirely likely, nVIDIA stopped making any of those in 2005, so Radeons are the only option, and here is one right here:
http://www.newegg.co...N82E16814125281
It was a much more complicated interface, and always did cost more to produce one than for PCIe(16); this one is $80.
If it is AGP, as is entirely likely, nVIDIA stopped making any of those in 2005, so Radeons are the only option, and here is one right here:
http://www.newegg.co...N82E16814125281
It was a much more complicated interface, and always did cost more to produce one than for PCIe(16); this one is $80.
Modifié par Gorath Alpha, 01 mai 2011 - 07:55 .
#11
Posté 01 mai 2011 - 07:40
TheDeanoRama
-
- Members
- 33 messages
If its any consolation I'm running it on a laptop with a mere mobile radeon(4650 320@550) on board and only a t6600 processor. I'm able to max out the graphics full screen so long as I leave the AA turned down.
Plays fine .. but the lappy does heat up considerably!
Plays fine .. but the lappy does heat up considerably!
#12
Posté 01 mai 2011 - 07:42
Robert Trevelyan
-
- Members
- 365 messages
Well, yes. I suppose that's worth taking into account also. But so far, as I say, the game is only starting to stagger if I push up the graphics detail. On lower detail it actually isn't all that bad. The processor is 2.8 ghz, if that's any help.
#13
Posté 01 mai 2011 - 07:48
RaenImrahl
-
- Members
- 5 386 messages
MarkRobLives wrote...
Well, yes. I suppose that's worth taking into account also. But so far, as I say, the game is only starting to stagger if I push up the graphics detail. On lower detail it actually isn't all that bad. The processor is 2.8 ghz, if that's any help.
But what architecture? Is it a Pentium D or what?
#14
Posté 01 mai 2011 - 07:52
Gorath Alpha
-
- Members
- 10 605 messages
An HD 4650 is an excellent (desktop) video graphics card for DA: O. It was always capable of very respectable performance, which is why I named one for the OP to consider, from Newegg. The Geforce 6200 SE, on the other hand, was more or less as good as one of the tin whistles given away as a prize in a box of Crackerjacks.TheDeanoRama wrote...
If its any consolation I'm running it on a laptop with a mere mobile radeon(4650 320@550) on board and only a t6600 processor. I'm able to max out the graphics full screen so long as I leave the AA turned down.
Plays fine .. but the lappy does heat up considerably!
Laptop producers have never released mobile video cards based on the same kind of standards, and the results vary all across the spectrum as a very direct result of that type of anarchy.
#15
Posté 01 mai 2011 - 08:00
Robert Trevelyan
-
- Members
- 365 messages
RaenImrahl wrote...
MarkRobLives wrote...
Well, yes. I suppose that's worth taking into account also. But so far, as I say, the game is only starting to stagger if I push up the graphics detail. On lower detail it actually isn't all that bad. The processor is 2.8 ghz, if that's any help.
But what architecture? Is it a Pentium D or what?
Yes. It is.
#16
Posté 01 mai 2011 - 08:41
Gorath Alpha
-
- Members
- 10 605 messages
If the PC in question isn't quite seven years old yet, it could have had PCIe instead of AGP, in which case, a newer card for less money is also available, such as this HD 5570 for $60, after rebate:Gorath Alpha wrote...
nVIDIA's 6200 SE was produced for AGP, for plain old type PCI, and for the PCIe(16) video bus, and cards for those different busses cannot be exchanged with one another. You are better off looking on the producers' site for the original system's specifications from seven years ago, be it Compaq, Dell, HP, whoever, to find what bus was used.
If it is AGP, as is entirely likely, nVIDIA stopped making any of those in 2005, so Radeons are the only option, and here is one right here:
www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx
It was a much more complicated interface, and always did cost more to produce one than for PCIe(16); this one is $80.
www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx
P. S. The index pages at Newegg mention a $10 rebate, which doesn't show up on the individual item's own page for some reason.
Modifié par Gorath Alpha, 01 mai 2011 - 08:58 .
#17
Posté 01 mai 2011 - 08:51
RaenImrahl
-
- Members
- 5 386 messages
MarkRobLives wrote...
RaenImrahl wrote...
MarkRobLives wrote...
Well, yes. I suppose that's worth taking into account also. But so far, as I say, the game is only starting to stagger if I push up the graphics detail. On lower detail it actually isn't all that bad. The processor is 2.8 ghz, if that's any help.
But what architecture? Is it a Pentium D or what?
Yes. It is.
Cool. Just keep in mind that the "stagger" may still happen, even with a faster/more powerful graphics card. This is because of how DAO's engine is coded. That said, you'll certainly see some increase in performance, but the CPU will be the bottleneck. For $60 the increased performance may be worth it-- hard to say for certain.
Further reading, if you like: http://www.bcchardwa...=1&limitstart=0
Modifié par RaenImrahl, 01 mai 2011 - 08:52 .
