33 réponses à ce sujet

[Aurume]

 and sorry, if I post this in wrong place or did something else wrong. 

So, can this laptop run DA2, and if so, what kind of settings (low, med, high) I could use (graphics):

Acer Aspire 5742 383G32MCPU: Intel Core Duo i3-380M (2,53 GHz, 3 MB)
RAM: 3 GB
Video: Intel GMA HD (max memory 1567 MB)
OS: Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit

Tried look information about this but with no result.

[Gorath Alpha]

No, it cannot. Sorry for the bad news.

Minimum:
OS: Windows XP 32-bit with SP3
OS: Windows Vista 32-bit with SP2
OS: Windows 7
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

[Aurume]

So.. video card is the problem I take it?

[Fredvdp]

Aurume wrote...

So.. video card is the problem I take it?

Yes.

[Gorath Alpha]

Aurume wrote...

 and sorry, if I post this in wrong place or did something else wrong. 

So, can this laptop run DA2, and if so, what kind of settings (low, med, high) I could use (graphics):

Video: Intel GMA HD (max memory 1567 MB)

Tried look information about this but with no result.

Since this forum requires game registration, I would need to create a local "Can You Run It" thread in the General Subjects Forum (and the SR Labs' results that are the "usual" 'net results from that set of four words is *NOT* a very good source of accuracy at all). 

Can I get a few "Yeas", "Nays", or "Whatever" responses whether it would be useful?  I have created such for DAO and ME2, but in neither case has anyone taken advantage of the opportunity.  Registration is not required for the PC Tech Forums in either of those two cases.  

[bEVEsthda]

Why don't people just stop buying computers with Intel graphics systems?

It's a pretty simple rule, actually. Intel graphics == don't buy.

Modifié par bEVEsthda, 16 juin 2011 - 06:11 .

[Aurume]

What about these two:

Acer Aspire 5742G
CPU: Intel Core i3-370M (2,4 GHz, 3 MB)
RAM: 4 GB
Video: Nvidia Geforce GT 420
OS: Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit

Acer Aspire 5553G
CPU: AMD Phenom Triple Core N850
RAM: 4 GB
Video: ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5650
OS: Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit

and if I understood correct, that sounds good idea Gorath.

[Gorath Alpha]

One of these days, Intel is likely to get it "almost right", as the Sandy Bridge is nearly at the basic business level right now, for the very first time. The Geforce GT 420M is not exactly awful, but the Mobility Radeon HD 5650 is much better. To get up as high as the Radeon "650", a Geforce "40" or "50" is what's needed, not a "20".

[Aurume]

Okay, thanks for answer. I'm just hoping to get high graphics as with my current desktop.

[bEVEsthda]

Can't find the GT 420. My suspicions is that Mobility HD 5650 is a considerably stronger graphics system though. (Based on that it's stronger than GT 440.)
The 5742G's i3-370M is probably easier on the batteries than AMD N850, and could be quicker at certain tasks such as compressing archives, converting videos, etc.

But the 5553G looks better balanced (stronger graphics, less CPU), and for that reason would give a more pleasant and comfortable user experience. In particular if you play games. These days PCs typically only use little of their CPU power, just idling along, while the computer is choked in the hd-access or 3D graphics system. So going for a powerful CPU frankly doesn't make much sense. Particularly not if it's financed by skipping on other parts.

The advantage I can suspect the 5742G may have over 5553G is better battery time. Both because the i3 CPU might be more economical and because the 5553G's radeon HD5650 also draws more power.

[Aurume]

I actually forgot to ask that will I be able to use high graphics detail on both of them or just on one, or nether one?

(Sorry, bad english, maybe =P )

[bEVEsthda]

Aurume wrote...

I actually forgot to ask that will I be able to use high graphics detail on both of them or just on one, or nether one?

(Sorry, bad english, maybe =P )

The second digit in both nVidia's and AMD/ATI's designation numbers is the one giving the performance class. The "2" in 420 means it's a pretty rudimentary, bottom-end, graphics system, not really suitable for gaming. Mobile Nvidia parts corresponding to HD5650 should probably have a "6", so they're not even close in performance. The mobility Radeon is as Gorath said "mucjh better". No you won't be able to use high details with the GT 420.

[Aurume]

(I should put these all in one post)

What about medium graphics details then?

[Gorath Alpha]

Aurume wrote...

I actually forgot to ask that will I be able to use high graphics detail on both of them or just on one, or nether one?

(Sorry, bad english, maybe =P )

You're getting your meaning across just fine.  It's the IM / TM foolishness I won't try to interpret! 

The Mobility HD 5650 is a Mainline Level Gaming card, designed to play games with.  At medium screen resolutions, with respectable frame rates, it will offer a good mix of Medium settungs with a lot of High Level settings also.  In order to have High Quality image settings in all conditions, or to have higher resolutions, the next step upward to the Mobility HD 6850 must be taken (or to the Geforce GTX 560M). 

The GT 420, like the 320, and 220, is a borderline level video card that is in between a Business-only Low Level card, and a GT 440 or GTS 450, which are the Geforce Mainline cards.  I haven't compared it lately, but I imagine that an HD 5550 amounts to a match to the 420 . .

Borderline cards such as those will handle Low Image Quality settings at Medium resolutions without bogging down badly in frame rates often.  To increase the quality settings will mean a loss of frame rate smoothness. 

[bEVEsthda]

Aurume wrote...

(I should put these all in one post)

What about medium graphics details then?

Don't know, haven found a performance class for GT 420  (...and that is not a good sign )

I have found desktop GT 520, and that is about on par with Gorath's stated minimum above (HD 2600 Pro)  .

Modifié par bEVEsthda, 16 juin 2011 - 08:07 .

[Gorath Alpha]

Gorath Alpha wrote...

Aurume wrote...

I actually forgot to ask that will I be able to use high graphics detail on both of them or just on one, or nether one?

(Sorry, bad english, maybe =P )

You're getting your meaning across just fine.  It's the IM / TM foolishness I won't try to interpret! 

The Mobility HD 5650 is a Mainline Level Gaming card, designed to play games with.  At medium screen resolutions, with respectable frame rates, it will offer a good mix of Medium settungs with a lot of High Level settings also.  In order to have High Quality image settings in all conditions, or to have higher resolutions, the next step upward to the Mobility HD 6850 must be taken (or to the Geforce GTX 560M). 

The GT 420, like the 320, and 220, is a borderline level video card that is in between a Business-only Low Level card, and a GT 440 or GTS 450, which are the Geforce Mainline cards.  I haven't compared it lately, but I imagine that an HD 5550 amounts to a match to the 420 . .

Borderline cards such as those will handle Low Image Quality settings at Medium resolutions without bogging down badly in frame rates often.  To increase the quality settings will mean a loss of frame rate smoothness. 

Given the comparatively slow sales numbers for DA2 compared to most Bioware releases, maybe this forum never will pick up very much again, but since game registration is required to post here in this Tech forum, if there's a potential usefulness for a message thread to handle local "Can You Run It" comparisons, it will have to go into the non-registered General Subjects forum. 

I'd be interested in knowing if the OP on this thread would have used such an option, since the place that is usually thought of with the words "Can You Run It" is so notoriously inaccurate, and we would not be. 

[emma-vhenan]

Rather than making another "Can I run it?" post, I'm going to ask here and hope that one of you knowledgable folks responding to this poster can perhaps help me out too. (And I agree, a "can you run it?" forum would be great for those of us who enjoy gaming but, alas, know or understand little about computers, despite how often we may use them.)

I had an HP Entertainment PC that played DA: Origins and II fine, but the motherboard on it just died a horrible death (no connection there, I hope). So I'm looking for a new laptop but not able to spend a tremendous amount of money at the moment. Mostly, I need it for schoolwork and I probably won't use it for much gaming aside from Dragon Age, so that's the main determining factor for me - can it play it?

I've gathered that the Intel graphics are a no-no, but I don't quite understand enough about graphics cards and even processors to know which ones will work if they are not the exact numbers listed for Dragon Age's specs. Maybe someone can explain to me how you know which ones are better? Is it based on how high the number is, as in Radeon HD 2600 - what does that number mean?

I'm looking at a Dell Inspiron right now with the following stats:

Processor: AMD Athlon™ II X2
Processor Speed: 2.3GHz
Graphics Card: ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4250

Will that be able to play Dragon Age II?

Thanks for any help!

[Gorath Alpha]

The FIRST number is only a generational marker, whether it's a Geforce's three digits, or a Radeon's four. For a Radeon, "600" is the target in the second digit, with a "570" being "close", you get the smallest of the cupie dolls. For a Geforce, that's the "40 - 50" pair at 570 / 670.

The HD 4250 isn't a "Card" at all, only the AMD version of an onboard Chipset video chip. The bottom card has been the HD 5450, and now will be the HD 6450. AMD hasn't sold any cards as bad as the Geforce 210, since 2005 or so. The 310 is more of the same, and nearly down in their ranks is is the GT 420.

Modifié par Gorath Alpha, 25 juin 2011 - 12:02 .

[Homer_S]

I used to have it run on a Dell Lattitude E6400 with Intel graphics. You just had to dial down all of the fancy settings. Also, it lagged a bit when there were tons of enemies on the screen. If you play with pausing to command your party, it is probably OK anyway. Mass Effect on the same machine is a no-go as it is super hard/impossible to aim properly due to the lag.

Homer

[Hellicious]

FOR EVERYONE!

use this to check the performance of many games in your pcs or laptops

http://www.systemreq...tslab.com/cyri/

[Gorath Alpha]

Big WRONG, bum steer there!

Those idiots are wrong so often that referring anyone else to the place earmarks you as a rube, if not a total noob, because they give wrong answers so often that they have a horrible reputation. It's not a good reference at all, really!

P. S. If you had read the entire message thread, in a prior comment of mine, I had already alluded to the bad reputation suffered by the SR Lab site.  

Modifié par Gorath Alpha, 25 juin 2011 - 10:09 .

[emma-vhenan]

Gorath Alpha wrote...

The FIRST number is only a generational marker, whether it's a Geforce's three digits, or a Radeon's four. For a Radeon, "600" is the target in the second digit, with a "570" being "close", you get the smallest of the cupie dolls. For a Geforce, that's the "40 - 50" pair at 570 / 670.

The HD 4250 isn't a "Card" at all, only the AMD version of an onboard Chipset video chip. The bottom card has been the HD 5450, and now will be the HD 6450. AMD hasn't sold any cards as bad as the Geforce 210, since 2005 or so. The 310 is more of the same, and nearly down in their ranks is is the GT 420.

Okay, that makes a bit more sense now, thank you! Am I understanding correctly that the HD 4250 is integrated graphics and that what I want is a dedicated graphics card? I've seen some of that terminology used, though the specs on web sites for purchasing computers don't always differentiate and so I still get a bit lost. So to play even with minimum settings, I need a number higher than the 250 - at least a card with 450? Is it possible to play the game without a card and just the video chip?

Thanks for your help, I appreciate it!

Modifié par roseganymede, 25 juin 2011 - 11:32 .

[emma-vhenan]

Homer_S wrote...

I used to have it run on a Dell Lattitude E6400 with Intel graphics. You just had to dial down all of the fancy settings. Also, it lagged a bit when there were tons of enemies on the screen. If you play with pausing to command your party, it is probably OK anyway. Mass Effect on the same machine is a no-go as it is super hard/impossible to aim properly due to the lag.

Homer

Interesting! I can deal with some lagging, and I tend to pause and play in combat a fair amount anyway. So your Dell didn't have a graphics card, per se, but had the integrated Intel graphics? I wish I knew the model of my previous laptop, as it's in the shop at present and I'm not sure what graphics it ran on, but being that I only paid $700 for it, I doubt I had an impressive card - I couldn't actually even run Mass Effect on it (which I was a bit bummed about, but I may get an Xbox 360 soon so I'll play it on there, even though I prefer PC).

Thanks for the input!

Modifié par roseganymede, 25 juin 2011 - 11:33 .

[emma-vhenan]

Hellicious wrote...

FOR EVERYONE!

use this to check the performance of many games in your pcs or laptops

http://www.systemreq...tslab.com/cyri/

The only problem with this - well, aside from Gorath saying it's not reliable - is that it measures the capabilities of the computer you are on. I didn't see on the site where you could enter a computer model instead, as my issue is that I'm not looking to see what I can play on a laptop I have, but rather I'm looking to purchase a laptop and want to know before I buy it if it will play the game.

Thanks for the input!

[Hellicious]

quick solution: Alienware ;D