205 réponses à ce sujet

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

For 1200 dollars? Yeah, if that isn't enough you've very likely been cheated.

[Archaven]

GTX760 hardly even a mid-end card? I'll go for at least GTX770 for Beyond HD resolution.

[Alexius]

Wulfram wrote...

Why does everyone who asks this have a system that's massively better than mine?

Ha, this so much.

When it's obviously over-specced (I doubt that's a word) I get the feeling it's just to show-off.

[EnergizerBunny211]

AlexiusDAlex wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

Why does everyone who asks this have a system that's massively better than mine?

Ha, this so much.

When it's obviously over-specced (I doubt that's a word) I get the feeling it's just to show-off.

At this point, because we don't know the Req's for DAI just yet-- I wouldn't go as far as saying that my upgrades are 'over-spec'd'  Because let's face it-- in six months or less they will be technically out-dated as something newer, bigger, faster and better will be out.....That's just the way of computer technologies, always has been.  We pay a good buck for the components that have just hit the market-- but within six months companies always release something to make what we've just purchased obselete.

Who knows?   I mean, I may have purchased a nearly top-of-the line CPU (only one step removed from the 4770k with .1 Mhz difference-- but big deal), moderately high-end Motherboard and (what I consider to be ) a pretty amazing GPU (though I know the 770s and 780s are better-- I couldn't afford to pay 500 dollars + for one, and frankly, I'd be nuts to.  So for the money I had to spend I went with the best card I could.)  But surely by the time Inquisiion comes out, new hardware will be on the market, and the specs for DAI will undoubtedly change in reflection of that compared to what we can only speculate now....

[errant_knight]

My laptop has a ATI Mobility Radeon HD 6370.... After reading this thread, I'm thinking that I may not be able to run the game with a playable framerate.

[whogotsalami]

EnergizerBunny211 wrote...

Have just wasted 1200 dollars? (Intel 4770 @ 3.4 Ghz, EVGA 4GB 760 Super-clocked Dual FTW, 32 Gigs of GSkill DDR3 @ 1600Mhz on an ASUS Maximus VI Hero Motherboard)...... I really REALLY hope my recently upgraded rig will be able to handle DA: I.....I'll be vexed if I get poor performance

Yep, horrible setup. You won't be able to run Origins, forget about DAI

[spirosz]

I have -
Intel I7-3770 @3.5 Ghz
Maximus V Gene Motherboard
Kingston HyperX 8GB DDR3 @1600Mhz
GTX 660ti

Would that be okay to run it?

[errant_knight]

From what I've seen of this thread, yes

[deuce985]

EnergizerBunny211 wrote...

Have just wasted 1200 dollars? (Intel 4770 @ 3.4 Ghz, EVGA 4GB 760 Super-clocked Dual FTW, 32 Gigs of GSkill DDR3 @ 1600Mhz on an ASUS Maximus VI Hero Motherboard)...... I really REALLY hope my recently upgraded rig will be able to handle DA: I.....I'll be vexed if I get poor performance

You will be fine. I promise. If these specs couldn't run the game then Bioware shouldn't even attempt a PC port lol.

[Alexius]

EnergizerBunny211 wrote...

AlexiusDAlex wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

Why does everyone who asks this have a system that's massively better than mine?

Ha, this so much.

When it's obviously over-specced (I doubt that's a word) I get the feeling it's just to show-off.

At this point, because we don't know the Req's for DAI just yet-- I wouldn't go as far as saying that my upgrades are 'over-spec'd'  Because let's face it-- in six months or less they will be technically out-dated as something newer, bigger, faster and better will be out.....That's just the way of computer technologies, always has been.  We pay a good buck for the components that have just hit the market-- but within six months companies always release something to make what we've just purchased obselete.

Who knows?   I mean, I may have purchased a nearly top-of-the line CPU (only one step removed from the 4770k with .1 Mhz difference-- but big deal), moderately high-end Motherboard and (what I consider to be ) a pretty amazing GPU (though I know the 770s and 780s are better-- I couldn't afford to pay 500 dollars + for one, and frankly, I'd be nuts to.  So for the money I had to spend I went with the best card I could.)  But surely by the time Inquisiion comes out, new hardware will be on the market, and the specs for DAI will undoubtedly change in reflection of that compared to what we can only speculate now....

Like someone already mentioned, the hardware you list is already on par with the next generation of consoles, if not better. You asked if it was ready, so I'm going out on a limb here and say it definitely is.

[EnergizerBunny211]

whogotsalami wrote...

EnergizerBunny211 wrote...

Have just wasted 1200 dollars? (Intel 4770 @ 3.4 Ghz, EVGA 4GB 760 Super-clocked Dual FTW, 32 Gigs of GSkill DDR3 @ 1600Mhz on an ASUS Maximus VI Hero Motherboard)...... I really REALLY hope my recently upgraded rig will be able to handle DA: I.....I'll be vexed if I get poor performance

Yep, horrible setup. You won't be able to run Origins, forget about DAI

Actually I can run Origins, DA 2, ME 1-3, BF 3 COD Black-Ops, MOH War Fighter, Tomb Raider (2013) and even Witcher 2 all at 2560x1600 with EVERYTHING totally maxed out with no problems whatsoever.   Of course, I'm going to be generous by giving you the benefit of the doubt, and think that when you made your comment you were being facetious.

However if you were being serious... well, what can I say other than everyone is entitled to their own opinion no matter how small.

[EnergizerBunny211]

deuce985 wrote...

EnergizerBunny211 wrote...

Have just wasted 1200 dollars? (Intel 4770 @ 3.4 Ghz, EVGA 4GB 760 Super-clocked Dual FTW, 32 Gigs of GSkill DDR3 @ 1600Mhz on an ASUS Maximus VI Hero Motherboard)...... I really REALLY hope my recently upgraded rig will be able to handle DA: I.....I'll be vexed if I get poor performance

You will be fine. I promise. If these specs couldn't run the game then Bioware shouldn't even attempt a PC port lol.

Touche

[EnergizerBunny211]

AlexiusDAlex wrote...

EnergizerBunny211 wrote...

AlexiusDAlex wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

Why does everyone who asks this have a system that's massively better than mine?

Ha, this so much.

When it's obviously over-specced (I doubt that's a word) I get the feeling it's just to show-off.

At this point, because we don't know the Req's for DAI just yet-- I wouldn't go as far as saying that my upgrades are 'over-spec'd'  Because let's face it-- in six months or less they will be technically out-dated as something newer, bigger, faster and better will be out.....That's just the way of computer technologies, always has been.  We pay a good buck for the components that have just hit the market-- but within six months companies always release something to make what we've just purchased obselete.

Who knows?   I mean, I may have purchased a nearly top-of-the line CPU (only one step removed from the 4770k with .1 Mhz difference-- but big deal), moderately high-end Motherboard and (what I consider to be ) a pretty amazing GPU (though I know the 770s and 780s are better-- I couldn't afford to pay 500 dollars + for one, and frankly, I'd be nuts to.  So for the money I had to spend I went with the best card I could.)  But surely by the time Inquisiion comes out, new hardware will be on the market, and the specs for DAI will undoubtedly change in reflection of that compared to what we can only speculate now....

Like someone already mentioned, the hardware you list is already on par with the next generation of consoles, if not better. You asked if it was ready, so I'm going out on a limb here and say it definitely is.

Nuff said then.  I rest my cse and put my mind at ease.  Thanks to all of  your who offered kind support to myself and other Forumites on this thread, and for the few who did not and have not, I have nothing more to say except I wish everyone in this Forum a pleasant gaming experience when "Inquisition" finally arrives.

Oh, what a fun day that will be....

[ruggly]

If my $1400 PC can't run the game, I'll probably weep a bit.

[EnergizerBunny211]

ruggly wrote...

If my $1400 PC can't run the game, I'll probably weep a bit.

Indeed.    I'm curious--what brands did you buy?(and I'm asking this in the most honest, friendly manner possible....NOT trashing or trolling at all, I promise).

   Myself, I lean towards Nvidia (particularly EVGA), Intel and ASS-US (yes I spelled it that way on purpose, becaue although I faithfully have bought that brand for years, the past 3 Boards have had some pretty serious issues, especially where the Drivers are concerned.  Not to mention the Service (and by that I mean complete lack of).

i've been told that ASUS only has a market here in North America.  Elsewhere (ie Europe) they promote Gigabyte and MSI in particular.   In years past, ASUS had always been true to their slogan "Rock Solid....." but recently, in my experience they have slipped up quite a lot and failed to deliver.

That being said, I am curious to know what other enthusiasists like myself, choose for their builds.   What are your brands of choice for your ultimate gaming PC? What if anything, is your opinion/experience with companies like MSI or Gigabyte?

Do you prefer AMD or Nvidia?    In years and decades past I had always supported ATI because they are Canadian, and (back in the 90s and early 2000s) they were a good 'budget build' in comparison to the more expensive Nvidia.   Yet as far back as I can remember.....(going back to 1991 with the 2 MB ATI Radeon Rage Pro II, 1st Gen PCI video cards) ATI has always had problems with their Drivers.  In the past (2000-2003) i'd also purchased the Radeon X850 Pro (SERIOUS Driver and other problems with that one!) then from 2004 to 2006 I owned (what I consider to be the last and best series of cards that was actually made by ATI (and not a 3rd party offshore company (ie Sapphire), the 256 MB Radeon X1950 Pro.....That was an amazing card for the time, but I found that it, too, had considerable Driver issues (intermitent as they were).

In 2007 I tried ATI cards from Sapphire, Diamond, Zotac and VisonTek....and none of them lasted more than 4 to 6 months; they all crapped out, either from component malfunctions or burning out.  The Sapphire infact, literally did burn.

It was then that I decided to change to Nvidia, beginning with the BFG 285 OC when it was brand new at the time....and I have had a number of Nvidia cards since that one and still do not have any problems with any of them, either from ASUS or EVGA.


Anyways, that's a long-winded dialogue......My apologies.  I am simply curious to know what you like to build your systems with

Do you like AMD/ATI or like me do you choose Nvidia?

Happy Gaming!

[ruggly]

My specs are:

MSI Z87-G45
Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 Ti
Intel i5-4670k @ 3.4
8 gig DDR3

And this is the first PC I ever built, and I had a friend help me, so I can't really answer your questions all too well, though I wish I could. Sorry about that.

I should also mention that it was $1400 for everything, so monitor and all, not just for the hardware.

Modifié par ruggly, 26 octobre 2013 - 10:52 .

[Br3admax]

EnergizerBunny211 wrote...

whogotsalami wrote...

EnergizerBunny211 wrote...

Have just wasted 1200 dollars? (Intel 4770 @ 3.4 Ghz, EVGA 4GB 760 Super-clocked Dual FTW, 32 Gigs of GSkill DDR3 @ 1600Mhz on an ASUS Maximus VI Hero Motherboard)...... I really REALLY hope my recently upgraded rig will be able to handle DA: I.....I'll be vexed if I get poor performance

Yep, horrible setup. You won't be able to run Origins, forget about DAI

Actually I can run Origins, DA 2, ME 1-3, BF 3 COD Black-Ops, MOH War Fighter, Tomb Raider (2013) and even Witcher 2 all at 2560x1600 with EVERYTHING totally maxed out with no problems whatsoever.   Of course, I'm going to be generous by giving you the benefit of the doubt, and think that when you made your comment you were being facetious.

However if you were being serious... well, what can I say other than everyone is entitled to their own opinion no matter how small.

If you can play the Witcher 2, there was really no reason to even ask. 

Modifié par Br3ad, 26 octobre 2013 - 10:41 .

[xSTONEYx187x]

Was honestly expecting a "can my quad sli uber Titan codename "Gaia" GPU run Dragon Age" stealth brag thread but it's not!

[EnergizerBunny211]

ruggly wrote...

My specs are:

MSI Z87-G45
Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 Ti
Intel i5-4670k @ 3.4
8 gig DDR3

And this is the first PC I ever built, and I had a friend help me, so I can't really answer your questions all too well, though I wish I could. Sorry about that.

I should also mention that it was $1400 for everything, so monitor and all, not just for the hardware.

That's a pretty nice rig you got and 1400 for everything tax-in, I think was a great deal.  No problem if you can't fully answer my question....I appreciate your honesty, and I wish you all the best. 

Happy future building....   It gets easier (and more fun) the more you do it.  My favourite part is unpacking all the hardware and the physicality of putting everything together; then of course, the icing on the cake is that first-glance at the job-well-done...and there's something about the appearance of a 'clean' looking system (with all the cables tucked away nicely using zip-ties and the hide-away notches in your case) that is particularly satisfying.

Did you have that feeling?    I've been building systems for 15 years or more and I still get that feeling of satisfaction, with just about every system I build....especially the ones that I'd been looking forward to.    I'm sure you had been looking forward to building yours with your friend, and I'm sure you'll get more than a few years of great gaming from your system.

Enjoy!

[bEVEsthda]

EnergizerBunny211 wrote...

ruggly wrote...

If my $1400 PC can't run the game, I'll probably weep a bit.

Indeed.    I'm curious--what brands did you buy?(and I'm asking this in the most honest, friendly manner possible....NOT trashing or trolling at all, I promise).

   Myself, I lean towards Nvidia (particularly EVGA), Intel and ASS-US (yes I spelled it that way on purpose, becaue although I faithfully have bought that brand for years, the past 3 Boards have had some pretty serious issues, especially where the Drivers are concerned.  Not to mention the Service (and by that I mean complete lack of).

i've been told that ASUS only has a market here in North America.  Elsewhere (ie Europe) they promote Gigabyte and MSI in particular.   In years past, ASUS had always been true to their slogan "Rock Solid....." but recently, in my experience they have slipped up quite a lot and failed to deliver.

That being said, I am curious to know what other enthusiasists like myself, choose for their builds.   What are your brands of choice for your ultimate gaming PC? What if anything, is your opinion/experience with companies like MSI or Gigabyte?

Do you prefer AMD or Nvidia?    In years and decades past I had always supported ATI because they are Canadian, and (back in the 90s and early 2000s) they were a good 'budget build' in comparison to the more expensive Nvidia.   Yet as far back as I can remember.....(going back to 1991 with the 2 MB ATI Radeon Rage Pro II, 1st Gen PCI video cards) ATI has always had problems with their Drivers.  In the past (2000-2003) i'd also purchased the Radeon X850 Pro (SERIOUS Driver and other problems with that one!) then from 2004 to 2006 I owned (what I consider to be the last and best series of cards that was actually made by ATI (and not a 3rd party offshore company (ie Sapphire), the 256 MB Radeon X1950 Pro.....That was an amazing card for the time, but I found that it, too, had considerable Driver issues (intermitent as they were).

In 2007 I tried ATI cards from Sapphire, Diamond, Zotac and VisonTek....and none of them lasted more than 4 to 6 months; they all crapped out, either from component malfunctions or burning out.  The Sapphire infact, literally did burn.

It was then that I decided to change to Nvidia, beginning with the BFG 285 OC when it was brand new at the time....and I have had a number of Nvidia cards since that one and still do not have any problems with any of them, either from ASUS or EVGA.


Anyways, that's a long-winded dialogue......My apologies.  I am simply curious to know what you like to build your systems with

Do you like AMD/ATI or like me do you choose Nvidia?

Happy Gaming!

I like to build cheap. My motto is "If it works, it works, even if it's cheap".

I made it a sort of point to always try a new brand of mainboard. I can't do that anymore 'cause there's not so many around anymore. The two Iiked the best, Abit and Exsomething, don't exist anymore. My current fav is Gigabyte. My next will be a Gigabyte again. I have a MSI in my last. Gives an impression of being shoddy, but it works (as all the rest) so I shouldn't complain.
I never buy the 'enthusiast' boards. I try to pick a simple, full size, plain board with no gimmicks and a good modern chipset. No Sli/Xfire, no onboard graphics. It's usually like a third of the price of the enthusiast boards and will typically work flawless, as long as you don't OC. IMO, the simple boards used to be more reliable than the enthusiast boards - not sure that is true anymore though. The enthusiast boards are bound to have become better. One important point is that the board must be able to deliver the current that the CPU requires, so one cannot buy any simple board.

I have typically had Intel in my job-computers, and AMD in my personal since the original Athlon. My personal runs better.
I've had one AMD-job-computer over the years. I had to press my employer on the issue for a long time. Then it cut processing times to 1/7'th (yep! really, gospel truth!) and my boss never said a word about Intel again. Of course, this was before Nehalem, aka Core i7. Since then Intel CPUs are ok and possess the top honors, but they're still over-rated.

I used to use nVidia, but after the AMD took over Radeon, my impression was that the best buy cards were Radeon, so I switched with AMD's second generation, the HD4870. At about the same time, MS statistics showed Radeon drivers to pass GeForce in reliability. The last ATI designed generation were the HD 2XXX cards. These were very hot and nVidia looked to have Radeon check mate at that time. The story was much different with the first AMD generation, the HD 3XXX. Geforce remained fastest, but HD3850 and HD3870 were much cheaper and cooler. Next generation, 4XXX, AMD matched GeForce performance, but remained cool and good value. Since then, it's been a toss, IMO. But I've sofar been sticking with Radeon. I'm prepared to switch anytime though.

I use cheap cases, decent PSUs, cheap stock/standard RAM and expensive CPU-coolers.

I've only ever had problems with 3 parts. Ironically high quality, hi reliability brands. One memory stick. One graphics card, a Matrox, and one PSU, a Fortron.  (note that I take careful precautions about static electricity when I handle parts).
...If I don't count harddrives. I've had three IBM Death-Stars, and one Fujitsu file-corruptor. Of course, IBM and Fujitsu are now out of the hd-business. What happens I guess, when they give extensive warranty and every single drive (or close) still fails.

Modifié par bEVEsthda, 27 octobre 2013 - 09:56 .

[zombiefriend]

My specs:

AMD Phenom II X4 955 @ 3.2ghz
Radeon HD 6870
4gb RAM

I could play Witcher 2 and BF3 on High at 1080, so I imagine I should be able to play on High and turn the resolution down probably down to 720 for 50-60 fps. That's how I played Crysis 3 and I don't mind playing at 720, so I'm going to guess my computer/body is ready.

[Fredvdp]

zombiefriend wrote...

My specs:

AMD Phenom II X4 955 @ 3.2ghz
Radeon HD 6870
4gb RAM

I could play Witcher 2 and BF3 on High at 1080, so I imagine I should be able to play on High and turn the resolution down probably down to 720 for 50-60 fps. That's how I played Crysis 3 and I don't mind playing at 720, so I'm going to guess my computer/body is ready.

Same PC as mine, except I have the Phenom II x4 965 instead of the 955.

Have you played the BF4 beta? It ran on my PC at high settings and 1080p, but it was with a low framerate of 30. Lowering settings and resolution had no effect. Still, Dice said they would fix performance, so we should probably check out some benchmarks soon (or buy the game if you're really committed to figuring this out).

I too run BF3 really smoothly on high settings. The single player is especially smooth, which is probably a better benchmark to compare to DA3 than the multiplayer.

[PnXMarcin1PL]

I can run BF3 on ultra settings with Q8200 oc'd to 3GHz, but in some intense moments my GTX 460 fails and starts to artifact for few minutes

[NocteAngelus]

My belief is that if you can run any game currently out on the market at maxed out settings right now, by the time DA:I comes out you will be fine. The only time a game company made a mistake with the releasing of a game too far ahead of the hardware was Crytek's Crysis. Even fully maxed out liquid cooled pcs couldn't max out the settings for it. I doubt anyone will make that error again anytime soon. Think Skyrim maxed out or even BF4 maxed out you should be okay. It's really the gameplay processing that might strain it more given the scope of the gameplay.

[zombiefriend]

Fredvdp wrote...

zombiefriend wrote...

My specs:

AMD Phenom II X4 955 @ 3.2ghz
Radeon HD 6870
4gb RAM

I could play Witcher 2 and BF3 on High at 1080, so I imagine I should be able to play on High and turn the resolution down probably down to 720 for 50-60 fps. That's how I played Crysis 3 and I don't mind playing at 720, so I'm going to guess my computer/body is ready.

Same PC as mine, except I have the Phenom II x4 965 instead of the 955.

Have you played the BF4 beta? It ran on my PC at high settings and 1080p, but it was with a low framerate of 30. Lowering settings and resolution had no effect. Still, Dice said they would fix performance, so we should probably check out some benchmarks soon (or buy the game if you're really committed to figuring this out).

I too run BF3 really smoothly on high settings. The single player is especially smooth, which is probably a better benchmark to compare to DA3 than the multiplayer.

No, sadfully, I was one of the many who had a very rough time trying out the beta that is if I actually got into a match. But I'm glad to hear it ran well enough on your machine having almost identical specs. I mainly wanted to test the beta out JUST to see how well I'd run DA:I and it looks like I'll be ready. <3