I thought it was 8GB cut off for 32-bit, but I could very easily be wrong. Since DAI requires a 64 bit OS I assumed they'd include a 64-bit executable as well. They might not I suppose.
Only 64-bit processes can utilize more than 4GB system memory. 64-bit executable for DA:I would be nice but so far very few games have ever provided one.
Well this isn't exactly true, a 32-bit OS can technically access more than 4GB of ram by enabling Physical Address Extension on the OS. Windows Servers have this off by default, and a Windows desktop OS doesn't have it without using 3rd party patch. Enabling PAE can cause some programs to go bonkers if the application requires more than 2GB of memory space as this is a limitation to PAE. Still takes quite of bit of steps to have it enabled on the desktop.
I thought it was 8GB cut off for 32-bit, but I could very easily be wrong. Since DAI requires a 64 bit OS I assumed they'd include a 64-bit executable as well. They might not I suppose.
If the OS isn't using the PAE mode, it won't go passed the 4GB of RAM barrier. If PAE mode is enabled it can address 64GB of memory. Still It's all the more easier to just go with a 64-bit OS.
I have a question. With these specs:
Operating system: Windows 8.1
AMD FX-8350 4Ghz.
8GB RAM
ASUS Radeon R9 280x 3GB
HD: 750+ GB
Here is one thing. My screen resolution is 1650x1050.
Would I be able to max DA:I?
I have a question. With these specs:
Operating system: Windows 8.1
AMD FX-8350 4Ghz.
8GB RAM
ASUS Radeon R9 280x 3GB
HD: 750+ GB
Here is one thing. My screen resolution is 1650x1050.
Would I be able to max DA:I?
1650x1050 is less pixels than 1080p, so it is actually easier for you to reach max settings. And with that set up I'd say yes. Not as familiar with AMD processors as with Intel, but if it's got 4Ghz and at least 2 processors it should be able to handle high settings. 30fps for sure, probably even 60fps. Unless you thrown in crazy AA stuff you'll be good.
So this thread seems like a good place to ask:
My aging laptop is incredibly borderline at best. Sadly, I don't really have the funds to upgrade--even a console would be a stretch. That said, it would be AWESOME if DAI could hobble along on my poor underpowered machine. If someone could tell me whether I have even a remote chance with these specs, that would be lovely.
Windows 7
Processor: Intel Core i5 M 560 @ 2.67GHz
Memory: 6GB RAM
Graphics Card: Nvidia GeForce GT 420M
Again, running it on super shiny max settings is way out the window--I understand that. But at the lowest settings, maybe? *crosses fingers*
So this thread seems like a good place to ask:
My aging laptop is incredibly borderline at best. Sadly, I don't really have the funds to upgrade--even a console would be a stretch. That said, it would be AWESOME if DAI could hobble along on my poor underpowered machine. If someone could tell me whether I have even a remote chance with these specs, that would be lovely.
Windows 7
Processor: Intel Core i5 M 560 @ 2.67GHz
Memory: 6GB RAM
Graphics Card: Nvidia GeForce GT 420M
Again, running it on super shiny max settings is way out the window--I understand that. But at the lowest settings, maybe? *crosses fingers*
If that Intel is a quad core I'd say yes on low. If it is dual-core then it gets iffy.
So this thread seems like a good place to ask:
My aging laptop is incredibly borderline at best. Sadly, I don't really have the funds to upgrade--even a console would be a stretch. That said, it would be AWESOME if DAI could hobble along on my poor underpowered machine. If someone could tell me whether I have even a remote chance with these specs, that would be lovely.
Windows 7
Processor: Intel Core i5 M 560 @ 2.67GHz
Memory: 6GB RAM
Graphics Card: Nvidia GeForce GT 420M
Again, running it on super shiny max settings is way out the window--I understand that. But at the lowest settings, maybe? *crosses fingers*
i would say it depends on what resolution you are gonna play? if you are willing to go below 1080p you should be able to run it, but no one can promise that right now
i would say it depends on what resolution you are gonna play? if you are willing to go below 1080p you should be able to run it, but no one can promise that right now
1366x768 at the most, really. That's (tentatively) good to hear. My wallet is giving a huge sigh of relief.
1366x768 at the most, really. That's (tentatively) good to hear. My wallet is giving a huge sigh of relief.
yeah with that resolution even if your CPU is a Dual Core.. it has Hyperthreading so it basically acts like a quad core
expect low settings... dont get your hopes too high but i think you should be ok
you could try out Battlefield 4... its the same engine and has almost the same requierements if you need to know in advance
Here's my specs:
Operating System: Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit
Processor: AMD A8-5500 APU with Radeon™ HD Graphics(4 CPUs), 3.2GHz
Installed Memory (RAM): 8GB
DirectX Version: DirectX 11
Will I be able to play it at medium settings?
So this thread seems like a good place to ask:
My aging laptop is incredibly borderline at best. Sadly, I don't really have the funds to upgrade--even a console would be a stretch. That said, it would be AWESOME if DAI could hobble along on my poor underpowered machine. If someone could tell me whether I have even a remote chance with these specs, that would be lovely.
Windows 7
Processor: Intel Core i5 M 560 @ 2.67GHz
Memory: 6GB RAM
Graphics Card: Nvidia GeForce GT 420M
Again, running it on super shiny max settings is way out the window--I understand that. But at the lowest settings, maybe? *crosses fingers*
Might not quite be smoothly playable on your laptop even lowest settings at 720p, here is a video of someone playing BF4 with 420m, see if you think this is too laggy for you:
OS: Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit
CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 2,83 GHz
RAM: 6GB DDR2
GPU: EVGA Nividia GTX 660 3GB
Resolution: 1680x1050
What setting do you think DA:I will run on with this setup?
I wonder how well comparing to BF4 is to compare to DAI?
This is what I currently have (heck, my laptop is from late 2010), and I can run BF4 (I can upgrade another 4GB of memory):
Intel Core i7 740QM (1.73GHz)
4GB Memory 500GB HDD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M
Windows 7 Professional 64-bit
But according to the CanIRunIt website, I don't even meet min specs for DAI.
This is just me wondering.
I wonder how well comparing to BF4 is to compare to DAI?
This is what I currently have (heck, my laptop is from late 2010), and I can run BF4 (I can upgrade another 4GB of memory):
Intel Core i7 740QM (1.73GHz)
4GB Memory 500GB HDD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M
Windows 7 Professional 64-bit
But according to the CanIRunIt website, I don't even meet min specs for DAI.
This is just me wondering.
What's the display resolution on your laptop? No way to know for certain until the game releases, but the fact that it's the same engine as BF4 and has the same recommended specs suggests your performance should be similar.
Those CanIRunit and systemrequirements websites are useless, IMO. They don't take into account your display resolution, graphics settings, what frame rate you prefer or actual benchmarks from other users with similar hardware. These make a huge difference. All those websites can do is compare your CPU and GPU to the list of min specs.
Someone should make a website that checks your hardware and graphics settings against actual benchmarks for the game.
OS: Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit
CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 2,83 GHz
RAM: 6GB DDR2
GPU: EVGA Nividia GTX 660 3GB
Resolution: 1680x1050
What setting do you think DA:I will run on with this setup?
At 1680x1050 (which is just a bit less expensive memory-wise than 1080p) I'd say medium to high (not ultra). If you know how to over clock your cpu it would go to high for sure.
At 1680x1050 (which is just a bit less expensive memory-wise than 1080p) I'd say medium to high (not ultra). If you know how to over clock your cpu it would go to high for sure.
Thanks! I guess it'll be a time to upgrade soon, this PC is about 5 years old 
I'll check out how much can it be boosted with overclocking.
1650x1050 is less pixels than 1080p, so it is actually easier for you to reach max settings. And with that set up I'd say yes. Not as familiar with AMD processors as with Intel, but if it's got 4Ghz and at least 2 processors it should be able to handle high settings. 30fps for sure, probably even 60fps. Unless you thrown in crazy AA stuff you'll be good.
Thank you for your response!
Let's seeeee....
Intel i7-4790K CPU
Asus z97 Sabertooth Mark 1 Motherboard
NVIDIA GTX 980 x2 SLI GPU
16 GB Crucial Ballistix Sport DDR3 1600 RAM
Playing on Windows 7 ('Cuz Windows 8 can **** off)
With:
Asus XB280HK 28" 4k G-Sync Monitor
&
Corsair Gaming Audio Series SP2500 High-Power 2.1 PC Speaker System
(Claps stupidly to self while bouncing up and down in chair)
Let's seeeee....
Intel i7-4790K CPU
Asus z97 Sabertooth Mark 1 Motherboard
NVIDIA GTX 980 x2 SLI GPU
16 GB Crucial Ballistix Sport DDR3 1600 RAM
Playing on Windows 7 ('Cuz Windows 8 can **** off)
With:
Asus XB280HK 28" 4k G-Sync Monitor
&
Corsair Gaming Audio Series SP2500 High-Power 2.1 PC Speaker System
(Claps stupidly to self while bouncing up and down in chair)
Congrats, you can ultra it on 4k with ultra graphics and still get 60fps.
Congrats, you can ultra it on 4k with ultra graphics and still get 60fps.
ROCK OUT!!!!
What's the display resolution on your laptop? No way to know for certain until the game releases, but the fact that it's the same engine as BF4 and has the same recommended specs suggests your performance should be similar.
Those CanIRunit and systemrequirements websites are useless, IMO. They don't take into account your display resolution, graphics settings, what frame rate you prefer or actual benchmarks from other users with similar hardware. These make a huge difference. All those websites can do is compare your CPU and GPU to the list of min specs.
Someone should make a website that checks your hardware and graphics settings against actual benchmarks for the game.
Thanks for the reply.
It's one of the things I've been wondering if the websites are as useful as I am talking myself into.
My laptop screen resolution is:
I'm wavering in between just adding the extra 4GB of memory for $40 and seeing how DAI runs, or plopping down the $$$$ for the custom built if my current system doesn't run it how I'd like it (which since I won't have time off until the week following DAI release, I'd at least be able to load the game on my current system, try it out, then order the new system if needed/wanted). Although with the environs they have shown, my inner geology/landscape geek really wants to see those environments in as high a resolution as possible. (if I do go the custom route, I hope the build lasts as long as my off the shelf Qosmio has, almost 4 years! Pretty good in my mind for a laptop)
I have a PS4 also, but I really prefer the PC controls and the portability for when I travel for work.
So I posted earlier in this thread and decided to get a video card upgrade. I'm looking at the gtx 970 and holy cow I see acronyms for days. I'm seeing a price difference of about $70 Canadian between different versions. Can anyone tell me what you get for the extra money and what the acronyms mean? I've been using NCIX.com.
link to a search of gtx 970: http://search.ncix.c...tid=0&q=gtx 970
Is there any reason not to get the cheapest option possible? Thanks if advance for any responses
Hello @ I Creep Around
In general, when looking at multiple versions of the exact same GPU (for example that GTX 970) you notice that price differences coincide with the fact that there are quite a few different manufacturers offing their "version" of that hardware. In some cases, the differences are minor, but noticeable (for example the ASUS version may have a higher MHZ rate, meaning it will run faster slightly, that say the ZOTAC version), whilst all other stats remain near the same..
These manufacturers difference do stem from the quality of components they use; so in essence when you see a negligible price difference, it is more than likely due to overall cost of components.. Now does this mean the cards are REALLY all that different? To a degree, however, more than anything it is that some components are of BETTER quality than others and so some manufacturers are more noted for their quality than others. So which is which? Obviously you can go with a type you know and trust (if you have such a brand you become familiar with) or, go with actual test market reviews (as opposed to users reviews, which tend to be more biased and emotionally driven.)
In the end, (and of coarse this can be always argued) current trends place ASUS and EVGA as some of the best manufacturers currently.. ( just to give you 2 top examples). But in the end, if you are concerned with budget as well as quality, go with the info you do trust before making any decisions.
Hope this helps.
So I posted earlier in this thread and decided to get a video card upgrade. I'm looking at the gtx 970 and holy cow I see acronyms for days. I'm seeing a price difference of about $70 Canadian between different versions. Can anyone tell me what you get for the extra money and what the acronyms mean? I've been using NCIX.com.
link to a search of gtx 970: http://search.ncix.c...tid=0&q=gtx 970
Is there any reason not to get the cheapest option possible? Thanks if advance for any responses
I suggest to wait a few weeks if you can. New versions of the 970 and 980 cards will be available soon with double memory (8GB VRAM).
Retour en haut