Not going to run 1080p comfortably, but at 1366x768 should be playable if you fiddle with the settings, probably turn off MSAA.
Here's more info and ranking on your GPU: http://www.notebookc...5M.41933.0.html
Great thanks! I'll play on min settings, then I'll play on beautiful ultra settings when I make my new rig.
I know it's already been posted, but this is really all you need
Those websites are not accurate. They don't take into account your display resolution, or the frame rate and graphics settings you are comfortable with. These make a huge difference.
My PC could run it, but it would not run well.
I need a new graphics card.
I'm not 100% certain about my CPU. I've got an intel core i3-3220 CPU at 3.30GHz, which only has two cores, however, it's got hyper threading and therefore four processors. cyri says I can run it, and a friend of mine who's better with computers than me says I'll be fine, and the speed is certainly fast enough for recommended specs, but I'm paranoid and if someone else could give me an opinion, that would be great.
My pc meets all the other requirements, just fyi.
if your GPU and RAM meet the recommended specs, then you will most likely to be fine. The majority of games, even the newest ones, rely far more on the Graphics processor than the CPU, and even when they utilize the CPU, have a lot of trouble utilizing multiple cores. so aside from some slight bottlenecking you might get if your GPU is excessively powerful compared to your CPU, the lack of 4 physical cores shouldn't really hinder you much at all.
@ redxxfox
Not to worry amigo..
The optimal take away note is "logical processors" - one of the joys of hyper threading. So while the CPU may have 2 physical cores, if it is running with 4 logical processors, you are as golden as the sun!
My CPU/GPU combination should let me run the game at medium-to-high settings in most regard but - of course - I want to slam this game into my brain with as maximized settings as the game will allow, heh!
My conundrum now is that I'll only have time and money enough to upgrade one before the NA release (though hopefully upgrading the other won't be far behind in the following months) and I'm really only "knowledgable" enough about PC hardware to have been able to muddle through building one a few years ago and having what is probably only a basic understanding of the components and how they interplay.
So! Should I upgrade my CPU or my GPU to the recommended specs to see the most dramatic result first?
(Current CPU: http://www.newegg.co...N82E16819116774; Current GPU: http://www.newegg.co...N82E16814202004)
(EDIT: Whoops! Should have added what I'm thinking of getting! Prospective CPU: http://www.newegg.co...N82E16819116504; Prospective GPU: http://www.newegg.co...N82E16814202090
And does "Recommended" likely mean recommended for full-blast, ultra-settings or should we be aiming higher than that for totally maxed settings, do you think?)
Hopefully this will ease the burden of your conundrum,
For the sake of your current hardware vs. your prospective hardware in relation to upgrading before Inqusition's release here is the following:
1- Your current CPU is fine, as is for the purpose of playing this game between min. / recommended settings
2- I am going to presume that your system RAM memory is alright (min. 2gb / recommended 4 gb)
With this in mind, you have 2 reasons for focusing only on the GPU:
1- Getting the dedicated VRAM of 2Gb dedicated will make sure that your system does not have to allocate regular RAM to run all processes (being both game and regular PC operation), thus allowing for much smoother game play mechanics and look with little to no issues
2- you are saving a bit of money to at least get the hardware that will serve more of a purpose for the intent of playing the game..
and Recommended is a standard term for playing the game at the med to high settings using native resolutions and refresh rates; if you wish to try ultra high settings then yes you would want to aim well above those states to ensure that you would not see clipping (of screen edges), pauses in screen action, or a loss of fidelity in either imaging or game play, especially with HD or even new 4k standards.
Hope this helps! Enjoy @ Gustave
I know it's already been posted, but this is really all you need
That website is highly inaccurate and should be used with caution, or preferrably not at all.
Oh, nice thread.
I have:
i5 4670K Quad-core @3.4 GHZ (6MB Cache)
Radeon HD 7970 3GB 5GDDR
8 GB Ram
The benchmarks I've looked at suggest I would be able to run ~40FPS on ultra for Battlefield 4.
Guest_DOJA_*
My CPU/GPU combination should let me run the game at medium-to-high settings in most regard but - of course - I want to slam this game into my brain with as maximized settings as the game will allow, heh!
My conundrum now is that I'll only have time and money enough to upgrade one before the NA release (though hopefully upgrading the other won't be far behind in the following months) and I'm really only "knowledgable" enough about PC hardware to have been able to muddle through building one a few years ago and having what is probably only a basic understanding of the components and how they interplay.
So! Should I upgrade my CPU or my GPU to the recommended specs to see the most dramatic result first?
(Current CPU: http://www.newegg.co...N82E16819116774; Current GPU: http://www.newegg.co...N82E16814202004)
(EDIT: Whoops! Should have added what I'm thinking of getting! Prospective CPU: http://www.newegg.co...N82E16819116504; Prospective GPU: http://www.newegg.co...N82E16814202090
And does "Recommended" likely mean recommended for full-blast, ultra-settings or should we be aiming higher than that for totally maxed settings, do you think?)
Upgrading the GPU is nearly always the way to go if you want better performance purely for gaming.
That GPU is definetely a decent choice, and a very good value for money, but no, it will not allow you to run everything on ultra with smooth framerates. Admittedly, any GPU that is more powerful than that one would probably be bottlenecked by your current CPU anyway, so I think the R9 270 is probably a very good choice.
My main concern is my graphics card. It's intel HD graphics 4000. I can run sims 3, skyrim, mass effect 3 just fine (not on max setting, on medium low setting). Do I have to upgrade if I simply want to run it smoothly (not on maxed setting)?
Oh, nice thread.
I have:
i5 4670K Quad-core @3.4 GHZ (6MB Cache)Radeon HD 7970 3GB 5GDDR
8 GB Ram
The benchmarks I've looked at suggest I would be able to run ~40FPS on ultra for Battlefield 4.
yeah, you would most likely get very playable framerates even if you max all of the settings at 1080p. It won't be perfectly smooth, and you might get some stuttering, but if you play around with settings and adjust your Anti-Aliasing, you should be able to get a solid 60 FPS for most of the game.
the 4670K is an excellent CPU as well, and is unlikely to bottleneck any future GPU upgrades for a while unless you get an extremely high end SLI setup.
My main concern is my graphics card. It's intel HD graphics 4000. I can run sims 3, skyrim, mass effect 3 just fine (not on max setting, on medium low setting). Do I have to upgrade if I simply want to run it smoothly (not on maxed setting)?
Yeah, unfortunately, intel HD graphics are not really sufficient to run most frostbite games.
Also, as previously mentioned, when developers release the "minimum required specs" that effectively represents the lowest end hardware that they will actually fully support. If any part of your hardware falls below the minimum standard (the HD 4000 is below the minimum), then neither EA or Bioware can provide any guarantee that the game will even run. This means that if you have an issue getting the game to run, and you try to contact EA support or something, they don't even have to help you out, because you do not meet the requirements to run the game anyway.
So I guess it's up to you if you want to build a new rig, or just get DA:I on console.
Ok,
My operating system is Vista 64 bit, which I hear the game has not been tested on.
Next, I use a 1gb 4850 and min specs claim to require 500mb 4870.
8 gb ram,, 3.4ghz 940 phenom
Is it over?
CPU: AMD FX-8100 8-core, 2.8Ghz
RAM: 8GB
GPU: Radeon R7 250 2GB
So I guess it's up to you if you want to build a new rig, or just get DA:I on console.
I don't have a console. Or money for new rig, for that matter.
This is why I said, I just want to be able to run it. Does "not really sufficient" mean "can't run it at all" or "run it, but you risk breaking the game midway (or something equally bad)"?
@ Hellspont
Well given what you provided you can certainly rest easy that you can play Dragon Age: Inquisition smoothly on the med. to med/high settings with little to no graphic issues (barring the occasional buffer stall with usually only lasts like a second or two.) I certainly would not recommend ultra settings as you would run into issues that could lead to very slow frame rates and interruptions in smooth game play.
But, given how good the Frostbite engine is, medium settings are not horrible to look at, especially from a sheer visual stand point.
@ Yeldar
These are the only two areas with which you may run into an issue:
1 - the GPU, given only 1GB dedicated, you would have to rely on the other 1GB being pulled from the total system memory during operation. Now this in and of itself is not the worst thing, but it can lead to images freezing for seconds at a time, especially if there is a lot going on in the scene. This can usually be remedied with turning off Anti-alias, using low to med. settings only, and possibly reducing your overall screen resolution size.
2- and the more important of the issues, the operating system. If you are indeed running on a operation system that is not tested for, you may very well run into issues that result in frequent "this program has stopped working" error messages.
@ GrinningRogue: Not really sufficient does mean that IF you TRY to play the game, you may very well run into issues that would result in restart, or lack of ability to play the game smoothly even on the lowest settings, if at all.
Hope this helps.
Thank you @Regular Wise Guy & @Hyperion! I have 32 G of RAM - which I should have stated - from an amazing deal a few years back but I believe that should be way more than enough. Thanks again for the advice!
Googling "[your GPU] BF4" might help give you a decent idea how it'll run with a youtube video.
@ GrinningRogue: Not really sufficient does mean that IF you TRY to play the game, you may very well run into issues that would result in restart, or lack of ability to play the game smoothly even on the lowest settings, if at all.
Hope this helps.
I see. 
Alright. Thanks for clarifying.
@ GrinningRogue
It was my pleasure. I know it is not the best of news, but better to at least get an accurate idea and know what may need to be fixed that just jumping right in, running into to all those issues and having no real idea as to why you are having them or what you can do (if anything at all) to correct them. Now, of coarse that doesn't completely mean that if you tried to play it, that it wouldn't work.. it may.. but certainly only on low settings and still with the potential for a lot of problems.
Everyone should be able to enjoy their games without playing the sub-game: upgrades & updates before hand!
Hope you get to enjoy Inquisition!
What settings do you think I'd be able to run it on?
GPU: Nvidia GeForce 680 2GB
CPU: AMD FX-8320 3.5GHz
RAM: 8GB
I'm confident I'll be able to run it, just want to know what settings I'll be aiming for 
Retour en haut