16 réponses à ce sujet

[buzznut]

I've been searching and having a difficult time finding the system requirements for the game. For this game I would definitely be willing to upgrade, but the location for this info wasn't obvious to me.

[AClockworkMelon]

Click Here.



System requirements are on the right-hand side of the page.

[Shensi]

XP Min:

* OS: Windows XP with SP3

* CPU: Intel Core 2(or equivalent) running at 1.4Ghz or greater

AMD X2(or equivalent) running at 1.8Ghz or greater

* RAM: 1GB or more

* VIDEO: ATI Radeon X850 128MB or greater

NVIDIA GeForce 6600 GT 128MB or greater

DVD ROM (Physical copy)

20 GB HD space



Vista Min:

* OS: Windows Vista with SP1

* CPU: Intel Core 2 (or equivalent) running at 1.6Ghz or greater

* RAM: 1.5 GB or more

* VIDEO: ATI Radeon X1550 256MB or greater

NVIDIA GeForce 7600 GT 256MB or greater

DVD ROM (Physical copy)

20 GB HD space



Recommended:

* CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad 2.4Ghz Processor or equivalent

* RAM: 4 GB (Vista) or 2 GB (XP)

* VIDEO: ATI 3850 512 MB or greater

NVIDIA 8800GTS 512 MB or greater

AMD Phenom II X3 Triple-Core 2.8 GHz or greater

DVD ROM (Physical copy)

20 GB HD space

[SheffSteel]

Too slow


Note to mods: Perhaps there should be a sticky note in this forum detailing the tech specs.

Modifié par SheffSteel, 15 octobre 2009 - 02:10 .

[JEBesh]

Windows XP Minimum Specifications
OS: Windows XP with SP3
CPU: Intel Core 2 (or equivalent) running at 1.4Ghz or greater
AMD X2 (or equivalent) running at 1.8Ghz or greater
RAM: 1GB or more
Video: ATI Radeon X850 128MB or greater
NVIDIA GeForce 6600 GT 128MB or greater
DVD ROM (Physical copy)
20 GB HD space

Windows Vista Minimum Specifications
OS: Windows Vista with SP1
CPU: Intel Core 2 (or equivalent) running at 1.6Ghz or greater
AMD X2 (or equivalent) running at 2.2GHZ or greater
RAM: 1.5 GB or more
Video: ATI Radeon X1550 256MB or greater
NVIDIA GeForce 7600 GT 256MB or greater
DVD ROM (Physical copy)
20 GB HD space

Recommended Specifications
CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad 2.4Ghz Processor or equivalent
AMD Phenom II X3 Triple-Core 2.8 GHz or greater
RAM: 4 GB (Vista) or 2 GB (XP)
Video: ATI 3850 512 MB or greater
NVIDIA 8800GTS 512 MB or greater
DVD ROM (Physical copy)
20 GB HD space

EDIT: I are slow.

Modifié par JEBesh, 15 octobre 2009 - 02:10 .

[buzznut]

Ok, thanks. Looks like I'm good to go! Surprised they aren't steeper though...

[flem1]

Let me copy some relevant developer posts here...

Andreas Papathanasis wrote...

Especially concerning CPU and system memory, you guys shouldn't be worrying as much about meeting the recommended system requirements for playing this game. I run the game fine on my 2 gig vista/2.13 GHz Core 2 Duo machine at home, and I'd be suprised if someone experienced significant performance gains when running Dragon Age on a quad core CPU, compared to an otherwise identical setup with a dual core CPU.

The video card will probably affect your experience more. Even though you'll get the full game experience on the minimum required graphics cards, having a recommended or better video card will make a difference in the visual quality of the game. That said, it very much depends on what kind of gamer you are and how much attention you pay to graphics. I personally enjoyed the game just as much on my laptop playthrough using the lowest visual quality setting.

Ross Gardner wrote...

Speaking to the single core questions, the game actually runs OK on a single core depending on the clock speed. We change the threading model slightly to take that into account and Andreas is saying it is about 20% slower, with likely a few dips in a larger heated combat. The min-spec was actually supposed to be an Intel Core 2 (single core) although that is not very clear. If it was a single core though, I'd want to run at higher than 1.4Ghz.

To the older AMD questions I ran the game all through development on the following system:

AMD 64 X2 Dual 4400+ 2.21Ghz w/ 3 gigs of RAM which I assume is DDR 2 without pulling the box apart. I tried and it runs really well on 1.5 Gigs but I constantly had a crapload of other apps running so hence the 3.
The video card I had was a 256MB 7800GT.
OS was XP

I ran on medium settings and the game ran really well - 99% of the time about 20fps and usually between 25-40.

Most of our single core work was done on a similar system with 1 core disabled.

We did a lot of work to make it run on lower end PC's well and if you have the minimum you will have an OK gaming experience. If anything I'd recommend closer to a 2Ghz and above processor before upgrading to a dual core (or a quad) if you can do that cheaply. And before upgrading you should try the game - because it might just surprise you

Ross Gardner wrote...

The AMD spec is for dual core, but as I was saying if you had a single core AMD 64 running around 2+Ghz you should be OK. The game will run on lower than that for sure, but then you start getting into questionable experiences IMO - and that will be up the individual if that is acceptable or not.

Ross Gardner wrote...

Based on the feedback we are getting for the min and recommended one change that comes to mind is lowering recommended to 3Ghz+ dual core.

Andreas Papathanasis wrote...

Posted 06/25/09 17:43 (GMT) by ushae

I'm glad I invested in a good machine a few months ago. I just have a question for the developers. Can I run the game at high frames wit maximum settings on 1680 x 1050 resolution with the following setup.

AMD Phenom 9850 Quad Core 2.4 Ghz
Nvidia GTX 260
4GB RAM
Win 7 (RC)
480GB HD

Or does the game struggle at highest settings ?

-U-

Haven't tested on Windows 7, but from everything else, it will run consistently over 30 frames a second on the highest available graphics setting at that resolution.

Andreas Papathanasis wrote...

I'm not sure what mobile notebook cards we'll officially support (typically what you see in most games is a disclaimer "mobile versions of these video cards may work but are not officially supported"), but for whatever it's worth, the game run respectably on my exact same laptop as yours, except I had the NVIDIA 9300M. The GPU was by far the biggest bottleneck, I run most of the game using the medium detail setting, but was willing to play between 10-15 frames a second. Playing at the low detail setting with that video card made it noticeably better, but still there were frequent cases when it dropped under 15. So I'd expect it will work on your video card, and quite a bit better than what I got.

Edit: Forgot to say I was running at 800x600 and without post-processing effects, that video card's fill rate is not nearly as good as the desktop versions.

Modifié par flem1, 15 octobre 2009 - 02:43 .

[flem1]

And a bunch more quotes from Andreas...

The key point to keep in mind from all of this is that if you have the recommended system configuration (even substituting the quad core CPU with a dual core at the same speed), you'll get 99% of what the game has to offer visually, and it will run very smoothly at all times on reasonable resolutions. Anything higher than that and all you'll get is better framerates if you're into that sort of thing (though it doesn't really make a substantial difference given this is not an action game), and/or the ability to run more smoothly at crazy high resolutions.

If you only meet the minimum requirements you'll have to turn down all graphics details sliders, but the game will still run smoothly - we focused a lot on making sure it is fully playable and that gameplay is not affected in any way by the lower detail graphics. If you're under the minimum requirements, the game may still run, but we can't guarantee what will happen since we haven't tested in configurations lower than that.

Yes, 1680x1050 is reasonable enough for the recommended video cards. On our daily tests we're running on a machine with an 8800 GTS and at 1920x1080 resolution (you have to see the game on that projector...), and the framerate was generally running above 30, some congested areas between 20 and 30, and it would occationally drop under 20 in larger battles, but not too often.

Both the 9600 GT and 8800 GS will run the game well on high settings. The recommended 8800 GTS will just be able to give better framerates on higher resolutions. It will also allow you to enable the high detail textures (that will be a different setting unrelated to graphics detail), which isn't recommended on cards with less than 512 MB of memory.

In general we designed the game so that 7800-7950 series nVidias and X1800XT ATIs would run the game well on medium graphics settings. Anything above that and you should be thinking about switching to the higher settings. You should know that the game looks great on medium settings as well, I wouldn't lose sleep if my system didn't meet the recommended specifications.

[In response to a question about "Intel pentium dual CPU E2180 @ 2GHZ (2 CPU's), ~ 2.00 GHz"]

You won't have issues playing this game because of your CPU. It's actually the video card that will determine what graphics detail settings the game will run comfortably with.

Modifié par flem1, 15 octobre 2009 - 02:43 .

[buzznut]

This is great supplemental info, so I can make recommendations. Thanks for that. I have a PhII X4 940 at 3.4Ghz and HD4850 so it looks like max settings will be easy to acheive.

[desertrunner]

I have a laptop which I am hoping will run it on minimum settings. The CPU is plenty powerful enough but that is not the case with my video card. Does anyone have a guess if a ATI Radion HD 3200 (256 MB) will be able to run the game? I have Vista (unfortunately).

[Phishytimmy]

I have a question that might be stupid:

I run a single core 3.6 Ghz with all the other specs in the green. Would this be equivalent to the 1,6 dual core or will I need to upgrade?

Thanks

[Jacody]

desertrunner wrote...

I have a laptop which I am hoping will run it on minimum settings. The CPU is plenty powerful enough but that is not the case with my video card. Does anyone have a guess if a ATI Radion HD 3200 (256 MB) will be able to run the game? I have Vista (unfortunately).

It will, i'm sure.

[Gorath Alpha]

Phishytimmy wrote...

I have a question that might be stupid:

I
run a single core 3.6 Ghz with all the other specs in the green. Would
this be equivalent to the 1,6 dual core or will I need to upgrade?

Thanks

AFAIK, by now the older Conroe CPUs that shared sockets with P4s are off the market, it's been so long since P$ processors were being sold.  You may be able to find them on sale at eBay, however.  Anyway, Toms Hardware maintains CPU benchmark charts that allow for comparisons.  Check there.

Next, when I saw the incorrect reply to the question below, I didn't realize that the question was dead and buried so long that it should've been left alone.

desertrunner wrote...

I have a laptop which I am hoping will run it on minimum settings. The CPU is plenty powerful enough but that is not the case with my video card. Does anyone have a guess if a ATI Radion HD 3200 (256 MB) will be able to run the game? I have Vista (unfortunately).

The game cannot run correctly on any onboard video chip, not even the second-best of the kind.  The minimum to run acceptably is still an actual, discrete, separate circuit board that adds to the system.  Unfortunatley, the laptops with only chips for video have no upgrade route for that component.  Sorry for the bad news.  If your display can run at lowered resolutions with decent image quality, and you can accept jerky animation, just don't hope for much from that chip. 

www.notebookcheck.net/ATI-Radeon-HD-3200.9591.0.html

social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/58/index/519461

Gorath
-

Modifié par Gorath Alpha, 24 janvier 2010 - 11:29 .

[Kerad Kralc]

Or, try this. 

[Gorath Alpha]

Ignore anyone who is beguiled by the stupid clowns at SR Labs, he / she doesn't know the truth. They are wrong so often that going there is a waste of time!

[yoyoreaper123]

will a mobile intel® 4 series express chipset work? I bought Fallout 3 and found out later that my graphics card is not good enough my brother wants to get me Dragon Age for my birthday but I do not want him to waste money on it if my graphics card is not going to work.

[Gorath Alpha]

INTEL CAN"T MAKE "Cards", they don't know how.

They make a terrible CHIP that is slower than Molasses in winter.  The best they make is still pure CRAP.