How will my
Q6600, 8800GT 512Mb, 3.25Gb 800Mhz (4 but 32 bit sucks) @ 1280*1024 run?
Q6600, 8800GT 512Mb, 3.25Gb 800Mhz (4 but 32 bit sucks) @ 1280*1024 run?
or my pentium 4 3.0ghz HTT, 9500GT 1Gb, 2gb of ram
how do you think it would run??
how do you think it would run??
awful if it doesCash 'N Prizes wrote:
or my pentium 4 3.0ghz HTT, 9500GT 1Gb, 2gb of ram
how do you think it would run??
It will be pretty much unplayable. My old computer (upgraded yesterday) was roughly the same as both those specs and in fraps averaged about 15 fps.
My new computer is pretty sweet except the cheaper vid card I bought still won't run the game on medium settings. But I should get it there when I get a second one and use xfire.
My new computer is pretty sweet except the cheaper vid card I bought still won't run the game on medium settings. But I should get it there when I get a second one and use xfire.
With a NVIDIA GeForce 7950 GX2 and the stuff below lags quite badly over here. Settings are 1024x768 and Low. You reckon a new video card would be enough or should I change the processor too?
Last edited by Ultrafunkula (2010-03-13 03:20:50)
You guys can run System Requirements Lab to see if you can run it. This will tell you if you meet minimum requirements or recommended.
Hmm. I had a better processor and it lagged badly. I'm no expert by any stretch, but your card is better than the cheap Radeon HD 5400 I bought but if you're lagging I'd upgrade your cpu to a quad core - which would mean updating your mainboard too.
You need both, Ultra.
It's not running fine, you just don't know how to be a real PC gamer. It needs to be going over 60FPS with all that FRAPS shit running, and steam, whilst talking to your internet friends on xfire. What the fuck is this "Medium" you talk about? How fucking dare you be satisfied with your PC gaming performance.The Sheriff wrote:
Well just spent a couple of hours on it now, runs fine on Medium 1920x1200, CPU is more than capable of handling it (it's been overclocked)
This. Is. GAAAAAAMING.
/Thread
So true im not sure what fps i got when i played but i played it on high(1680x1050) with my dual core and hd4870 and it was smooth.Mekstizzle wrote:
It's not running fine, you just don't know how to be a real PC gamer. It needs to be going over 60FPS with all that FRAPS shit running, and steam, whilst talking to your internet friends on xfire. What the fuck is this "Medium" you talk about? How fucking dare you be satisfied with your PC gaming performance.The Sheriff wrote:
Well just spent a couple of hours on it now, runs fine on Medium 1920x1200, CPU is more than capable of handling it (it's been overclocked)
This. Is. GAAAAAAMING.
http://mmanytt.se/wp-content/uploads/20 … parta1.jpg
/Thread
Last edited by dill13 (2010-03-13 16:50:17)
Mek, suck my dick you paki bastard
Was checking out some processors. Would a AMD Athlon II X2 250 for 72€ be a good replacement?Ultrafunkula wrote:
With a NVIDIA GeForce 7950 GX2 and the stuff below lags quite badly over here. Settings are 1024x768 and Low. You reckon a new video card would be enough or should I change the processor too?
Tbh it's pointless wasting money on a dual core even if it's to upgrade a CPU for a current mobo you have. I definately wouldn't spend money to go from an Athlon X2 to an Athlon 2 X2.
The only way you're going to be able to play BC2 smoothly is to spend out on a new CPU and Motherboard, which will mean new DDR3 RAM (assuming you'd go Intel)
Best bet is to get an i5 and 4GB Ram and a mobo (if you want cheap), i5 won't bottleneck any games and it overclocks to 4Ghz easily it's really fast- best price/performance.
I bought the i5 750, a mAtx mobo 4GB G.Skill Ripjaw ram and a Coolermaster hyper 212 plus cooler for £350 and the CPU is at 3.8Ghz and the Ram is at CL7 timings- that's good value for money imo
I kept my current GPU (8600GT) because I only play BF2 at the moment and it runs it at 100fps constantly, I'm not going to spend £120 on something like a 5770 just to be able to play BC2 at below average framerates, I'm just going to wait until BF3 and then new generations of GPUs will be the same price- I'm cheap though lol
I'd say the only dual core that would reasonably play BC2 (except for the i3) would be an E8400 or E8500, and for the price of one of those you might as well buy an i5 for £10-20 more
The only way you're going to be able to play BC2 smoothly is to spend out on a new CPU and Motherboard, which will mean new DDR3 RAM (assuming you'd go Intel)
Best bet is to get an i5 and 4GB Ram and a mobo (if you want cheap), i5 won't bottleneck any games and it overclocks to 4Ghz easily it's really fast- best price/performance.
I bought the i5 750, a mAtx mobo 4GB G.Skill Ripjaw ram and a Coolermaster hyper 212 plus cooler for £350 and the CPU is at 3.8Ghz and the Ram is at CL7 timings- that's good value for money imo
I kept my current GPU (8600GT) because I only play BF2 at the moment and it runs it at 100fps constantly, I'm not going to spend £120 on something like a 5770 just to be able to play BC2 at below average framerates, I'm just going to wait until BF3 and then new generations of GPUs will be the same price- I'm cheap though lol
I'd say the only dual core that would reasonably play BC2 (except for the i3) would be an E8400 or E8500, and for the price of one of those you might as well buy an i5 for £10-20 more
Last edited by H3RB4L ABU53 (2010-03-17 10:08:05)
As far as I know, the Athlon II processors are very bad for gaming because they lack the L3 cash. In any case 72euros is too much for that CPU. In Vienna it costs about 60 € average and Im sure there cant be that much difference in price.Ultrafunkula wrote:
Was checking out some processors. Would a AMD Athlon II X2 250 for 72€ be a good replacement?Ultrafunkula wrote:
With a NVIDIA GeForce 7950 GX2 and the stuff below lags quite badly over here. Settings are 1024x768 and Low. You reckon a new video card would be enough or should I change the processor too?
http://img709.imageshack.us/img709/1038/machina.png
I recently bought a AMD Phenom II 550 2x3.1 GHz, which is much better than Athlon II, for 75€. I overclocked it to 3.6 GHz with stock cooler and no additional cooling. Its a great budget CPU and with the right motherboard you have 50% chance of unlocking it to quad core. But I dont know whether your current motherboard supports it.
If it doesnt you are looking at another 50ish € for a new mobo, and there are plenty that support Phenoms and ddr2 so you wont have to buy new ram.
So basically I'd be better off buying a completely new set instead of updating this old heap Blaah.
It's not an old heap at all, that Athlon you have wouldn't bottleneck hardly any game, it's just games like BC2 are optimized for consoles, and the PS3 and Xbox 360 have multi core processors which is why a lot of multi platform games rely more on CPUUltrafunkula wrote:
So basically I'd be better off buying a completely new set instead of updating this old heap Blaah.
Good thing my CPU trumps the cell and the tricore of the sexbox
what what? your new pc hardware trumps the cores of a 5-year old console?
get the fuck outta here!
where'd you buy it from? NASA garage sale?
get the fuck outta here!
where'd you buy it from? NASA garage sale?
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
Well sort of lol Xbox 360 maybe, but the Cell is a clever processor specially designed for games it can act as a GPU with it's internal cores. It's not as raw fast as something like an i7 but because coders can code games specially for that CPU only, nothing will beat it for a long time.SonderKommando wrote:
Good thing my CPU trumps the cell and the tricore of the sexbox
But only PS3 specifics like GT5 make the most of it.
Basically if you was to use Cell processor on a desktop or PC game it wouldn't be that fast but because of the internal cores (they're not actually "cores") it's really fast for games.
Last edited by H3RB4L ABU53 (2010-03-17 16:01:03)
Whernher Von Brauns estate sale actually.Uzique wrote:
what what? your new pc hardware trumps the cores of a 5-year old console?
get the fuck outta here!
where'd you buy it from? NASA garage sale?
If I had a choice between an HD 4890 or an HD 5750, which should I choose? Is one much better than the other?
I might actually get to play online later today, if my game runs well on SP will it also run well on MP?
The 5750 is cheaper and DX11 and a better overclocker, but 4890 is 256 bit memory so better for high resolutions. I'd say the 4890 if you use 1920x1080.Jaekus wrote:
If I had a choice between an HD 4890 or an HD 5750, which should I choose? Is one much better than the other?
You might be able to get a 4890 cheaper maybe used, but I can't find any in stock anywhere new. The 5770 is about £10-£20 dearer than the 5750 and only gets you about 3 or 4 extra fps in most games so it's not really worth getting that either.
I'd say if you're playing at about 1680x1050 or lower then get a 5750 they use a lot less power than 4890 and older cards too
Last edited by H3RB4L ABU53 (2010-03-18 04:36:16)
Sweet, my native resolution is 1280x1024 (old lcd) so I don't go above that anyway. Plus it'll save me about $50 AUD to get the 5750.
Or if you're not desperate for a new one at the moment, you could wait until the GTX 4 series come out, not sure if prices of things like the GTX260 would drop quickly though. I suppose the GTX260 is only slightly better than 5750 anyway