View Full Version : Creative Assembly The "Would my PC be able to run M2TW?" thread (all such queries here pls)
blahblahblah
10-09-2006, 23:21
Moderator edit - apologies to blahblah for editing his first post, but just a quick plug for the Systems Requirements Lab. This is a nice on-line facility that checks whether your computer meets the system requirements for M2TW (and many other modern games):
http://www.systemrequirementslab.com/referrer/srtest
It takes around 10-20 seconds and I have never had a problem with it.
It provides graphs of how far your RAM, graphics card etc are from the minimum and recommended specs, providing some information beyond a simple "yes/no".
************************************************************************
Blahblah wrote:
Here are my specs:
AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 3200+
2.00 GHz
512 MB of RAM
NVIDIA GeForce 6200 TurboCache(TM) with 256 MB of Memory
fruitfly
10-09-2006, 23:39
In a word, yes.
You've got an Athlon 64 processor, so it supports SSE2, which seems to be the problem with the current early demo as far as those of us (myself included) with older AMD processors are concerned (hopefully CA will have extended compatability by the time of release).
Another 512MB RAM would probably improve performance (assuming you've got WinXP, that uses about half of the 512 you've got, leaving you effectively with 256 plus the pagefile), but it doesn't look like that'll be essential for playing the game.
professorspatula
10-09-2006, 23:40
Your system should be ok for a lower detail setting - 1GB ram would be better. However, the graphics card is dire. My mate has one of those and has to play the same games I have on my old and slower system in a lower resolution than me. Try the demo when it comes out before buying the game perhaps, but I'd recommend spending a little bit of money on a graphics card with a bit more power. You don't need to spend much to improve on that card to be honest. That said, usually TW games can be played on a low graphics detail setting, and CPU power et al is important, so your system should cope. Well I hope so, because your processor is a tad faster than mine!
Zimfan40
10-10-2006, 00:04
Sounds like trouble for me, I have a good processor(AMD 64 X2 4200) but a crappy video card(Nvidia 6150 LE).
I really don't want to see a profileration of "will my PC be able to run it?" threads in this forum. However, I suspect it will be a common question, so I would like this thread to cover all such inquiries.
Other users with the same questions should also post here.
Zimfan40
10-10-2006, 00:06
I really don't want to see a profileration of "will my PC be able to run it?" threads in this forum. However, I suspect it will be a common question, so I would like this thread to cover all such inquiries.
Other users with the same questions should also post here.
Econ21 Maybe the thread's name should be changed to "The official Would my PC be able to run M2TW? Thread". :bow:
Zimfan40
10-10-2006, 00:07
Gah! Too late. :laugh4:
blahblahblah
10-10-2006, 00:26
I really don't want to see a profileration of "will my PC be able to run it?" threads in this forum. However, I suspect it will be a common question, so I would like this thread to cover all such inquiries.
Other users with the same questions should also post here.
Dammit you telling me Imma open another can of worms again? ~:rolleyes: jk
Well...
I played the PC Gamer demo and I get surprise how the game is heavy!
I got a Sempron64 2800, 1GB ram and a FX5200 128/128 and even at the lowest config I got slowdowns!
My surprise is due the fact I used to play Rome Total War in a weaker system and it ran smoothly! Don´t know if the game will be improved until the release date or if it is a game which require a very good VGA...
Modestus
10-10-2006, 00:37
Help thank god for that! Playing the demo with two 6800GT 256MB in SLI, a AMD Athlon 64 3500+ with 1gig memory major lagging even on low settings! My monitor is a 24inch flat screen could this be one of the problems! Any help would be appreciated.
Help thank god for that! Playing the demo with two 6800GT 256MB in SLI, a AMD Athlon 64 3500+ with 1gig memory major lagging even on low settings! My monitor is a 24inch flat screen could this be one of the problems! Any help would be appreciated.
hmm... it seems I´m not the only one with slowdowns!!!!
Maybe this demo was not improved enough to run in Nvidia or AMD systems... or maybe the both! Someone else with one of those hardwares got performance problem?
Kourutsu
10-10-2006, 00:45
Well...
I played the PC Gamer demo and I get surprise how the game is heavy!
I got a Sempron64 2800, 1GB ram and a FX5200 128/128 and even at the lowest config I got slowdowns!
My surprise is due the fact I used to play Rome Total War in a weaker system and it ran smoothly! Don´t know if the game will be improved until the release date or if it is a game which require a very good VGA...
Disable the shadows.
Disable the shadows.
Shadows? lol
I´m playing (or at least trying) without shadows, bloom or reflections... in few words, "shaders 1"!
And as I said, everything on LOW, LOWEST and OFF!!!!!
:(
Modestus
10-10-2006, 00:49
hmm... it seems I´m not the only one with slowdowns!!!!
Maybe this demo was not improved enough to run in Nvidia or AMD systems... or maybe the both! Someone else with one of those hardwares got performance problem?
Never liked the speed of RTW, Be careful what you ask for, you just might get it!
Never liked the speed of RTW, Be careful what you ask for, you just might get it!
[off-topic]
Uhn... I don´t know if is my bad english but I really dont understand why did u reply me like this!
Bob the Insane
10-10-2006, 02:11
My 2 cents...
My machine:
AMD Athlon64 +3300
2GB RAM
BFG 6800GT
NVidia drivers 91.33
OS: WinXP Pro SP2
Settings:
Shader Version 2
Resolution: 1280x1024
AA: x2
Texture Filtering: AFx4
Unit Detail: Highest
Effects Detail: Highest
Building, Vegetation, Grass and Texture detail: High
Shadow Quality: None
Bloom: On
Reflections: On
Tutorial and both battles where as smooth as silk...
Going to play with the shadows a bit more...
Barkhorn1x
10-10-2006, 02:26
Shadows? lol
I´m playing (or at least trying) without shadows, bloom or reflections... in few words, "shaders 1"!
And as I said, everything on LOW, LOWEST and OFF!!!!!
:(
You see Bob the Insane's post above - NVidia drivers 91.33. I would try them and tell us how you do.
Barkhorn.
How Bout
Core 2 Duo E6600
Evga 7900 GTO
2GB Ram
Heh:furious3:
professorspatula
10-10-2006, 03:34
How Bout
Core 2 Duo E6600
Evga 7900 GTO
2GB Ram
Heh:furious3:
Wouldn't even load it!
You see Bob the Insane's post above - NVidia drivers 91.33. I would try them and tell us how you do.
Barkhorn.
The driver helps a little, but I´m still think that something isnt rite with this demo!
Dammiet now i got to upgrade again...........:furious3: :wall: :furious3:
Incongruous
10-10-2006, 04:25
Okay heres my boy.
AMD 3200+
2G's DDR2
X800 XT Platinum edition
Windows XP PRO
All the latest drivers.
tiny_titan
10-10-2006, 06:49
I would have thought that someone from CA has not made some kind of announcement on the sega america website about the sse2 issue with the demo, & also interesting to note that the game requirements listed on Sega americas web site don't have anything to say about the cpu having sse2 capabilities only that it must be a 1500mhz cpu or better, very odd.
I have a Radeon 9800PRO 256mb, 2gb of fast RAM and a P4 3.2ghzHT.
The Demo will run with bad FPS no matter what settings I choose, highest or lowest except for one:
Shader version.
Shader version 1.0 gives me better FPS with a better quality than what I get at RTW. Shader version 2.0 is sluggish and offers worse FPS than RTW at highest settings.
So, I wonder, am I doomed to Shader version 1.0 without the fancy effects unless I buy a new video-card or could it be that my Radeon driver is so old it doesn't work with shader2.0? Would updating the driver help?
The shader2.0 looks so pretty. It's so sad to be stuck with 1.0, even though the FPS is fantastic with 1.0.
Modestus
10-10-2006, 08:57
[off-topic]
Uhn... I don´t know if is my bad english but I really dont understand why did u reply me like this!
Just referring to the fact that we both had slow downs. It was not an insult or anything like that. I was trying to be funny? https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/images/smilies/gc/gc-embarassed.gif
:embarassed:
Kwartjuh
10-10-2006, 11:20
Game runs smooth with most on Medium/Heavy (except shadows - Lowest, and grass - Low) on this machine:
AMD 64 3000+, 1.5 GIG ram, Ati Radeon 9800PRO
Game looks, and plays GREAT!
How about AthlonXP 2600+ CPU?
Demo won't even start with this...
Kwartjuh
10-10-2006, 11:33
You miss some technology (sse2) that is only present on INTEL and AMD64 bit proccessors...
SpencerH
10-10-2006, 12:19
Wouldn't it be better to have a thread for machines/setups that do work and on what game settings rather than constant cries of
"I have a 8.2 GHz P6 with 6 Gb RAM and the lastest fusion driven graphics card, will it run MTW2 (puffs out juvenile chest)?"
Bob the Insane
10-10-2006, 12:22
"I have a 8.2 GHz P6 with 6 Gb RAM and the lastest fusion driven graphics card, will it run MTW2 (puffs out juvenile chest)?"
:2thumbsup: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:
Just referring to the fact that we both had slow downs. It was not an insult or anything like that. I was trying to be funny? https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/images/smilies/gc/gc-embarassed.gif
:embarassed:
No need to sorry.... it was my fault since I don´t understood wht do u said!
Well, wainting for some improvement in the game!
Barkhorn1x
10-10-2006, 12:41
The driver helps a little, but I´m still think that something isnt rite with this demo!
Hmmm...don't know then, sorry. Other guys w/ rigs equal or lesser than yours can run w/ no problems. Keep playing around w/ settings and hope it gets better.
Barkhorn
Duke Malcolm
10-10-2006, 12:49
hmm...
I wonder if mine might just perchance run this game:
AMD Athlon XP 1800+, 1.54 GHz
256Mb Ram
nVidia GeForce 2 MX 420
...?
Kwartjuh
10-10-2006, 12:59
hmm...
I wonder if mine might just perchance run this game:
AMD Athlon XP 1800+, 1.54 GHz
256Mb Ram
nVidia GeForce 2 MX 420
...?
Not gonna happen. The system is too old, AND has no SSE2 technology.
Sorry mate :(
Hmmm...don't know then, sorry. Other guys w/ rigs equal or lesser than yours can run w/ no problems. Keep playing around w/ settings and hope it gets better.
Barkhorn
Yeah... no problem at all, I bet this demo do not represents the final version! It´ll run nice and smootlhy here when it´s done!!! (faith, faith)
fruitfly
10-10-2006, 13:54
I don't know if CA will make a formal announcement, but here's some general advice:
If your processor is made by AMD, and is not an Athlon 64, new(ish) Sempron (socket 754, 939 or AM2) or dual-core, then you won't have SSE2 and won't be able to run the current demo.
If you've got an Intel pentium 4 processor (or better), then you probably will as far as processor compatability is concerned.
Less than 512MB of RAM probably won't cut it in terms of getting any decent sort of performance, but you may be able to run things if you don't mind some lag.
If you're not sure what sort of processor or how much RAM you've got:
Right-click on "My Computer" and select "properties" from the menu and the dialogue box that opens up will tell you some basic information.
For more detailed information on what processor you have and what instruction sets it supports (ie whether it's compatible with SSE2 or not), you can download a program like Cpu-z
http://www.cpuid.com/cpuz.php
Run the exe and it'll list details about your processor including that info.
As for graphics cards, make sure you've downloaded the newest drivers and installed them correctly (in case of compatability issues, uninstall the existing ones and then install the newest). If it's less than 256MB you're probably going to have to sacrifice at least some of the eye candy to get a decent frame rate. As previously stated here, the best thing to turn off initially is shadowing. If you're having real problems and have already updated your drivers, try turning all settings to minimum to see if you can get any improvement in performance and then gradually increasing them. There are also some pretty dire 256MB graphics cards out there, so I'm afraid having one that on paper exceeds the minimum requirements (128MB with Shader 1 support) doesn't automatically mean the game will run well.
Finally, remember that this demo is pretty old in terms of game development and the finished product will hopefully have been improved in many areas (including SSE2 support- pleeeease CA, be nice to us old AMD owners).
===============
EDIT: Forgot to add - I wouldn't rush out to upgrade anything your PC is short of apart from memory before CA/SEGA give more concrete information about hardware compatability for the release version of the game. Not unless your graphics card is seriously underpowered anyway.
Finally, remember that this demo is pretty old in terms of game development and the finished product will hopefully have been improved in many areas (including SSE2 support- pleeeease CA, be nice to us old AMD owners).
I reeeeeeeeeeeally hope so!
Barkhorn1x
10-10-2006, 14:17
Good advice FruitFly.
:2thumbsup:
Barkhorn.
Seeing that there is a mass of questions about the SSE2 issue, can the Moderators re-post FruitFly's advice heading it up as something like:
"M2:TW Demo and SSE2"
I think it would be handy to have something posted specifically stating this and pointing out that this may not be an issue in the finished game.
.....fingers crossed for those without 64-bit processors.
Personally I can't run the game at all. I need a complete new system anyway, so I haven't lost anything :inquisitive:
Wow the demo is a CPU killer! I have Intel Core Duo E6400 and the Pavia battle, with small size units, used about 70% to 80% of the both CPUs (cores) :scared: It will be a slide show if the units are normal or huge as I like to play RTR.
Duke Malcolm
10-10-2006, 15:52
Not gonna happen. The system is too old, AND has no SSE2 technology.
Sorry mate :(
I was only pulling your leg, the thing can barely play Rome, and even then with the stick-men, small unit sizes, and preferably small to medium sized battles... I was just mesmerised by all the better computers...
Kor Khan
10-10-2006, 16:48
Edit: Cancel that, I got it to work.
SSE2 = Streaming "Single Instruction, Multiple Data" Extensions 2.
CPUs supporting SSE2
AMD Athlon 64
AMD Athlon 64 X2
AMD Opteron
AMD Sempron (Socket 754/939/AM2 versions only)
AMD Turion 64
Intel Pentium 4
Intel Pentium D
Intel Pentium EE
Intel Pentium M
Intel Celeron (Socket 478 versions only)
Intel Celeron D
Intel Celeron M
Intel Core Solo/Duo
Intel Core 2 Solo/Duo/Extreme
Transmeta Efficeon
Intel Xeon
Via C7
Notable CPUs not supporting SSE2
Anything from Motorola, or any other CPU manufacturer not listed above
The following CPUs do not support SSE2.
AMD Athlon
AMD Athlon XP / MP
AMD Duron
AMD Sempron (Socket A versions)
Intel Pentium II Xeon
Intel Pentium III Xeon
Intel Pentium II
Intel Pentium III
Intel Celeron (Slot 1, Socket 370)
Intel Itanium
Intel Itanium 2
Via C3
Transmeta Crusoe
IDT Centaurs-Haul Winchip
and any older CPUs.
Help anyone?
DVX BELLORVM
10-10-2006, 21:41
I've just played the demo, on medium settings it runs just fine :2thumbsup:
My machine:
Pentium IV 3GHz
Radeon 9800pro 128MB
1GB RAM
Incongruous
10-10-2006, 23:42
Wohoo, just ran the game On the highest setting (super-high, as highest is just a waste of power really)
My specs are
AMD 3200+
X800 XT PLATINUM EDITION 256mb
2 Gigs of DDR2
Plays like a dream, I love the new fighting moves, I love it when my Zwiehanders parry a blow from a Halberdier and then runs him through. Must say though Pavia is awfully easy to win. So is Agincourt, the English are just too overpowered.
Mount Suribachi
10-10-2006, 23:53
FWIW I'm playing with
P4 3.0GHz
1 Gig RAM
Radeon X700 Pro with 256MB RAM
And once I turned shadows to low it ran just fine.
Just bought myself a brand new computer for this game, except for my graphics card.
I hava a Core 2 Duo 2.4 Ghz overclocked to 2.7 Ghz, 2Gb of Pc 8500 Memory, and a Ati Radeon X850 XT graphics card.
I still could not use the maximum settings. I guess a new ATI radeon 1950 XTX is required, or i my case, i'll wait for the the ATI R600 based card's.
This is definitly a heavy duty game. But the graphics is worth it.
Espjo
Incongruous
10-11-2006, 11:24
Really you're having trouble with an X850 XT?
Here are my specs:
AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 3200+
2.00 GHz
512 MB of RAM
NVIDIA GeForce 6200 TurboCache(TM) with 256 MB of Memory
You should know that your graphicscard has around 16-64MB RAM itself and the rest is used of your 512MB system RAM(and I guess you have to set that amount somewhere in the driver/BIOS), which makes me wonder how slow your system is in general...
That said, things like TurboCache are usually considered bad anyway, since your graphicscard will use bandwidth and space of your normal RAM, leaving less for the CPU etc.
I'd say lowest setting if you're lucky.
Get another 512MB RAM and it should improve your performance, then maybe aim for a real graphics card.~;)
I myself have:
Core 2 Duo E6600
1024MB DDR1 400MHz RAM
GeForce 6600GT AGP 128MB
and my settings are:
https://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i231/husar1985/medieval22006-10-1019-16-57-17.jpg
in the demo it's mostly very smooth at more than 20 fps and looks pretty great.:2thumbsup:
Just bought myself a brand new computer for this game, except for my graphics card.
I hava a Core 2 Duo 2.4 Ghz overclocked to 2.7 Ghz, 2Gb of Pc 8500 Memory, and a Ati Radeon X850 XT graphics card.
I still could not use the maximum settings. I guess a new ATI radeon 1950 XTX is required, or i my case, i'll wait for the the ATI R600 based card's.
This is definitly a heavy duty game. But the graphics is worth it.
Espjo
Weird. I got the X800 XL one and I am running things very smoothly at high graph settings, shader x 2. High anti-aliasing and that other thingy. I only need to test out the amount of shadow detail I can have but thats boring. (Up to lowest sofar, which looks ugglier than no shadows)
I even got only 1 GB of Ram, two of 512mb PC 3200, so thats lower too, and a non-overclocked 2.2 Ghz thingy. (3500+ AMD 64 one)
There seem to be a large amount of discrepencies regarding people with very similar systems who are having either good success or terrible failure.. I'll let you know what happens when my download is finished, right now I'm at %30.
System is a Pentium IV 2.8 (I would overclock if I knew how...), 2gigs of incompatible ram (don't ask, but I forced the buggers to work :laugh4: ), and a Radeon x1300pro 256mb card.
Lord ZORO Savage
10-11-2006, 13:24
How do i find what sempron do i have?
Bob the Insane
10-11-2006, 13:30
How do i find what sempron do i have?
What motherboard do you have?
There seem to be a large amount of discrepencies regarding people with very similar systems who are having either good success or terrible failure.. I'll let you know what happens when my download is finished, right now I'm at %30.
I can only say that I lost around 50% performance with shadows on low.
But since shadows are neither important nor very nice, I am very happy without them.
SirGrotius
10-11-2006, 16:28
I can only say that I lost around 50% performance with shadows on low.
But since shadows are neither important nor very nice, I am very happy without them.
I'll have to disable shadows next time I play. I admit I'm unfamiliar with what "bloom" does? If I disable it what will I lose and what might I gain?
Thanks
sunsmountain
10-11-2006, 16:42
Thank God V-Sync can be turned off, that means the CPU-limit on Frames Per Second is out of the window. That means it'll actually pay off to get a fast GPU instead of a fast CPU, which makes sense for games if you think about it.
Big King Sanctaphrax
10-11-2006, 16:42
Bloom does the funny 'shimmery' effect you'll see in a lot of the screenshots. It's quite hard to describe.
Thank God V-Sync can be turned off, that means the CPU-limit on Frames Per Second is out of the window. That means it'll actually pay off to get a fast GPU instead of a fast CPU, which makes sense for games if you think about it.
No, it doesn't make sense.
I had an Athlon 2400+ before with a comparatively fast GPU(6600GT) and with my new processor(E6600) even Gothic 2 got a performance boost, both need to be fast for good performance and don't forget about memory.
Also IIRC VSync forces your graphicscard to put out exactly as many pictures as your monitor displays per second. That means if your monitor runs at 60Hz, you will get a constant 60fps framerate. The problem here is if your graphicscard is too slow and can calculate only 20fps, it will put out 3 times the same picture anyway. I don't know exactly what VSync is good for, but it may fix some bugs with certain graphicscard-monitor combinations.
Concerning bloom, I think this refers to edges of objects where the light(from behind) will fade into the object, though I am unsure about the connection/differences between this and HDR effects(which, to me, seem to do exactly the same thing).
Marquis of Roland
10-12-2006, 08:06
I am going to buy a whole new computer just to play this game. :2thumbsup:
Now, can someone tell me what my computer needs to be made up of to play this game on the highest graphics settings? :help:
Oh, and would I be able to afford a computer like that for USD$3k or less? Just the computer.
Incongruous
10-12-2006, 08:08
Yeah I had the feeling bloom had something to do with the softening of a light when it hit something to give a kind of glow? or was it the other way round? Or D. am I talking out of where the sun don't shine?
Well my Radeon 850 XT run's everything smoothly at 1024*768, BUT, since i want to run the game with the highest possible graphics settings, the Ati Radeon 850 XT card just ain't enough.
Espjo
Incongruous
10-12-2006, 08:42
Remember the game will be optimised for performance.
I reckon a x850 xt is enough.
Its more than enough if you dont use shadows but put everything else at max. (And I find the shadows quite uggly when zoomed out anyways) I even play at 1280x1024 and I got a X800XL
Ja'chyra
10-12-2006, 10:47
What about mine guys?
Intel Core Duo T2300E Processor 1.66GHz
667 MHz FSB
2MB Cache
1024 MB RAM
100 GB Hard Drive
DVD Rewriter MultiDrive
14.1" Widescreen Display
Microsoft Windows XP Home
128MB Intel 945 Shared Graphics
128MB Intel 945 Shared Graphics
Argh! *throws holy water*
So that's a probably not then.
Mine played the demo flawlessly with everything on highest possible settings but with shadows and bloom off.
redriver
10-12-2006, 15:42
ok I ran this demo on 3 different systems now. the specs are as follows:
System 1:
P4 1.6 1024 ddr ti4200 128mb Win2k PRO
System 2:
P4 3.0 1024 ddr Radeon 9200 SE 256mb Win XP Home
System 3:
P4 3.0 2048 ddr X1300 512mb Win XP M/C
All systems were able to run the demo no probs.
System 1 and System 2 had all graphic options set to LOW or OFF(grass) in order to get best performance. anythin' higher than that would slow things down noticably!
System 1 ran the game much smoother than System 2 with exaclty the same demo graphics settings.
System 3 was able to run the game on HIGH with shadows OFF for best performance(noticable lag with shadows enabled).
Conclusion:
System 3 had the best performance of the 3 with system 1 bein' second best.
Interestly enough, graphics card have the most impact on the performance and CPU/memory not so much.
It seems like this demo will not satisfy anybody with less than high end or state-of-the-art computers! That is if one to expect both visual quality and acceptable performance.
It's important to note that all 3 systems were in great shape and that System 2 had a fresh copy of Windows and drivers and everything just installed from scratch.
Crandaeolon
10-12-2006, 15:54
According to people at Totalwar.org.pl, the beta of MTW2 works without SSE2. The demo is probably earlier code, and the full game might not have this compatibility issue. Would be nice to hear something official though (Barton 3000+ owner here, and I'm not gonna upgrade for MTW2 only... ~;p )
SpencerH
10-12-2006, 15:58
System 3:
P4 3.0 2048 ddr X1300 512mb Win XP M/C
System 3 was able to run the game on HIGH with shadows OFF for best performance(noticable lag with shadows enabled).
Good info redriver. :2thumbsup:
Maybe CA can answer whats wrong with this 'picture'?
Orda Khan
10-12-2006, 16:34
Maybe CA can answer whats wrong with this 'picture'?
I'm sure we would all love some feedback from CA on this important issue. The current demo seems to be a long way from 'if you can run RTW you will be able to run MTW II'
.......Orda
Lord ZORO Savage
10-12-2006, 17:10
How do i find what sempron version do i have?The motherboard supports the SSe2?I have motherboard n-force 2.
SpencerH
10-12-2006, 17:38
I'm sure we would all love some feedback from CA on this important issue. The current demo seems to be a long way from 'if you can run RTW you will be able to run MTW II'
.......Orda
Yes, it seems very strange to me that redriver's "system 3" has to turn off shadows while running on "high". I have to wonder what machine can be built so that one can turn on shadows.
Barkhorn1x
10-12-2006, 17:48
The Shogun - the CA Moderator at the .COM site - has posted the following at the TWC forums:
I did actually mention in a previous post over at, wwww.totalwarforums.com, that I would get back to you guys on this. I would like to remind you all this is the demo and it is not meant to fully represent full the game. I am waiting for the official line on this issue from the Oz office, which I should have by Monday. I did ask you all to be a little patient so we can get enough feedback from demo as possible and I would like that request to stand.
Cheers guys
Cryptic to be sure, but we should know on Monday how "representative" the demo is.
Barkhorn.
Barkhorn1x
10-12-2006, 17:55
How do i find what sempron version do i have?The motherboard supports the SSe2?I have motherboard n-force 2.
You must have the following - AMD Sempron, Socket 754/939/AM2 versions only - if you have a Socket A mobo you are SOL.
Use this freeware tool to check:
http://www.cpuid.com/cpuz.php
Barkhorn.
I'm looking for recommendations on what to upgrade first, RAM or graphics card. My system:
Windows XP
2.6 Ghz P4
512 MB ddr400
Radeon 9200 128MB
I know ideally I should be increasing both, but my wife will not necessarily agree ;) It won't cost much to upgrade to 1024 MB RAM (or is it worthwhile to go higher, like 1.5 GB), but upgrading a graphics card can get pricey. Where would be the better "bang for the buck"? Any recommendations for a mid-level graphics card (AGP 8x) that's a good value?
Thanks.
- DCD
Celtic_Guardian
10-12-2006, 18:41
I wasn't expecting miracles on this laptop when i bought it, but i thought the demo would at least start up to see if i should bother getting MTW2. *SIGH* guess im gonna have to bring my desktop up to school with me to play MTW2. I am running SSE2 so that isnt the problem.......i think
Intel Core Solo T1350 1.86 GHZ
512 MB DDR2
128MB Intel 945 built in garbage graphics
Im guessing its my graphics, i mean i thought i would at least see if it ran on lowest of the low settings........ I hope it runs on my desktop (i can at least spend winter break playing it 24/7 :juggle2: )
Intel P4 3.2 GHZ
512 MB DDR2 (i know i know, 512, i am hoping to get more)
Geforce 6600GT
Muad'Dib
10-12-2006, 19:10
How about AthlonXP 2600+ CPU?
Demo won't even start with this...
Same here. :no:
Finally, remember that this demo is pretty old in terms of game development and the finished product will hopefully have been improved in many areas (including SSE2 support- pleeeease CA, be nice to us old AMD owners).
I hope you're right.
According to people at Totalwar.org.pl, the beta of MTW2 works without SSE2. The demo is probably earlier code, and the full game might not have this compatibility issue. Would be nice to hear something official though (Barton 3000+ owner here, and I'm not gonna upgrade for MTW2 only... ~;p )
:2thumbsup:
It's not a good day when you realize your comp is only half of what it used to be...
~;p
SirGrotius
10-12-2006, 20:22
I'm looking for recommendations on what to upgrade first, RAM or graphics card. My system:
Windows XP
2.6 Ghz P4
512 MB ddr400
Radeon 9200 128MB
I know ideally I should be increasing both, but my wife will not necessarily agree ;) It won't cost much to upgrade to 1024 MB RAM (or is it worthwhile to go higher, like 1.5 GB), but upgrading a graphics card can get pricey. Where would be the better "bang for the buck"? Any recommendations for a mid-level graphics card (AGP 8x) that's a good value?
Thanks.
- DCD
Definitely upgrading your RAM will be the quickest and cheapest fix. If your board can handle the extra, getting a 1 GB stick would be helpful.
I'm an Nvidia adherent, so if you go the graphics card route, the over clocked 6800s and 7200s (?) are probably reasonably priced (i.e., c. $200).
Definitely upgrading your RAM will be the quickest and cheapest fix. If your board can handle the extra, getting a 1 GB stick would be helpful.
I'm an Nvidia adherent, so if you go the graphics card route, the over clocked 6800s and 7200s (?) are probably reasonably priced (i.e., c. $200).
Thank you, Sir!
One other question I'd like to throw out there about RAM, is there any real benefit to a dual-channel setup? Right now I have two 256 MB sticks in a supposedly dual channel arrangement, if I were to add another GB is it better to get 2 (512 MB each) and put them in the dual channel slots or just get 1 full GB stick and forget the dual-channel thing?
- DCD
{Don}_Sky{Mh}
10-13-2006, 01:20
I admit I got almost no knowledge of computer specs, so please don't laugh at this. (I know I most probably need a new graphics card)
Compaq Presario
AMD Athlon(tm) XP 2400+
2.00 GHz
512 MB of RAM
If I do need a new graphics card, driver, whatever, please tell me where.
I got Circuit City, Gamestop, and FYE at my mall. CompUSA and BestBuy is over at Braintree (few towns over, easy on highway).
Please help a fellow gamer brother out! :dizzy2:
If I forgot to post another spec by accident, sorry bout it, tell me where to find it on my computer. (In Layman's Terms please) :oops:
ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88
10-13-2006, 01:34
2.8 GHz
512 RAM
Radeon X1300 256MB Card
Windows XP Home Edtion
8-13MB Cable
don't tell me my comp can't run it good, like the .com ppl say.
BF2,1.5 GHz,512 RAM, runs like a charm, with SLIGHT Lag ONCE in awhile
Elder Scrolls IV, 2.4GHz,256RAM, Runs on High Quatily, Little to No Lag.
Ehrlichmann
10-13-2006, 02:50
AMD Athlon 3000+ 2.2ghz
nVidia Geforce 6600 256mb AGP
1gb Ram
Soundblaster Live 5.1
Maeda Toshiie
10-13-2006, 08:37
http://p223.ezboard.com/fshoguntotalwarfrm55.showMessage?topicID=4733.topic
Palamedes
CA Staff
Posts: 4
(10/13/06 7:24 am)
Wow the forums are running hot with demo chat. I thought I better hurry up and address some of your concerns so you can relax and enjoy the weekend. As mentioned in the developer blogs the demo is a pre-beta build and since then the game has had over 2 months of polish and optimization. I am happy to inform you that:
• SSE2 is only required for the demo, the release version of the game will only require SSE.
• Most of the issues with the Athlon XP processor were fixed for the release version of the game, the single player game works fine but there are a few residual issues with multiplayer and as such we can’t officially support it.
• Regarding frame rate, considering there has been over 2 months of work on game optimization I think it’s safe to assume the frame rate in the release game will be better than the one seen in the demo.
I will be sure to keep up to date with the demo chat and try and address any additional issues requiring clarification.
Jason
Pras the Reaper
10-13-2006, 08:40
Heh - beat me to it... came here just to point the guys towards Jason's post.
Hooray!!!! Fraps up/ Fun up!!!!:2thumbsup:
is that the original Athlon XP that will not be officially supported, or all Athlons including the later thunderbird/thoroughbred/barton versions too?
{Don}_Sky{Mh}
10-13-2006, 12:44
I admit I got almost no knowledge of computer specs, so please don't laugh at this. (I know I most probably need a new graphics card)
Compaq Presario
AMD Athlon(tm) XP 2400+
2.00 GHz
512 MB of RAM
If I do need a new graphics card, driver, whatever, please tell me where.
I got Circuit City, Gamestop, and FYE at my mall. CompUSA and BestBuy is over at Braintree (few towns over, easy on highway).
Please help a fellow gamer brother out! :dizzy2:
If I forgot to post another spec by accident, sorry bout it, tell me where to find it on my computer. (In Layman's Terms please) :oops:
So would this have SSE in it? If not, I am pretty much screwed. I am on a tight budget at the moment, under 500ish, being in college.
Brighdaasa
10-13-2006, 12:47
Well my Radeon 850 XT run's everything smoothly at 1024*768, BUT, since i want to run the game with the highest possible graphics settings, the Ati Radeon 850 XT card just ain't enough.
Espjo
i also have a Saphire X850XT (AGP) card, and i run the game smoothly (though average 20-25 frames but no frame drops) on 1600*1200, everything maxed out except shadows off and AA and texturing filter at x2 (Haven't tried turning them any higher)
my full setup:
WinXP
Athlon64 3400+ (ClawHammer core, with 1MB L2 cache)
1.5GB DDR400
Creative SB Audigy
Saphire X850XT AGP 256MB
Basileus
10-13-2006, 12:53
My new hardware came and after building the pc i tried the demo and it run perfectly on all the highest settings at 1280x1024.
core duo e6660
asus i975x
2gb ddr2ram
7950gt oc
audigy
I can only only imagine how the full game will work with all the optimization CA say they have done.
SpencerH
10-13-2006, 12:54
I'm looking for recommendations on what to upgrade first, RAM or graphics card. My system:
Windows XP
2.6 Ghz P4
512 MB ddr400
Radeon 9200 128MB
I know ideally I should be increasing both, but my wife will not necessarily agree ;) It won't cost much to upgrade to 1024 MB RAM (or is it worthwhile to go higher, like 1.5 GB), but upgrading a graphics card can get pricey. Where would be the better "bang for the buck"? Any recommendations for a mid-level graphics card (AGP 8x) that's a good value?
Thanks.
- DCD
I've gotta disagree with SirGrotius. More RAM may be useful but you need a better video card if you wanna improve the look of MTW2 during play. I havent kept up with the specs so I wont recommend a card. I do note that you can pick up a 9800 pro 256 for around $100 and I've found the 9800 cards to be very versatile (ie they play a lot of games without undue problems).
My new hardware came and after building the pc i tried the demo and it run perfectly on all the highest settings at 1280x1024.
core duo e6660
asus i975x
2gb ddr2ram
7950gt oc
audigy
nice, similar to what i have just built:
C2D 6600
Gigabyte DS4
1GB PC6400
XFX 7950
Silverstone LC16-M case
i think we'll do fine with M2:TW. ;)
Bob the Insane
10-13-2006, 15:32
nice, similar to what i have just built:
C2D 6600
Gigabyte DS4
1GB PC6400
XFX 7950
Silverstone LC16-M case
i think we'll do fine with M2:TW. ;)
NO FAIR!!! :help:
Please send money...
You guys should be running at 1600x1200 with that setup, to be running at 1280x1024 is an offense to that hardware :wall:
Not really too surprising that the demo works with the latest hardware!
Marius Dynamite
10-13-2006, 17:11
http://p223.ezboard.com/fshoguntotalwarfrm55.showMessage?topicID=4733.topic
I'm sure this is flying around here somewere but I guess I should mention it in this topic. Sorry if its already here.
I have AMD Athlon(TM) XP 2400+
2.00 GHz, 256 MB RAM
NVIDIA GeForce4 MX 440
Can I play the game??? The demo not start, can be some of my computer???
NVIDIA GeForce4 MX 440
I have the same card, thats one problem I think.
I just got that graphics card to stop the stuttering on MTW, now I have to get a new one with shadowing to run MTW2. Well it's been 3 years since I've looked at graphics cards, what are the minimums on Graphic RAM, makers, and capabilities.
mfberg
[QUOTE=mfberg]I have the same card, thats one problem I think.
I just got that graphics card to stop the stuttering on MTW, now I have to get a new one with shadowing to run MTW2. Well it's been 3 years since I've looked at graphics cards, what are the minimums on Graphic RAM, makers, and capabilities.
So do you say me that I have to change my video card or the MB of Ram or Both????
GeneralMikeIII
10-13-2006, 17:56
I've been looking to buy a new computer for about 6 months, and M2 is going to be the thing that finally makes me go out and do it. I went to the Dell website and came up with this. I didn't buy it yet, but it is what I am looking at.
XPS 410 (model)--very important for price, see below
C2D E6400 (2.13 Ghz) (processor)
2 GB (memory)
ATI X1300 Pro (graphics card)
It's been awhile since I was up to date with the hardware stuff, but I think this should have no problems running it, right? That is the kind of feedback I get from reading this thread, plus my rather out of date knowledge.
For those interested, It also came with a 19" monitor, 320 GB Hard Drive, and a CD/DVD burner. Price is about $1350 (US) b/f tax and any rebates you can get (I get a discount from my college, for example, but there are other ones a person might be eligible for). 3-5 day shipping is free. Quite a reasonable price, I'd say. If you go with a XPS 700 model, with everything else the same, it comes out to an extra $500 or so.
:Crosses fingers and hopes that he does still know what he is talking about with this kind of stuff:
Barkhorn1x
10-13-2006, 18:06
I have AMD Athlon(TM) XP 2400+
2.00 GHz, 256 MB RAM
NVIDIA GeForce4 MX 440
Can I play the game??? The demo not start, can be some of my computer???
Nicolas;
Sorry to have to tell you this but you have problems across the board:
a. Your CPU does not support SSE2 so you can't play the demo - and the full game will be pretty sluggish at best.
b. Your RAM is too low - you need AT LEAST 512 MB - 1GB would be better.
c. Your MX 440 was a budget card when it came out about 4 years ago and I you won't be able to even play the full game - at any speed - on that card.
Barkhorn.
Lord ZORO Savage
10-13-2006, 18:19
my computer supports just SSE2 is it enough?
Dracula(Romanian Vlad Tepes)
10-13-2006, 18:22
is SSE enough or i need SSe2?
Barkhorn1x
10-13-2006, 18:25
You MUST HAVE SSE2 to play the demo. If you do your are fine. If not, then not. To find out downloand this freeware app. and look on the CPU tab, "Instructions" line.
http://www.cpuid.com/cpuz.php
Barkhorn.
Tell me one thing, what is SSE2, what function does in my computer??? I have SP2.
Barkhorn1x
10-13-2006, 19:36
Tell me one thing, what is SSE2, what function does in my computer??? I have SP2.
SP2 is Windows Service Pack 2 - a patch that basically corrects many of the scew-ups in XP on the part of M$.
SSE2 is an instruction set for your CPU:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SSE2
Barkhorn.
Dracula(Romanian Vlad Tepes)
10-13-2006, 20:25
Can i get SS2 from the web?
The Spartan (Returns)
10-13-2006, 20:33
now ive tested M2TW on my Intel Graphics Card which not to my surprise didnt work. (probably didnt have SSE2)
so can this work?:
site and info of specific graphics card (http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=7951638&type=product&productCategoryId=cat01151&id=1152836575674)
Barkhorn1x
10-13-2006, 21:37
Can i get SS2 from the web?
Nope. SSE2 is an instruction set imbeded in the CPU architecture. The chip either has it or it doesn't.
Barkhorn.
Barkhorn1x
10-13-2006, 21:40
now ive tested M2TW on my Intel Graphics Card which not to my surprise didnt work. (probably didnt have SSE2)
so can this work?:
site and info of specific graphics card (http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=7951638&type=product&productCategoryId=cat01151&id=1152836575674)
Keep in mind that SSE2 is part of the CPU architecture - not the GPU.
That being said, you should be able to play the full game on that card - at less than the full level of detail - assuming your CPU and memory can handle it.
Barkhorn.
GeneralMikeIII
10-13-2006, 21:51
Sorry to be obnoxious, but I was hoping to get some feedback on this. I posted this earlier, but I haven't gotten a response, and I definately want the opinion of someone who is a little better educated than I in this area. This is what I put:
I've been looking to buy a new computer for about 6 months, and M2 is going to be the thing that finally makes me go out and do it. I went to the Dell website and came up with this. I didn't buy it yet, but it is what I am looking at.
XPS 410 (model)--very important for price, see below
C2D E6400 (2.13 Ghz) (processor)
2 GB (memory)
ATI X1300 Pro (graphics card)
It's been awhile since I was up to date with the hardware stuff, but I think this should have no problems running it, right? That is the kind of feedback I get from reading this thread, plus my rather out of date knowledge.
For those interested, It also came with a 19" monitor, 320 GB Hard Drive, and a CD/DVD burner. Price is about $1350 (US) b/f tax and any rebates you can get (I get a discount from my college, for example, but there are other ones a person might be eligible for). 3-5 day shipping is free. Quite a reasonable price, I'd say. If you go with a XPS 700 model, with all the other specs the same, it comes out to an extra $500 or so.
:Crosses fingers and hopes that he does still know what he is talking about with this kind of stuff:
You guys should be running at 1600x1200 with that setup, to be running at 1280x1024 is an offense to that hardware :wall:
1920x1200 with max settings on my dell screen. :)
I've been looking to buy a new computer for about 6 months, and M2 is going to be the thing that finally makes me go out and do it. I went to the Dell website and came up with this. I didn't buy it yet, but it is what I am looking at.
XPS 410 (model)--very important for price, see below
C2D E6400 (2.13 Ghz) (processor)
2 GB (memory)
ATI X1300 Pro (graphics card)
It's been awhile since I was up to date with the hardware stuff, but I think this should have no problems running it, right? That is the kind of feedback I get from reading this thread, plus my rather out of date knowledge.
For those interested, It also came with a 19" monitor, 320 GB Hard Drive, and a CD/DVD burner. Price is about $1350 (US) b/f tax and any rebates you can get (I get a discount from my college, for example, but there are other ones a person might be eligible for). 3-5 day shipping is free. Quite a reasonable price, I'd say. If you go with a XPS 700 model, with everything else the same, it comes out to an extra $500 or so.
:Crosses fingers and hopes that he does still know what he is talking about with this kind of stuff:
CPU is great
Memory is great
GPU will work, but with low/medium settings as it doesn't have too much grunt.
should be fine all told. :)
The Spartan (Returns)
10-13-2006, 22:32
Keep in mind that SSE2 is part of the CPU architecture - not the GPU.
That being said, you should be able to play the full game on that card - at less than the full level of detail - assuming your CPU and memory can handle it.
Barkhorn.
CPU and Memory is great..
so i guess its good!:2thumbsup:
GeneralMikeIII
10-13-2006, 23:02
CPU is great
Memory is great
GPU will work, but with low/medium settings as it doesn't have too much grunt.
should be fine all told. :)
Thanks a lot for the response, Peregrine.
Alright, on the GPU then, the other thing I was looking at was a 1GB NVIDIA GeForce 7950 GX2 Dual-GPU Graphics Card for about $550 on tigerdirect.com. Have you heard anything negative about it, or is that a pretty good deal? I tried to check it out, but all I understood was that 1GB is a big number for a graphics card. Also, if I get the 7950, I'd still have the ATI that I could sell or something.
Basileus
10-13-2006, 23:33
Thanks a lot for the response, Peregrine.
Alright, on the GPU then, the other thing I was looking at was a 1GB NVIDIA GeForce 7950 GX2 Dual-GPU Graphics Card for about $550 on tigerdirect.com. Have you heard anything negative about it, or is that a pretty good deal? I tried to check it out, but all I understood was that 1GB is a big number for a graphics card. Also, if I get the 7950, I'd still have the ATI that I could sell or something.
I would suggest the 7900GTO which is a 7900GTX underclocked card which you can overclock if you so wish, it costs almost half the price of the GTX so its a good deal and a great card. Depending where you are from prices may vary but i reckon it will be cheap:er then the SLi card atleast heh..would fit teh rest of your set up good.
Btw you could always wait until mid november and go for the new nvidia DX10 cards :D heh
Belgolas
10-14-2006, 01:01
I have a...
2.8 GHz Pentium D
3gigs of ram
Sapphire X700 256mb gpu
The demo runs better than RTW. I love the demo. I can run it on high for unit detail and the rest on low to medium except for shadows. To my surprise the demo runs better than RTW. I also don't have the problem like in RTW where I would have to under clock my GPU to run it without crashing. If M2TW full version will run even better I will be so happy.
I think I will upgrade my computer when Direct X 10 comes out.
It will most likely be a
Quad Core Intel
And a
DX10 Very high end GPU
Or for $2000(Canadian) I could upgrade my current computer now and get a
2.66 Core 2 duo Conroe
ATI Redeon X 1950 XTX
X-FI sound blaster
A new mobo
NCIX.com or tigerdirect.ca
Buy parts online because at stores they jack them up by a few hundred dollars. I have seen some things $500 more at a store than online at best buy and Future Shop.
Big King Sanctaphrax
10-14-2006, 01:15
Originally Posted by GeneralMikeIII
I've been looking to buy a new computer for about 6 months, and M2 is going to be the thing that finally makes me go out and do it. I went to the Dell website and came up with this. I didn't buy it yet, but it is what I am looking at.
XPS 410 (model)--very important for price, see below
C2D E6400 (2.13 Ghz) (processor)
2 GB (memory)
ATI X1300 Pro (graphics card)
It's been awhile since I was up to date with the hardware stuff, but I think this should have no problems running it, right? That is the kind of feedback I get from reading this thread, plus my rather out of date knowledge.
For those interested, It also came with a 19" monitor, 320 GB Hard Drive, and a CD/DVD burner. Price is about $1350 (US) b/f tax and any rebates you can get (I get a discount from my college, for example, but there are other ones a person might be eligible for). 3-5 day shipping is free. Quite a reasonable price, I'd say. If you go with a XPS 700 model, with all the other specs the same, it comes out to an extra $500 or so.
:Crosses fingers and hopes that he does still know what he is talking about with this kind of stuff:
Please don't put that graphics card in that system. It's such a waste. Stretch your budget a little and get the x1900 or 1950.
GeneralMikeIII
10-14-2006, 01:22
Please don't put that graphics card in that system. It's such a waste. Stretch your budget a little and get the x1900 or 1950.
Yeah, that's the way I was leaning too, but the 1900/1950 seemed like a too-good-to-be-true kinda deal. I was afraid there was some horrible problem with them, like melting all over the inside of the computer or something, and they had to knock the price down just to sell them. I know that isn't very likely either, but I'm in college; I can't afford to take many financial risks right now. Looks like I'm leaning towards the 7900GTO.
Thanks for all the help guys.
AlJabberwock
10-14-2006, 03:35
Some info about current and recent Video Cards for the layman...
I make PCs as a hobby, for home, friends and for work (though I am not employed as a PC builder). I am NOT a proffessional developer/manufacturer by any means, and any error or ommission in these comments is lamentable but possible and not intentional. I have been doing it for years and have had to stay on top of many of the dizzying changes in technology. I have had to read the white papers at Dell, M$, NVidia, ATI, AMD, Intel, and elsewhere. So you don't have to (unless you like that sort of thing-not that there's anything wrong with that!), here are a few basic ways to understand what you have, want, or need in video cards... :book:
(A summary at the end is provided as an opinion-laden shorthand if you are not interested in the details listed here ad infinitum).
As another poster intelligently specified, I am an adherent of one of the two dominant video card producers. This is important to know about yourself if it is true since it means you 1) may have a bias severe or slight, 2) probably know more about one maker than another. I know more about and concentrate on NVidia cards, and for specific reasons, but will give some info on ATI cards as well. Hopefully someone more knowledgeable about ATI cards will post a sensible comment with greater detail on ATI chip products.
V Card "generation"
There are "generations" that can be more or less defined as "stages" in the battle for supremacy or competitiveness between NVidia and ATI. I will not try to trace the lineage of ATI cards or individual stages of where the frontline was in each of these stages between the two makers. Which generation you have or are looking to buy will give you a good indicator of what you can expect its functionality will be for M2TW. Convenienetly recent Nvidia card generations can be more or less defined by the first number in their designation or the number after the "GeForce" name. Ergo, 4's , 400's 4000's etc. are pretty much 4th generation, 5's 5000's (many with the "FX" designation in front of them) are 5th generation, 6000's are the last generation, and 7000's are the current generation (at least for a bit longer!).
If you have a 6th or 7th generation NVidia card, you probably have no worries unless it is a budget card (or in some cases a "LE" or low energy card) which may have some limited support issues for the cooler textures and shaders, limited ram or energy issues. Although Rome TW can run great with most eye candy turned on even with an "FX" or 5th gen. if you have no other bottlenecks, (5500 OC or better is reccommended), it is not clear this will be sufficient for M2TW. It does provide a cutoff of sorts, insofar as it seems to me that it is unlikely demands will be less than they were for RTW. So, less than a mid-level 5th gen definitely calls for an upgrade, and BTW, the current price for video cards will vary by the "interface type" as well as what generation and bells and whistles they have so read below... this is important also for those thinking of upgrading since you may have to change you mobo (motherboard) and pretty much everything else depending on how high you reach and what your budget is may be very important.
V Card Interface type
The loveable, friendly brown AGP 8X "state of the art" interface (the way in which your vid card fits into your mobo) is pretty much history. Mobos with AGP graphic slots and the vid cards that go into them are now going the way of the Dodo, and while temporarily cheaper, will eventually become scarce and provide the twin advantages of being both "more expensive" and "less fulfilling"!
The reason they are going away, is because a new standard called "PCI-Express" (or PCI-E) is faster and cheaper to scale up. This means vid cards can reach new heights, and be less of a bottleneck because of the way in which this new interface type widens the signal (like bandwidth does for your internet connection as a bad example...). Unfortunately it also means most new cards and eventually all new cards, will fit into these PCI-E slots and NOT into your AGP slots (they're completely incompatible... big surprise there from the office of planned obsolesence!). This is equally true of ATI and NVidia cards.
There are a number of different speeds of these PCI-E slots (not to be confused with regular PCI slots... where you put other cards like USB or modem cards...) 1x, 2x, 4x, 8x, and 16x.... There are also now boards with two 8x or 16x slots so you can run "crossfire" (ATI) or "SLI" (NVidia) video card setups which are two cards operating simultaniously. If that isn't enough craziness, NVidia has a card called the 7950GTX which is actually two "GPU's" or video chips on one card, and you can have two of THOSE things running although there are only a handful of programs that can take any kind of real advantage from all this incredible increase in video signal width and increased computing power on the vid cards. As with dual core CPUs, extra cards and/gpu's help in some tasks and programs just like a second person helps when you are trying to move your couch, but you may not need them (or indeed want them around at all) when you are doing your undies at the laundry...
Vid Card Memory
Memory on video cards comes in DDR, DDR2 and DDR3 forms. DDR3 is theoretically faster, but certainly less than 256megs (of whatever kind you have) will restrict the rendering rate and cause any other advantages your card has to be diminished because of the "bottleneck" caused by the card waiting around while the dimwitted ram gets the picture ready. While this can be radically different for different programs and different systems it is highly effected by whether the software relies more on the CPU (your computer's brain- like AMD or Intel) or the GPU (your video cards vid chip-like ATI or NVidia) to handle the load of rendering etc, and what the limits are of and how you set your BIOS (that blue screen you can get to by madly pressing the F1 or Delete key as your 'puter starts up) to handle the tasks or limits or overclocking on your individual components.
Cards in the upper price ranges have 512 megs of gddram, and depending on the system and the task it definitely has an impact. I have, with difficulty, found the edge of where a single 7900GTX OC w 512 megs can function with no visible strain, at least in some programs. I don't have a large enough monitor to find the edge for two of them working in tandem for any program that I possess.
On the other hand, with prices ranging from $400 to $500 @, well, you get what you pay for...
Non Vid Card hardware impacts on video performance
The better your CPU, and the greater your Ram speed and quantity, in general, the better your video performance... although by how much will vary based on your settings and the way a particular software is engineered. Also to be considered is your "front side bus" (now described in terms of hyper transport speeds and soon to be based on the same physical concept that has given us the PCI-E). Not so well known is the makeup of your Ram sticks... Your system in general will run better with more ram than less, however, fewer "big" sticks, are better than more "small" sticks. Obviously the most recent drivers for your CPU, "chipset" (the chips on your mobo other than your CPU), vid card and oddly, your sound card are also adviseable.
Summary and Shameless Opinion for Vid Cards for M2TW
ATI cards hands down win anti-aliasing contests in most cases that are fair fights with NVidia cards (anti-aliasing being loosely defined as the way in which your video card can and will "round sharp edges" and make a computerized picture look the way we see reality with our eyes). On the other hand, many of these differences can rarely be seen without stop-motion still comparison between frames from the different systems- the same can be said of the texturing and or shading advantages that may be gotten from NVidia cards in certain conditions and programs. In all cases I am also talking about the maximum resolutions that most people will never need or use unless they have monitors in excess of 24 inch-viewable.
I like the NVidia driver architecture better and a few other things that are strictly opinion and based on personal experience... For me, in general, NVidia cards are smaller and less hot and more reliable IN MY OPINION. Your mileage may vary and has to do with conditions, uses and systems and a number of other things... Buy an upper-end product from either maker and you will probably be quite satiesfied if it represents a significant step up from where you are.
Keep in mind that programs can be more CPU or more GPU (vid card) -intensive. If you are buying a new system, keep this in mind... and you might be buying a new system if you want an upper end card that uses the new technology based on PCI-E. As time progresses, PCI-E cards may NOT be the more expensive, so check to make sure you are buying the right kind of card! (PCI-E is NOT the same as regular PCI! Read above).
A 6th or 7th generation NVidia Card is adviseable (6000's or 7000's series). GTs, are usually faster than standard, GTXs faster still, and OCs (meaning overclocked) are faster than the stock setting of whatever gpu they are based on... , and maybe worth the price if they are waranteed by a good manufacturer like BFG or XFX and the like who specialize in these types of products. It is unknown whether an FX series (the 5000's series) will be adequate to run M2TW with anything like joy, so if you own one, or the ATI equivalent, you may need to start taking evasive action.
Any one of the following cards should easily handle M2TW at high or highest on most settings...
Fastest in the 6000's series: 6800gt... unless there is an OC version of the 6800gt. Second best 6600gtocx or similar 6600gt.
Fastest in the 7000's series: 7900gtx OC, although the 7800gtx 512 in some versions is a tough second, and there is a lot of talk about the straight 7950gt but I have no personal experience with it.
The 7950 gx2 (or the dual gpu vid card) is a one of a kind unit and is the only thing I have seen that is as large or larger physically than the 7900gtx (which is itself absolutely the hugest thing I have ever seen standing upright on my mobos...). One of these alone would probably laugh at the demands placed on it by most monitors playing M2TW.
Current price check online today shows the follwing price range:6600s can be had for as little as $100 us in the PCI E version, less in the AGP versions. 6800s are in the $130 US range. 7800s are around $2 to 300 US, with 7900s in the $400 to $500 US range. GX2's are around $600 a piece. Keep in mind almost any of these except the 6600s will probably also call for a PCI E capable board. Sorry guys, I wish they were less, trust me, they are way less than when I had to buy a bunch of them a couple of months ago. Wait another month or two and they will come down again. There are new generations coming out soon!
Al Jabberwock
ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88
10-14-2006, 04:19
Would My Radeon X1300 256MB Card be ok? it can Run BF2, which is 1.5 GHz,512 RAM (comp is 2.8 GHz,512 RAM) with no ploblems. I have about 10-15 seconds of lag at start of a MP game,then it goes fine. SP game on BF2, no ploblems at all..
AlJabberwock
10-14-2006, 07:12
King,
If I recollect, the x1300 256 is a recent, but not most recent gen ATI product. I will have a look at the supported API and pixel pipelines. If its Shader 2 or better and decent pipelines, its probably ok... I can't edit my posts here so I will respond below.
Also in my post above, I inadvertently referred to the "NVidia 7950gtx" - a card that does not at this time exist. Although later in my post I got it right, it is called the 7950gx2 (a two-chip vid card that allows up to 4 GPUs to be used when in SLI mode with dual cards... wacky!)
AlJabberwock
x1300 is 4 pipes at 450mhz so somewhat less than the power of a radeon 9700pro (8 pipes at ~300mhz).
If its the Pro, its 600mhz so up there with a 9700pro
AlJabberwock
10-14-2006, 08:29
King,
The X1300 comes in a few different flavors so I cannot be certain exactly what is supported in the version you have, but the ones I scoped had Shader 3.0 and Open GL 2.0 which is GOOD (mostly -although I saw a few that only had shader 2.0 and Open GL 1.5).
It only has 4 pixel pipelines in all the versions I saw which is similar to 6200's and FX or 5000 series NVidia cards, but not quite as good as, say the NVidia 6600 which has 8, but had the same GL and Shader model support as the better 6600s. Pixel pipelines can impact speed when large quantities of data need to be transmitted so having only 4 is not good, but makes it at least tenable that the card could function well enough not to look for the sledgehammer...right away at least The clock and corespeeds I saw were reasonable, and the card should allow you to at least look at the demo unless it is some very budget version of the x1300.
The rest of your machine, uh, well 512 Ram will "technically" work, again, its borderline.
A 2.8 ghz CPU is ok, but we need to know what kind. A kind poster earlier listed CPU types that support SSe2, which appears to be needed to run the demo, if not the game, and the SSE2 thingy notwithstanding, 2.8 on an AMD is one thing whereas on an Intel it is something entirely different. If an Intel, it is also probably "ok" but you will simply have to try it out or wait for more definitive info from CA which appears not to be forthcoming before Monday next, the 16th.
Wait as long as you can, as both seriously superior CPUs and Vid Cards have and/or should experience sharp falls in price. CPUs because of the price wars between Intel and AMD over dual-core chips and the vid cards because of the new version of DirectX about to relegate current cards to the has-been category.
Cheers!
AlJabberwock
I'll play ATI advocate.
0 intent to initiate flames/debate (which should probably be done either here (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/forumdisplay.php?f=132) or here (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/forumdisplay.php?f=19) (not too sure of the latter, I haven't ventured in there personally)), and with maximum intent to provide useful info as per Jabberwocks' excellent & informative post I'll follow his format.
First & foremost, this is very true:
Buy an upper-end product from either maker and you will probably be quite satiesfied if it represents a significant step up from where you are.
Now a general note on generation and high/low end:
There is a really really wide range of cards out there on sale, differing in both generation and top-bottom end and there is huge overlap between them.
At the top (expensive) end which I will be mainly dealing with, each new generation brings roughly twice the power of the previous generation.
This is not the case at the cheap end where even the 7th generation is not very much more powerful than a (similarly priced) mid-low 4th generation.
In the mid-price range there is a significant increase in performance resulting in new generation mid-upper range being often not far short of or better than the previous generation top end.
At the mid-upper end, you should be mostly concerned about what (high) resolution & the level af AA/AF you will be using.
At the bottom end, the pure mathematical power is generally more important than features since this end is maths/resolution limited.
For those looking to compare their current graphics card with the current state of the art in terms of raw performance, see this (http://www.beyond3d.com/misc/chipcomp/?view=board&orderby=pix_fill&order=DESC&n=0) (some would call this site ATI biased but I believe this chart is about as comprehensive & unbiased as they come in terms of pure technical details)
For a fairly comprehensive suite of practical benchmarks (but not taking into account AA/AF qualitative differences), see here (http://www23.tomshardware.com/graphics.html), here (http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/12/02/vga_charts_viii/index.html) and here (http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/07/05/vga_charts_vii/index.html) (though unfortunately, its seperated between PCI express & AGP for reasons only known to tomshardware...)
Card "generation"
ATI generation 4 is 8500pro, its roughly equivalent to a 4xxx series NV card (xbox has a GPU somewhere between the 3 & 4 generation), some would say more advanced but slightly inferior in total performance
The 9000, 9100 and 9200 fit within this generation rather than the generation 5 proper, they are basically just 8500s with a different name.
Generation 5 is the legendary Radeon 9700/9800 series.
These cards are probably the best GPUs ever, they span the period from basic fixed function 3D acceleration to the current era of programmable effects like a colossus :2thumbsup:
At the time, they were twice the power of a Geforce 4 and completely outclassed the Nvidia generation 5 at shaders while being more than a match in pure horsepower for older stuff.
So outclassed were the FX cards that Nvidia was reduced to blatant and at times very visible benchmark cheating to try to seem competitive.
My 9800 lasted me from Unreal Tournament 2003 at 1024*768 with 6*AA and 8*AF clear through RTR at 1920*1200 with most settings maxed, huge armies & 2*AA/8*AF (albeit it choked somewhat in the bigger battles) up to playing Battlefield2 at 13something*1024 with 2*AA & 8*AF.
ATIs 6th generation was a bit of a letdown, while Nvidia did a complete rebuild of their architecture, providing real shader power and introducing shader 3.0, ATI did little more than simply double the functional units on the 9800.
This gave the x800 series technically better overall power but a bit outdated tech wise.
For the 7th generation, Nvidia refined their successful 6th generation (slightly modified chip will also be used for PS3) while ATI bought out the x1800/x1900 series which are a big improvement on the x800 series with shader 3.0 support and some fairly advanced internal architecture (but while more powerful in pure maths terms, technologically inferior to the chip they did for xbox 360).
The x1900s are arguably excessively light on texture ability compared to maths but make more efficient use of this, while the 6/7 series of Nvidia cards has some maths units that do double function for textures which means that while maximum maths abilities are similar, in practice, maths is roughly halved because those units will mostly be doing texture.
The 8th generation is due to debut next month for Nvidia and early next year for ATI, they will be absolute computing monsters! (and very power hungry :elephant: )
The particularly good thing about this for those looking to upgrade soon is that the current generation of cards should shortly be becoming much cheaper :2thumbsup:
The bad thing being that you'll then need to weigh up whether you want the lower grade new generation at equivalent price-point with new features or the current generation with more power.
Card Interface type
If you are looking to upgrade GPU for an AGP motherboard, you'll be quite restricted in what you can buy in terms of graphics card updates on AGP.
Also, there are at least 3 different versions of AGP, before purchasing make sure that the graphics card you are looking to buy is compatible with your motherboard.
Card Memory
The only thing I have to add here is that 512MB is of no particular value if you are running anything less than say 1600*1200 & that with heavy AA/AF.
Non Vid Card hardware
Important! Before going out to get that 1GB stick of RAM, make sure that your motherboard can handle it!
Older mobos may be only able to handle 512MB sticks (or even 256MB for the really oldies).
From personal experience, its helluva PITA to get home, plonk in that RAM & find that your PC won't boot now :wall:
Also, its my understanding that Pentium 4s are happier with 4*256MB than 2*512MB.
Another thing, if getting a fairly high end graphics card, its important to have a good powersupply.
With a weak powersupply, you may find that your PC will freeze/semi-randomly reboot and you face the (fairly unlikely) possibility of frying your PC altogether.
AA & AF
(note, some people don't see the difference between AA/AF enabled and no AA/AF, others go 'ugh' instantly they see no AA/AF.
Also, depending on DPI & other hardware factors, some people will prefer a higher resolution with lower/no AA/AF over a similarly performing lower resolution with higer AA/AF)
Anti Aliasing is blending of the edges of objects to reduce the 'stepping' eg with a not quite vertical phalanx spear.
ATI has generally had better AA than Nvidia from generation 4 onwards. ATI haven't really changed anything since the 9700, while Nvidia have been progressively improving performance & quality to the extent that in the current generation, at 2*, ATI is a bit better, 4* is roughly a draw (& generally the best quality/performance for both).
ATI still maxes at 6* while Nvidia has several exotic levels above 4* but with significant performance expense.
This latter is primarily where the SLI/GX2 setup comes in to play, particularly at high resolution (more on this further on).
Anisotropic Filtering is taking extra samples of the textures to remove the blurring of textures in the distance eg the horizon in Grassy Flatland custom battle map of RTW.
Leadership here has flip-flopped over the generations.
With the 9700, ATI cut some corners but had sufficient raw power to have a net better quality than Nvidias ostensibly more correct method (this being one of the bits where Nvidia did blatant cheating to try to catch up).
In the 6th generation, ATI still used the same level of corner cutting as the 9700 while Nvidia followed suit but more agressively.
In the 7th generation, ATI has reintroduced more mathematically correct filtering (with some smart algorithms that cut corners in places where it should never be noticed) but Nvidia still uses heavy hardware corner cutting that can often be seen.
Resolution
This is an often missed aspect.
There is no point having a 7950GX2 if you only have a 19" monitor that runs only 1280*1024 (unless you intend to upgrade the monitor some time soonish).
The GX2 is a fillrate beast that can crank out 4*AA & 16*AF at crazy high resolutions like 2560x1600 with all settings maxed in much more computationally demanding games than M2TW will be.
My mid-high range x1900GT can handle new games like Prey and the upgraded Half-Life2 engine with HDR etc at 1900*1200 with 4*AA/8*AF without problems, while my 9800 was still generally good for 1280*1024 with 2*AA & 8*AF in most games.
Scaling factor is very important regarding resolution.
The number of pixels increases exponentially when you increase resolution!
ie: 1024*768 is 786,432 pixels that need to be calculated per frame.
1280*1024 is 1,310,720
1920*1200 is 2,304,000
and 2560*1600 is 4,096,000!!!
So if you run a medium resolution, you can get away with a much less powerful GPU than if you try to run a higher resolution.
Or, if you don't care too much for the 'pretty effects', you should be able to handle a higher resolution with various effects disabled.
Summary and Shameless Opinion
Because I am one of those that go 'ugh yuck' at no or poor AA/AF I went for an ATI X1900GT for my recently procured major upgrade because while the equivalent Nvidia card (7900gt) is a bit 'faster' on benchmarks, the ATI card does it with (depending on whether you see it or not) better quality at hardly any practical performance decrease.
The following is some more general info about effects that may answer queries earlier in the thread regarding M2TW optimisation (bearing in mind that I'm looking at this from a high resolution, powerful machine):
HDR/Bloom
Bloom is roughly speaking, poormans/Fools Gold HDR.
Proper HDR is where you render the scene with a higher maximum brightness/darkness than the monitor can actually display at once, enabling a good emulation of your eyes adjusting to sudden brightness changes eg dark->bright or bright->dark.
The classic live rendering example of true HDR can be found here (http://www.daionet.gr.jp/~masa/rthdribl/)
Bloom is the colour blurring seen in the M2TW demo, its a lot easier to do in terms of maths power & gives one of the main visible effects that a proper HDR implementation provides in that the colour blends somewhat but its not really anything like real HDR.
Its also a(n all too) common method used by game developers to cover art/detail weaknesses with an "Oh wow" feature...
Turning it off will deliver some level of performance improvements but probably not too much.
Some people just find it Blooming ugly.
Shadows
Shadows have been & will continue to be one of the major performance bottlenecks of 3D games.
If you are lagging, probably the first thing to decrease/disable should be shadows.
Grass/Unit Detail
Lower these a bit & you should get some performance increase for minimal visible difference.
In RTW, on max setting, this forces your PC to render every soldier/tree as a 3d object, on lower settings, the max polygon 3d object is replaced at increasingly close distances with first lower polygon, then (STW/MTW style) 2D sprites.
With my x1900gt & 2.4ghz Core2 Duo at 1900*1200 with 2*AA/8*AF, I'm running medium vegetation/high unit detail on the demo & even in RTW I keep them on one step down from max.
I think I'm done with editing now.
... a bunch of edits later... ok maybe now.
fruitfly
10-14-2006, 11:24
I'd just like to say thanks to Jabberwock and hoom for those informative GPU guides. That's definitely the area where my hardware knowledge is sketchiest.
Also, that's a major relief reading that CA have sorted out SSE compatability for the finished game. Since I'm only an SP player, I'm hoping to be very happy now.
Thanks a lot for the response, Peregrine.
Alright, on the GPU then, the other thing I was looking at was a 1GB NVIDIA GeForce 7950 GX2 Dual-GPU Graphics Card for about $550 on tigerdirect.com. Have you heard anything negative about it, or is that a pretty good deal? I tried to check it out, but all I understood was that 1GB is a big number for a graphics card. Also, if I get the 7950, I'd still have the ATI that I could sell or something.
my 7950GT is enough to run the game maxed out at 1920x1200, so you won't need any more power than that for M2:TW.
better still, a 7950GT/X1900GT? can be had for as little as £170 ($275?)
if you want to spend $550 i would wait for November and get a nVidia 8800GTS.
I would suggest the 7900GTO which is a 7900GTX underclocked card which you can overclock if you so wish, it costs almost half the price of the GTX so its a good deal and a great card. Depending where you are from prices may vary but i reckon it will be cheap:er then the SLi card atleast heh..would fit teh rest of your set up good.
Btw you could always wait until mid november and go for the new nvidia DX10 cards :D heh
agreed, the GTO is very good value right now.
Would My Radeon X1300 256MB Card be ok? it can Run BF2, which is 1.5 GHz,512 RAM (comp is 2.8 GHz,512 RAM) with no ploblems. I have about 10-15 seconds of lag at start of a MP game,then it goes fine. SP game on BF2, no ploblems at all..
Whats your internet connection? Lag can be caused by that, so ye, whats your internet?
I have an AMD Sempron(tm) Processor 3200+, MMX, 3DNOW, 1.8ghz.
Will my rig run SSE2? Will it run the game?
I bought a very good video card last weekend. But I have a month to return it if my computer won't run MTW2. If it won't, I will return the card as I don't need it for any other games.
So will my AMD Sempron run the game?
Belgolas
10-14-2006, 17:23
If you are going to upgrade the whole system I would wait. DirectX 10 and next gen GPU's are coming out soon(When ever Vista is realesed). Also if you are going to get a dual core CPU then wait till the end of the year when Quad Core CPU's come out and half the price of dual cores. Just a warning because if you spend a lot of money now on a GPU you will not get DX 10:wall: . Wait!!!
Eaglefirst
10-14-2006, 18:57
IF you turn off shadows even an old machine can run m2tw fast. I have a 2.8 ghz pentium, 1 Gig O' Ram and an overclocked 9700pro and can run high texture, high unit detait, PS2.0 with Bloom and Reflectionls and everything else on medium except TURN SHADOWS OFF. The shadows bog the computer down badly. Also I would make an effort to set tectures too high at all costs as the units are ugly with low/medium textures. Overall I'm surprised my old machine can run the game on high/medium with 1280x1024 and I'm sure the real game will run much better after they optimize the code. Just remember High Textures and No Shadows.
Whats the diff in all the high's in unit details??:help:
Belgolas
10-14-2006, 21:19
Well I did some more test and with my
2.8 ghz pentium D
533 mhz front side bus
3gig ram DDR2 533 mhz
Saphire X700
Unit detail High, no shadows and everthing esle max settings with no lag. I am Very Happy. For some reason M2TW runs better than RTW can someone explain that?
Whats the diff in all the high's in unit details??:help:
Distance in which 2D sprites become low polygon 3D models and finally high polygon models.
Going over high just increases this range, the detail at the closest unit is already as high as it gets.
Just downloaded and ran the demo on the Pavia battle as the Holies.
System: Winxp sp2, AMD Athlon 64x2 Dual Core processor 4200+, 1.0Gig ram, GeForce 7800GT.
All settings to highest.
I noticed nothing I'd complain about as far as lag goes but was playing with few units. For larger battles, I can see maybe needing to turn down to medium on some things.
I also had everything set to best quality on my vid card. Monitor is 19" flat screen and res was set to highest pick in the game setting which I belive was 1280 x 1024.
Belgolas
10-15-2006, 04:11
For people looking to upgrade wait until the end of november. Nov 8th the first Dx10 GPU with Shader model 4 is going to be out from NVidia 8800. Also Quad Cores are comming soon so that will drop the price of the dual cores.
For the info on the new GPU
http://megagames.com/news/html/hardware/nvidiagf8800gtxgtsspecs.shtml
Kourutsu
10-15-2006, 04:56
ALright, I plan to upgrade my Radeon X600, to an X1600.
The only problem is that there are two. An AGP, and an Express.
Which one should I get?
AlJabberwock
10-15-2006, 11:23
K,
If you are buying it for your current mobo (motherboard) its probably an AGP you want since your present board is probably with an AGP slot. Open your case and look in to where your vid card is. If it is off to one side and is stuck in a brown colored slot, its AGP. Now you have to figure out if its AGP8x , 4x, or youch!, a 2x... Look up your mobo maker on the web for your specific mobo if you dont have the manual anymore... Look in the specs and it will tell you what the agp slot speed is. Get the AGP card that is appropriate based on that spec (probably 8X if you had a 600 but ya never know). On the other hand most cards can operate in the slower modes, its just a shame to pay for it and not get the maximum performance...
If you want to upgrade your whole sys, get the PCI-E card, and a mobo with PCI-E. All your future cards WILL be PCI-E ...RESISTANCE IS FUTILE!
Cheers!
Al Jabberwock
AlJabberwock
10-15-2006, 12:01
Thanks Fruitfly and thanks to Hoom for picking up where I missed some important details!
Special vid card plugs
I would like to underline his emphasis on power supplies... If you get a bigger vid card, especially the last two generations, they need more power and in fact, 6's and 7's and generally their ATI equivalents, all need THEIR OWN POWER CONNECTION TO YOUR POWER SOURCE! Yep, they have plugs and you have to get the appropriate plug from your power source to fit into them. While the older ones can use the generic 4-prong plugs that come with most power sources, newer NVidias in the 7000 series require specialized 6-prong plugs from the power source. Trust me, if you have anything more than a year or so old for a power source, it doesn't have those plugs and you are going to have to buy a new power source if you buy a 7th gen vid card... (On the other hand you will probably have to buy a new mobo too since 7s don't come in AGP either, so you might as well do the whole sys...).
Another power source item to consider if you are upgrading or rebuilding your system with new components...
Power Source Rating
New vid cards are energy hogs in a very specific range... You can get a monster power source with 6 or 700 watts and still be power starving your system because it isn't getting enough _+12v_ power. New and newer cards can require anywhere from 6 to 12 amps (or more!) each of power in the +12v range, and the trick is, your mobo needs around 11 amps in the SAME range - yep, +12v!! This means you are looking not only at the number of watts the power source is putting out, but depending on the power needs of your card (or cards if you run dual cards in Crossfire or SLI) and mobo, you need to get a power source with a +12v rating that in total is MORE than sufficient for what you are going to be having on that system.
For example, if you are planning to run a dual card set up with two current gen 7900GTXs, or X1900XTs, you will probably need about 24 amps just for the vid cards and another 10 or 11 for the mobo... This for me, means a total of at least 36 amps in the +12 volt, and I would go for more... Without getting into the whole active/passive PVC thing , just keep in mind that power sources (no matter how good they are) experience fluctuations in the power they draw on and in the power they supply, so the wattage and the amps _fluctuate_ around the max they can theoretically provide... So if you need 500 watts, have a 700 watt minimum, and if you need 34 amps in the 12 volt, get 36 or more if you can...
Being Cheap with the Power Source
In case you are feeling cheap when you get down to that pesky power source question as you finish up your buy for your upgrade or new system... Keep in mind insufficient power will - in its most benign form - merely cause your video output to be poor, dark, full of artifacts (weirdness that doesn't belong there), stutter, be incoherent, or go black... This is the benign form. In its malignant form it can either in conjunction with these effects or without showing these effects either quickly or slowly destroy your mobo, vidcards, and any other components in the system... Power systems for non SLI and Crossfire can be had online for reasonable sums, usually less than the cost of a night at the club. Anybody you meet at the club will just yell at you to come to bed when you would rather be playing M2TW anyway, so quit your complainin' and save the beer money for a night!
Al Jabberwock
I have an AMD Sempron(tm) Processor 3200+, MMX, 3DNOW, 1.8ghz.
Will my rig run SSE2? Will it run the game?
I bought a very good video card last weekend. But I have a month to return it if my computer won't run MTW2. If it won't, I will return the card as I don't need it for any other games.
So will my AMD Sempron run the game?
So does anyone know if my rig will run MT2?
ToranagaSama
10-15-2006, 18:18
Hello all,
I believe that this thread would be more useful to everyone and particularly the developers if we all adopt some useful disciplines when posting.
First, everyone should run Fraps when playing the demo, Fraps is software that will show your Frames Per Second when playing.
http://www.fraps.com/
Just saying the game runs fine or smooth really doesn't provide much info. We all need to know what average FPS you're getting on your system to do a good comparative.
Second, everyone needs to post their system specs: Operating System (and version) and of course, CPU, GPU, RAM, etc.
Third, we need to know your game Option settings. Without this everything is meaningless. If you go into the Demo folder and open the file, "medieval2.preference.cfg" with your text editor---Notepad will do---scroll down to the heading: [video]. These are your game option settings. Please copy and post this info.
One thing in particular that is important to know is your "battle resolution". Your resolution will have a significant effect on your FPS. This is one reason why some people are running the game fine and others are not---not everyone is using the same resolution.
It's also quite important whether your monitor is an LCD or CRT. Most LCDs will inhibit the resolution you can play at and your FPS as well. Some of the newer *quality* monitors do a much better job for games that require a high FPS.
Here are my settings:
[video]
anisotropic_level = 0
anti_alias_mode = off
antialiasing = 0
assassination_movies = 1
autodetect = 0
battle_resolution = 1024 768
bloom = 0
building_detail = low
campaign_resolution = 1024 768
depth_shadows = 0
depth_shadows_resolution = 0
effect_quality = normal
event_movies = 1
gamma = 99
infiltration_movies = 1
no_background_fmv = 0
reflection = 0
sabotage_movies = 1
shader = 2
show_banners = 1
show_package_litter = 0
skip_mip_levels = 0
splashes = 1
subtitles = 0
terrain_quality = custom
texture_filtering = 1
unit_detail = higher
vegetation = 1
vegetation_quality = low
vsync = 0
widescreen = 0
Here is my system:
Abit IC7-G
Pentium 2.4c (12x250 1:1)
Thermalright XP-94 (Vantec Tornardo 92mm ~3000rpm)
ATI Radeon 9700 pro (357/343.5)
2x512 MB Corsair XMS 3200XL (2.5-3-3-5)
Addtronics 7890A (modified by www.coolcases.com)
Cornerstone p1700 (21")
Win2000pro SP4
For playing games, I usually overclock (though I didn't have to for RTW). With my first go round with the demo I did not overclock. Above are my normal overlcock settings (for Far Cry, I may pump up the settings for the GPU and RAM a wee tad). For those of you not familiar with overclocking, running my CPU at 12x250 1:1 equates to 3.0 Ghz. I can push it to about 3.3; with better cooling (and a bit of RAM tweaking) it can go to about 3.8.
As I said for the Demo, I did not overclock, running my CPU and GPU at their normal speeds. Normal speed for my RAM is 2-2-2-5. Also, I believe, Windoze is controlling my Swap File.
To get the Demo to run fairly smooth, I had to drop the resolution from 1600x1200 to 1280x1024 and finally to 1024x728 and put most things to low.
texture_filtering = 1
unit_detail = higher
I did not run Fraps, so I can't give a FPS average. The game was very playable and fairly smooth. Though, I had a bit of an issue scrolling the screen with the mouse. Using the keypad wasn't a problem. Might be a code issue, not sure.
Later tonight I'll run overclocked as above, and I'll use Fraps and report back.
My goal will be to get an average FPS between 30 and 60 (and hopefully with FEW drops below 30). I want to do this with the game options, generally at Medium settings, except Unit Detail which *must* be at highest; and Textures at high, along with Trilinear filtering. I'm fairly confident I can do it. I used to run Far Cry at virtually the highest settings with similar frame rates.
I'll also run with a 1 gig Swap File, defragged and on a separate drive from the game drive. Earlier nothing was defragged and my drives are horribly fragmented. If I have time I'll defrag my game drive and Windows drive (both separate), but that might have to wait. Oh, yeah, I also ran the demo with a ridiculous number of Processes in the background. Tonight I'll run with a minimum number.
With quality parts and a ***cool*** running system, along with the right tweaks, you'll be surprised how far performance can be stretched.
It's also a good idea to check your CPU and GPU temperatures while actually playing the game (post these as well). If these temps are too high you will suffer slows downs (and even crashes). You can have the faster CPU and GPU, but if your system is running hot, its all for naught!
Many of you with newer systems than mine will have temperature monitoring software from your motherboard maker and GPU maker. If you can, set it to monitor and record your temps over at least a 20 minute period, recording the High, Low and Average temperatures for a 20 minute period.
If you're software can't do this and/or if you have an older system w/o such software, then you can try Motherboard Monitor. It is excellent and what I use:
http://mbm.livewiredev.com/
Luck!
~TS
Zimfan40
10-15-2006, 19:30
Thanks for the link to the fraps site, ToranagaSama. I downloaded it and, sadly, even the lowest of the low settings my measly Nvidia 6150 LE never made it to 20fps, and most frequently stayed in the low 10s. :shame:
Good thing I'll be getting a new card this year. Preferably after the next gen of cards has come out, so the current gen will be cheaper. :2thumbsup:
My goal will be to get an average FPS between 30 and 60 (and hopefully with FEW drops below 30). I want to do this with the game options, generally at Medium settings, except Unit Detail which *must* be at highest; ...
I agree 30 FPS is a sweet spot. But people are say unit detail at high gives you as good close-ups as you are going to get, so I may go down to that. Highest just changes the distance at which the game switches to sprites and zoomed out, I don't bother too much about unit graphics.
AlJabberwock
10-15-2006, 20:50
Jagger !
Sorry no one got back to you dude! Here's the deal with Semprons and SSE2.
Typically if you have a non 64-bit AMD like Sempron or Atholn XP, you will have to determine whether its an A-Socket or anything else like a 754 (in some cases even an AM2 or 939/940). If you have a socket-"A", you're out of luck my friend, but only for the Demo because it requires SSE2 which is not on the socket-"A" versions of these chips. Word is the full game will not require SSE2, so if you're a socket-A type (like three of the machines in my house!) hang tough till November 14 when the full game is out, and there will be joy (at least in SP mode... MP may or may not function satisfactorily since CA appears to be saying they will not at this time probably support these in MP). If you have a Sempron tht is non-"A" type, raise the flag! You can probably play the demo too! I have two Athlon XPs and a Sempron all in the A socket version. Fortunately we also have a 754 and an AM2 for the Dual 64.
Econ21 is right, it makes little sense to use "highest" detail settings for the units unless you are just testing out your card or plan on publishing some screenies... or your system just doesn't notice the difference between highest and lowest! :2thumbsup:
Thanks ToranagaSama for the fraps link. I use this myself, but I don't have it on all the machines we use so its nice to have it somewehere convenient.
Just an opinion, but probably the link and the comment regarding standards for reporting should be added in the thread about thoughts on the demo rather than this one ('will my rig run M2TW...')
Cheers!
Al Jabberwock
ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88
10-15-2006, 22:06
King,
The X1300 comes in a few different flavors so I cannot be certain exactly what is supported in the version you have, but the ones I scoped had Shader 3.0 and Open GL 2.0 which is GOOD (mostly -although I saw a few that only had shader 2.0 and Open GL 1.5).
It only has 4 pixel pipelines in all the versions I saw which is similar to 6200's and FX or 5000 series NVidia cards, but not quite as good as, say the NVidia 6600 which has 8, but had the same GL and Shader model support as the better 6600s. Pixel pipelines can impact speed when large quantities of data need to be transmitted so having only 4 is not good, but makes it at least tenable that the card could function well enough not to look for the sledgehammer...right away at least The clock and corespeeds I saw were reasonable, and the card should allow you to at least look at the demo unless it is some very budget version of the x1300.
The rest of your machine, uh, well 512 Ram will "technically" work, again, its borderline.
A 2.8 ghz CPU is ok, but we need to know what kind. A kind poster earlier listed CPU types that support SSe2, which appears to be needed to run the demo, if not the game, and the SSE2 thingy notwithstanding, 2.8 on an AMD is one thing whereas on an Intel it is something entirely different. If an Intel, it is also probably "ok" but you will simply have to try it out or wait for more definitive info from CA which appears not to be forthcoming before Monday next, the 16th.
Wait as long as you can, as both seriously superior CPUs and Vid Cards have and/or should experience sharp falls in price. CPUs because of the price wars between Intel and AMD over dual-core chips and the vid cards because of the new version of DirectX about to relegate current cards to the has-been category.
Cheers!
AlJabberwock
Hey,
It's a Intel,does that help you at all??
Well from reading this thread its obvious that I wont be able to run this game very well at all.
Current pc.
athlonXP3200+
1gb pc3200 ram
ati 9800se
I have about $400-$450 to spend and I was looking at a new setup of an ASUS socket AM2 mobo, a athlon64 3500+, 1gb of DDR2 memory and a x1800xt/gto.
but if anyone has any better suggestions for better deals to stretch my money go ahead and make them. :)
Demo -
Agincourt
-----------------------------------------
Fraps -
variation = 10-22 FPS
average = 15 FPS
-----------------------------------------
Video Options -
[video]
anisotropic_level = 4
anti_alias_mode = off
antialiasing = 0
assassination_movies = 1
autodetect = 0
battle_resolution = 1920 1200
bloom = 1
building_detail = high
campaign_resolution = 1920 1200
depth_shadows = 2
depth_shadows_resolution = 3
effect_quality = normal
event_movies = 1
gamma = 99
infiltration_movies = 1
no_background_fmv = 0
reflection = 1
sabotage_movies = 1
shader = 2
show_banners = 1
show_package_litter = 1
skip_mip_levels = 0
splashes = 1
subtitles = 0
terrain_quality = custom
texture_filtering = 2
unit_detail = higher
vegetation = 1
vegetation_quality = high
vsync = 0
widescreen = 1
---------------------------------------------
System -
CPU = C2D 6600
Motherboard = Gigabyte 965P DS4
Memory = 1GB DDR800 (single channel)
Video = XFX 7950GT
Screen = Dell 2405
HD 1 = 250GB Samsung
HD 2 = 320GB Seagate
---------------------------------------------
15 FPS seems quite low, but it is actually very playable.
Demo - Pavia
Fraps - 10-20 fps
Video Options -
[video]
anisotropic_level = 16
anti_alias_mode = off
antialiasing = 4
assassination_movies = 1
autodetect = 0
battle_resolution = 1600 1200
bloom = 0
building_detail = high
campaign_resolution = 1600 1200
depth_shadows = 2
depth_shadows_resolution = 3
effect_quality = normal
event_movies = 1
gamma = 116
infiltration_movies = 1
no_background_fmv = 0
reflection = 1
sabotage_movies = 1
shader = 2
show_banners = 1
show_package_litter = 1
skip_mip_levels = 0
splashes = 1
subtitles = 0
terrain_quality = custom
texture_filtering = 2
unit_detail = higher
vegetation = 1
vegetation_quality = high
vsync = 0
widescreen = 0
System -
AMD Athlon 64 FX-55 @2750MHz
2Gb PC4000 @250MHz
512Mg XFX X1900XT
Iiyama VM 454 Pro 19"
2*80Gb RAID 0 OS
5*80Gb RAID 3 Apps
2*250Gb RAID 1 Storage
Oh, and Peregrine_Tergiversate, I agree totally that 15fps is perfectly playable and btw... you're killing that rig with only 1Gb RAM dude :dizzy2:
i know, i will have another gig of DDR2 800 in there within a fortnight. :)
how do you get 1600x1200 on a 19" screen? surely it would be 1280x1024............
it's a CRT. the finest CRT ever made, to be honest and I won't swap it for an LCD unless it breaks. best picture quality i've ever seen and it's getting on 5 years old now ~:) It'll do 2048x1536 @ 85Hz if needs be
Here are my specs:
AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 3200+
2.00 GHz
512 MB of RAM
NVIDIA GeForce 6200 TurboCache(TM) with 256 MB of Memory
That configuration would be able to run the game fine in my opinion. Although you might want to upgrade your RAM to 1 Gig.
My specs:
AMD Athlon 64 3400+
2.41 GHz
1.00 Gig of RAM
Geforce FX 5700
As you'd imagine, I have to upgrade my graphic card, because my current card is a piece of junk. :wall:
AlJabberwock
10-16-2006, 02:20
Hey,
It's a Intel,does that help you at all??
It means you have abetter chance of having SSE2 so you can try the current demo for yourself to see how you might handle the game with your setup... The game should run much better than the demo, but I would really up your ram... Please! ~:cool:
Al Jabberwock
Zimfan40
10-16-2006, 03:47
That configuration would be able to run the game fine in my opinion. Although you might want to upgrade your RAM to 1 Gig.
My specs:
AMD Athlon 64 3400+
2.41 GHz
1.00 Gig of RAM
Geforce FX 5700
As you'd imagine, I have to upgrade my graphic card, because my current card is a piece of junk. :wall:
Do you know if there is a big difference between his "Nvidia GeForce 6200 TurboCache(TM) with 256 MB of Memory" and my Nvidia Geforce 6150 LE? My CPU is powerful (Athlon 64 X2 4200+) and my RAM higher than needed (2 gig), but the demo runs very poorly on my comp(even rome needs many of the settings put to low to play with large units). I suspect my graphics card is the culprit, and another poster said I'd need a new one back before the demo came out.
I plan to buy a new one but I don't really know the difference between the numbers, except that the first number(6, 7, etc.) is the "generation" and past that the higher the better. Is there any connection between the distance between them and the dif in their specs(6150-6200 small dif, but 6200-6800 larger), or are the numbers just a convenient way to tell which ones are newer?
Do you know if there is a big difference between his "Nvidia GeForce 6200 TurboCache(TM) with 256 MB of Memory" and my Nvidia Geforce 6150 LE? My CPU is powerful (Athlon 64 X2 4200+) and my RAM higher than needed (2 gig), but the demo runs very poorly on my comp(even rome needs many of the settings put to low to play with large units). I suspect my graphics card is the culprit, and another poster said I'd need a new one back before the demo came out.
I plan to buy a new one but I don't really know the difference between the numbers, except that the first number(6, 7, etc.) is the "generation" and past that the higher the better. Is there any connection between the distance between them and the dif in their specs(6150-6200 small dif, but 6200-6800 larger), or are the numbers just a convenient way to tell which ones are newer?
That's weird. Because with my Geforce FX 5700, I can play RTW at near high settings just fine. Have you tried updating to the latest drivers? Or maybe it's just a compatibility problem with your dual-core processor.
As far as those two cards are concerned, I don't think there is that huge of a difference between the 6200 and the 6150LE. If you want to upgrade your card, go with the 7 series.
AlJabberwock
10-16-2006, 04:00
That configuration would be able to run the game fine in my opinion. Although you might want to upgrade your RAM to 1 Gig.
My specs:
AMD Athlon 64 3400+
2.41 GHz
1.00 Gig of RAM
Geforce FX 5700
As you'd imagine, I have to upgrade my graphic card, because my current card is a piece of junk. :wall:
I agree with both your comments Max, with slightly more emphasis on the ram... see at the bottom below.
We use a 5500OC to run RTW on medium settings with no problem, so it is possible with whatever optimization is being worked on at CA, M2TW might run on medium with that 5700 (but you're right, the whole FX series is just a waste of time, and a siren calling our dollars onto the rocks of display despair!). 6200's have 4 pixel pipelines while 5500's have only 2 (:wall: ), while your 5700 'should' have 4 as well. Elsewhere in the thread on the Demo are those who reported the game working with G4's!!! (poorly to middling it is true, but working at all is a miracle), so who knows. We will conduct experimentation on the lowly 5500 to see how it fairs, although a 6600 we had played the demo with little effort and everything except max shadows.
Technical:
(The above said, 6200s have some of the support you would want and at least 4 pixel pipelines. Depending on your FX5700 however, there may not be too much difference between them- or there could be a vast gulf between them... The 6200 will probably have a whole step better in shader model support and Open GL, and probably twice as many pixels and textures per pass, but different manufacturers make for high variation in what you might have... the 5700 PROBABLY has 4 pixel pipelines too. I say this because I recently saw one that stated it had only 2! Often something that happens with LE versions, this would be the equivalent of a FX5500 or lower, which is truly a limited vehicle, and I have two of those so I can honestly say these things are pieces of junk.)
The 6200 system mentioned is quite bottlenecked by Ram. If IRCC that is a turbo cached 6200, so it only has 64 or 128 megs onboard and is "borrowing" system Ram that is available to reach 256 of Vram. The problem with that 6200 system is that it hardly has enough to run the OS and a decent game and the Vid card will be left begging in the dust. 1 gig is probably going to show a significant improvement in all operations on the machine, graphic or not. 2 Gigs would be better! Your 5700 sys has adequate ram for the vid card it has, but you have a waaay better CPU and a decent vid card and a little more ram would make a big difference.
Cheers!
Al Jabberwock
Jagger !
Sorry no one got back to you dude! Here's the deal with Semprons and SSE2.
Typically if you have a non 64-bit AMD like Sempron or Atholn XP, you will have to determine whether its an A-Socket or anything else like a 754 (in some cases even an AM2 or 939/940). If you have a socket-"A", you're out of luck my friend, but only for the Demo because it requires SSE2 which is not on the socket-"A" versions of these chips. Word is the full game will not require SSE2, so if you're a socket-A type (like three of the machines in my house!) hang tough till November 14 when the full game is out, and there will be joy (at least in SP mode... MP may or may not function satisfactorily since CA appears to be saying they will not at this time probably support these in MP). If you have a Sempron tht is non-"A" type, raise the flag! You can probably play the demo too! I have two Athlon XPs and a Sempron all in the A socket version. Fortunately we also have a 754 and an AM2 for the Dual 64.
Econ21 is right, it makes little sense to use "highest" detail settings for the units unless you are just testing out your card or plan on publishing some screenies... or your system just doesn't notice the difference between highest and lowest! :2thumbsup:
Thanks ToranagaSama for the fraps link. I use this myself, but I don't have it on all the machines we use so its nice to have it somewehere convenient.
Just an opinion, but probably the link and the comment regarding standards for reporting should be added in the thread about thoughts on the demo rather than this one ('will my rig run M2TW...')
Cheers!
Al Jabberwock
Thanks, Jabberwock! I can wait till middle of November as I can't download the demo anyway. I am stuck in a hotel room for at least another month with a 24Kb connection. Although I bought Barbarian Invasions which will keep me busy till them. Too bad, I can't download the BI patch though.
Zimfan40
10-16-2006, 04:14
That's weird. Because with my Geforce FX 5700, I can play RTW at near high settings just fine. Have you tried updating to the latest drivers? Or maybe it's just a compatibility problem with your dual-core processor.
As far as those two cards are concerned, I don't think there is that huge of a difference between the 6200 and the 6150LE. If you want to upgrade your card, go with the 7 series.
I do have the latest drivers. Hmmm...now that that I've downloaded Fraps I should play around with the graphics settings in Rome and check my fps. I had to turn everything but unit detail to fairly low settings when I bought a higher resolution monitor recently(1280 x 1084) but that was before I knew what a difference turning off shadows makes. Knowing that I might be able to get better performance. Either way the demo still runs a bit choppy at 15fps with almost everything down to lowest.
It being the built in card might make a difference, too. I've been told that that means anything running in the background is using up the vid. card, too.
I'll be springing for something in the 7 series by Christmas. Preferably the most powerful one I can afford. Hoepfully they'll be cheaper after the 8 series comes out.
Thanks for the help. :bow:
Edit: Forgot to mention, I did get the latest drivers.
AlJabberwock
10-16-2006, 05:04
Do you know if there is a big difference between his "Nvidia GeForce 6200 TurboCache(TM) with 256 MB of Memory" and my Nvidia Geforce 6150 LE? My CPU is powerful (Athlon 64 X2 4200+) and my RAM higher than needed (2 gig), but the demo runs very poorly on my comp(even rome needs many of the settings put to low to play with large units). I suspect my graphics card is the culprit, and another poster said I'd need a new one back before the demo came out.
I plan to buy a new one but I don't really know the difference between the numbers, except that the first number(6, 7, etc.) is the "generation" and past that the higher the better. Is there any connection between the distance between them and the dif in their specs(6150-6200 small dif, but 6200-6800 larger), or are the numbers just a convenient way to tell which ones are newer?
Firstly,
I think you and Max miscommunicated... you said you have to set to low to play RTW with LARGE units, while Max may be playing near High, with normal unit size (though I do not know this, I suspect it from our experience with 5500 and 5500OC cards that simply can't play RTW with large units unless everything else is OFF and the planets align.)
Secondly,
Yes, unfortunately there is a HUGE difference between your 6150LE and the 6200 Turbocache thingy. The 6150 is an onboard embued-in-the-motherboard GeForce solution mainly intended for business solutions - affordability with some of the newer API features like Model 3.0 and whatnot.
Its a 6th gen. budget chip on the mobo (motherboard) and if it has dedicated memory at all, it is small, and it may very well use the sys ram just like the 6200TC. Fortunately you actually have enough Ram to deal with that, but the onboard stuff is not really meant for more serious gaming. An LE card is rarely a good choice for blowing up aliens from Neptune either for a number of reasons, they are rather meant to save money on reduced energy usage- and to keep machines cooler. Note that any mobo running this I have seen still has an AGP slot open (for a "real" card) - I haven't seen any PCI-e mobos yet with this on board. So you can still build up your sys with the same mobo, but it will probably have to be an agp card, and you wil have to go through some hoops to disable your onboard card. Be SURE it has an AGP slot before you do that though! See my posts above on vid cards.
Thirdly,
We can't make your onboard thingy into a real card no how, but that's that for now. We should still be able to get decent performance off the demo, even if it isn't "beautiful".
The first thing to do, do it now, is turn off shadows. Just turn them off. And bloom, its a silly thing anyway. That should increase performance by almost 100%. See if that helps. Another thing to consider is what do you have in your systray and running in the background? If you are running search programs on the net, music (especially music) and some anti virus programs like Norton and the like, you are seriously tying up your resources. DIsable them or turn them off. Chat programs and other kinds of services running in the background that are uneccessary are a bane to computer efficiency. Turn all that junk off! Make sure you don't have some malware or scumware sucking you into cyberspace while it watches our every moment or uses your spare bandwidth for its own nefarious purposes too!
Done that? Ok, if it is still slow, the next thing is unit detail. Make sure it is on high not highest. Check. Still want more? Turn grass down or off. Look, you're just going to trample it down anyway, and who the heck is watching the grass when the Frog Cav is bearing down on your line anyway! Turn building detail to low, you hardly deal with any in the demo anyway. Revisit unit detail again and turn it to medium if you must.
Let me know?
Al Jabberwock
ToranagaSama
10-16-2006, 05:13
Well from reading this thread its obvious that I wont be able to run this game very well at all.
Current pc.
athlonXP3200+
1gb pc3200 ram
ati 9800se
I have about $400-$450 to spend and I was looking at a new setup of an ASUS socket AM2 mobo, a athlon64 3500+, 1gb of DDR2 memory and a x1800xt/gto.
but if anyone has any better suggestions for better deals to stretch my money go ahead and make them. :)
Well, personally, I suggest that people wait for Windows Vista before upgrading. Also, at this date, it makes little sense to spend money on a single-core CPU. Once Vista drops in just a couple months, the computing focus will be all 64 bit **multi-** core CPUs. The gaming industry is already shifting this way. Wait! Save another $500 and you'll be able to build a REALLY nice machine in 4-6 months. Al the next gen CPUs, GPUs and MBs will be out.
That said you're main problem, like a few others, is that "se" version card. To anyone thinking of upgrading now or in the future---NEVER---spend your money on a video card with any kind of "se" or "le" moniker. It never pays to buy a 'light' version. Also, never buy based upon the amount of *memory* that a card has. These are just GIMMICKS to separate you from your money!!! Attempting to make you *think* you're getting more card performance, when actually you're getting less.
If money is the issue, and such cards are at the right price point, then I strongly suggest looking into 'used' or 'refurbished' cards of better quality. It always pays to do a little homework.
For example way back when, I purchased my 9700pro *used* at about the same time as the release of the 9800xt. Hardocp.com did some good real world testing of the cards, including a 9800pro. The 9700 pro and 9800 pro tested *virtually* equal and in a few cases the 9700pro bested both. Importanly, the 9700pro had better graphic visuals than the 9800xt. ATI stopped making the 9700pro cause it was eating into sales of the newer cards.
I, personally, tested the 9700pro vs the 9800xt and the 9700pro provided better graphic *quality* even though the xt had a faster clock and memory speed.
Given that both cards, the 9800pro and xt, were roughly US$200 more than the cost of a *used* 9700pro---it was the far better bang for the buck! At the time of my purchase ATI had discontinued the 9700pro. Today, it's still kicking and taking a lickin....
NOW, back to your situation, one way you can squeeze a bit more performance from your present setup (and keep **saving**) is to "softmod" or "unlock" your 9800se card---into a **9800pro**.
You can do a Google and find LOTS of info. Though, I give you this WARNING!!!, if you don't follow the instructions, in other words do it **right** you can render your card useless. I think its worth the risk given an se is probably, now, worth $25-50 (or less!!). Not much risk.
Ok, here a link to a Tom's Hardware site providing a chart showing the difference in the R3xx series ATI cards (as well as Nvidia's cards). The thing to note is that the 9800se though having a faster clock/memory speed has half the *bandwidth* (128 bit) and half the rendering *pipelines* (4x1) compared to 256 bit and 8x1 for both the 9700pro, 9800pro and xt.
As I said the cool thing is you can unlock/softmod the 9800se:
Chart:
http://www.tomshardware.com/2003/12/29/vga_charts_iii/index.html
Link to all the VGA charts and buying guides at Tom's (these are EXCELLENT for comparing):
http://www.tomshardware.com/site/vgacharts/index.html
Radeon 9800 SE to Radeon 9800 Pro Mod Guide!:
http://www.rojakpot.com/showarticle.aspx?artno=101&pgno=0
Go to the Forums ask questions, also, HardOCP.com has excellent forums with very knowledgeable people, so check those forums too.
Luck!
~TS
AlJabberwock
10-16-2006, 05:14
Thanks, Jabberwock! I can wait till middle of November as I can't download the demo anyway. I am stuck in a hotel room for at least another month with a 24Kb connection. Although I bought Barbarian Invasions which will keep me busy till them. Too bad, I can't download the BI patch though.
Doh! As a hotel guy, that is pure torture to me. The horror!:no:
No patching because of the connection... Um, if you are in a decent sized town, I would seriously consider going to the library to see if they have a high speed connection, or if there are any 'hotspots' if you have a wireless card. otherwise, go to a cyber cafe and GET THAT PATCH! Look, if I was trapped in a hotel room somewhere for a _month_, even if I wasn't in a large town, I would either beg the hotel staff to find me a high speed connection for the ten minutes I would need or I would rent a car and DRIVE to the nearest place that had one! LOL Jagger, I feel your pain!!!
At least I hope it isn't snowing where you are!
Cheers,
Al Jabberwock
Zimfan40
10-16-2006, 05:33
Firstly,
I think you and Max miscommunicated... you said you have to set to low to play RTW with LARGE units, while Max may be playing near High, with normal unit size (though I do not know this, I suspect it from our experience with 5500 and 5500OC cards that simply can't play RTW with large units unless everything else is OFF and the planets align.)
:shrug: That could be it. I played on much higher settings when I set unit size to medium. I only got into the habit of playing with large units when I started doing PBEM campaigns, and everyone else preferred large.
Secondly,
Yes, unfortunately there is a HUGE difference between your 6150LE and the 6200 Turbocache thingy. The 6150 is an onboard embued-in-the-motherboard GeForce solution mainly intended for business solutions - affordability with some of the newer API features like Model 3.0 and whatnot.
Its a 6th gen. budget chip on the mobo (motherboard) and if it has dedicated memory at all, it is small, and it may very well use the sys ram just like the 6200TC. Fortunately you actually have enough Ram to deal with that, but the onboard stuff is not really meant for more serious gaming. An LE card is rarely a good choice for blowing up aliens from Neptune either for a number of reasons, they are rather meant to save money on reduced energy usage- and to keep machines cooler. Note that any mobo running this I have seen still has an AGP slot open (for a "real" card) - I haven't seen any PCI-e mobos yet with this on board. So you can still build up your sys with the same mobo, but it will probably have to be an agp card, and you wil have to go through some hoops to disable your onboard card. Be SURE it has an AGP slot before you do that though! See my posts above on vid cards.
Ok, that's what I was most curious about. To my computer illiterate mind, a difference of fifty(6200-6150) seemed small but that person with the 6200 was told he could run the game(when I had trouble with the demo). Knowing there is a big difference makes me feel better.
So it's a budget card, eh? That explains a lot. :sweatdrop: I actually do have a PCI-E slot for a video card in my comp. One of the few things I remember a much more computer saavy friend(who I unfortunately don't get to talk to much or I'd be barraging him with my irritating questions) telling me when he looked at it. Do I have to disable my built in card when I get a new one? I was under the impression the inbuilt one would handle some of the background stuff and OS while the added card would be used by the game. :shrug: I could certainly be wrong, though.
Thirdly,
We can't make your onboard thingy into a real card no how, but that's that for now. We should still be able to get decent performance off the demo, even if it isn't "beautiful".
The first thing to do, do it now, is turn off shadows. Just turn them off. And bloom, its a silly thing anyway. That should increase performance by almost 100%. See if that helps. Another thing to consider is what do you have in your systray and running in the background? If you are running search programs on the net, music (especially music) and some anti virus programs like Norton and the like, you are seriously tying up your resources. DIsable them or turn them off. Chat programs and other kinds of services running in the background that are uneccessary are a bane to computer efficiency. Turn all that junk off! Make sure you don't have some malware or scumware sucking you into cyberspace while it watches our every moment or uses your spare bandwidth for its own nefarious purposes too!
Done that? Ok, if it is still slow, the next thing is unit detail. Make sure it is on high not highest. Check. Still want more? Turn grass down or off. Look, you're just going to trample it down anyway, and who the heck is watching the grass when the Frog Cav is bearing down on your line anyway! Turn building detail to low, you hardly deal with any in the demo anyway. Revisit unit detail again and turn it to medium if you must.
Let me know?
Al Jabberwock
:2thumbsup: Most of that already done, with unit detail on medium, unfortunately. I can play the demo with about an average of 15fps. Never thought about shutting off msn or Norton Antivirus. It's a bit late and I have a midterm tomorrow, but I'll give it another shot afterwards with those programs turned off and report back with my fps.
NOW, back to your situation, one way you can squeeze a bit more performance from your present setup (and keep **saving**) is to "softmod" or "unlock" your 9800se card---into a **9800pro**.
You can do a Google and find LOTS of info. Though, I give you this WARNING!!!, if you don't follow the instructions, in other words do it **right** you can render your card useless. I think its worth the risk given an se is probably, now, worth $25-50 (or less!!). Not much risk.
Ok, here a link to a Tom's Hardware site providing a chart showing the difference in the R3xx series ATI cards (as well as Nvidia's cards). The thing to note is that the 9800se though having a faster clock/memory speed has half the *bandwidth* (128 bit) and half the rendering *pipelines* (4x1) compared to 256 bit and 8x1 for both the 9700pro, 9800pro and xt.
As I said the cool thing is you can unlock/softmod the 9800se:
Chart:
http://www.tomshardware.com/2003/12/29/vga_charts_iii/index.html
Link to all the VGA charts and buying guides at Tom's (these are EXCELLENT for comparing):
http://www.tomshardware.com/site/vgacharts/index.html
Radeon 9800 SE to Radeon 9800 Pro Mod Guide!:
http://www.rojakpot.com/showarticle.aspx?artno=101&pgno=0
Go to the Forums ask questions, also, HardOCP.com has excellent forums with very knowledgeable people, so check those forums too.
Luck!
~TS
Sweet tip. I have already been running this card overclocked with a new heaksink/fan on it. Now I just installed the softmodded drivers for my card and Fraps tells me I'm getting about 40%ish better performance in RTW :O. The average framerate in a standardish battle. (custom battle, 1000 men on both sides, gallic countryside) went from 12~ to 17~ with most stuff on high except grass and vegetation(medium) at 1024x768 res. (large unit size) Shadows on units off.
2006-10-16 00:55:44 - RomeTW
Frames: 7473 - Time: 429871ms - Avg: 17.384 - Min: 9 - Max: 34
I'll wait for the 2nd demo to see how m2tw runs. If I get playable performance(hopefully I should with the unlocked pipelines), you saved me some money. :)
Doh! As a hotel guy, that is pure torture to me. The horror!:no:
No patching because of the connection... Um, if you are in a decent sized town, I would seriously consider going to the library to see if they have a high speed connection, or if there are any 'hotspots' if you have a wireless card. otherwise, go to a cyber cafe and GET THAT PATCH! Look, if I was trapped in a hotel room somewhere for a _month_, even if I wasn't in a large town, I would either beg the hotel staff to find me a high speed connection for the ten minutes I would need or I would rent a car and DRIVE to the nearest place that had one! LOL Jagger, I feel your pain!!!
At least I hope it isn't snowing where you are!
Cheers,
Al Jabberwock
Actually I have been in this hotel room since the middle of July. I am going a bit stir crazy. :help: I am doing a contract in the Monterrey Bay area, Ca...so no snow thank goodness. Beautiful area but too much work to really enjoy. Fortunately it wraps up shortly...about the time MTW2 comes out. Thank goodness. :laugh4:
Yggdrasill
10-16-2006, 07:32
Just a quick question. What kind of a graphics card do I need to rum MTW2 smoothly (medium graphics settings, maximum number of soldiers per unit)?
This is providing the rest of the rig is strong enough (2 gigs of ram, Core duop or Core 2 duo processor).
ToranagaSama
10-16-2006, 08:52
I'll wait for the 2nd demo to see how m2tw runs. If I get playable performance(hopefully I should with the unlocked pipelines), you saved me some money. :)
How much was that you planned to spend? $400-500??
Well, my fee is 10%. I accept PayPal!
:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:
Glad to here its working out for you. Make sure you put some *paste* between the GPU and the Fan. I use Artic Silver (do a Google), but find some good instructions before you use it.
Luck!
~TS
P.S., here's another tool to help you tune your card for maximum performance:
http://www.techpowerup.com/atitool/
Also, overclocking that CPU will get you a few more frames as well, but that's another discussion.
I do have the latest drivers. Hmmm...now that that I've downloaded Fraps I should play around with the graphics settings in Rome and check my fps. I had to turn everything but unit detail to fairly low settings when I bought a higher resolution monitor recently(1280 x 1084) but that was before I knew what a difference turning off shadows makes. Knowing that I might be able to get better performance. Either way the demo still runs a bit choppy at 15fps with almost everything down to lowest.
It being the built in card might make a difference, too. I've been told that that means anything running in the background is using up the vid. card, too.
I'll be springing for something in the 7 series by Christmas. Preferably the most powerful one I can afford. Hoepfully they'll be cheaper after the 8 series comes out.
Thanks for the help. :bow:
Edit: Forgot to mention, I did get the latest drivers.
I really do think that it might be something with your dual-core processor. I'm not sure. But I'm fairly confident that you should not be having such performance problems with that configuration. Your graphic card should be more than enough for Rome.
And just to clear up, I run RTW near high settings with the unit setting set to Large.
So yeah, your problem is very unusual, and that's why I'm thinking that it might be some sort of compatability problem with your dual-core processor.
Just a quick question. What kind of a graphics card do I need to rum MTW2 smoothly (medium graphics settings, maximum number of soldiers per unit)?
This is providing the rest of the rig is strong enough (2 gigs of ram, Core duop or Core 2 duo processor).
a good match for a C2D would be a 7900GTO or X1900GT
Incongruous
10-16-2006, 09:58
Is a Card of that power really needed though?
well, i only get an average of 15FPs with maxed out settings (see previous page), so if we are to consider 30FPS as smooth then this would be a good start.
granted, i was running at 1920x1200 which he is probably not.
if he has a 17 or 19 inch panel running at 1280x1024 then i guess a 7900GS would be perfect for Medium settings with Maximum unit size at 30FPS. :)
Yggdrasill
10-16-2006, 10:54
if he has a 17 or 19 inch panel running at 1280x1024 then i guess a 7900GS would be perfect for Medium settings with Maximum unit size at 30FPS. :)
Well this is about what I am happy with at this moment. I can't really afford a new card right now since I'll spend everything on the processor, motherboard and RAM. I'll buy a new card later.
I was planning on uising my old 6800 GeForce for a while. Will this do?
if it's a GT then yes, if it's one one of the cut down version of the 6800 then you might be pushing it.
depends how the optimisation of the final game goes.............
Yggdrasill
10-16-2006, 13:50
if it's a GT then yes, if it's one one of the cut down version of the 6800 then you might be pushing it.
depends how the optimisation of the final game goes.............
It's a GT version.
My humble machine:
Intel Pentium IV 2.4 Ghz
1.5 Gb Ram
ATI RADEON 9600
:juggle2:
Tom Lloyd
10-16-2006, 14:15
Hi, I'm new here and looking into buying a new PC for MTW2 at the start of next year. Currently I'm looking at-
Core2Duo E6600 2.4Ghz
Radeon X1900XT 256
2Gb RAM
Any comments/advice on if this will give a good performance would be great!
Also anyone got any idea if that CPU or graphics card are likely to come down in price anytime soon?
That's almost exactly the same as my new system, which is :
Core2Duo E6600 2.4Ghz
Radeon X1950XTX 512 MB
2Gb Corsair RAM
And this runs the demo very well on all the highest settings. I think there was only one occasion when the battle of Agincourt went as low as 14 FPS. Given that there's likely to be improved optimisation between the demo and release version of the game, I don't think your system will have any issues whatsoever.
Tom Lloyd
10-16-2006, 14:53
Awesome, that's good to hear! Now I just have to raise the cash to buy the damn thing!
Would my:
Intel P4 3.00Ghz(2CPU)
64mb vidcard(dunno what model it is- must be a radeon)
246mbRAM
100Gb of space
run M2TW? And what's up with the 2CPU thingy? I'm not a very tech-savvy person btw.... And this is certainly a low-end pc, which can only run RTW at low-med settings.
You have neither enough RAM, nor enough horsepower in your video card. If it runs at all, i'll be surprised.:shame:
Freedom Onanist
10-16-2006, 16:30
Hello,
After all that erudite PC knowledgery another "will it work on my PC", excuse the PC simpleton.
My system
AMD Opteron 146 @ 2.7
7800 gt
1 gig memory
Any advice gratefully received.
looks like the C2D 6600 is a popular choice right now. :D
Any Conroe chip is in another league in terms of raw power to any other chip on the planet. I've been a hardware enthusiast for more than 10 years now and I don't ever remember such a massive jump in performanec before in a single chip revolution.
The sensible chip to go for is the 6300, though, cause they all overclock to similar levels and you'll get a much higher FSB from the lower multiplier of the 6300 than, say, the 6600.
DukeofSerbia
10-16-2006, 18:03
If SSE2 stay then we'll have parox...
Minimum PC requirement:
Intel Pentium 4 Celeron 1.5 GHz:dizzy2:
AMD Athlon64 2800+ (s.754):wall:
SSE2 is only req'd for the demo; on about pg. 3 a senior member (can't remember who--sorry!) posted a blurb from one of the CA dev's who said that SSE2 was only for the demo, and that when the game itself ships you'll only need SSE. Does that help, Duke?
Or did I miss several boats? :laugh4:
On another note, I built a new PC with a core 2 6400, not the 6600. :D
DukeofSerbia
10-16-2006, 18:19
SSE2 is only req'd for the demo; on about pg. 3 a senior member (can't remember who--sorry!) posted a blurb from one of the CA dev's who said that SSE2 was only for the demo, and that when the game itself ships you'll only need SSE. Does that help, Duke?
Or did I miss several boats? :laugh4:
It seems that I missed. Anyway, I have Athlon64 which have SSE2.
Lord_Phan
10-16-2006, 18:21
Is there a memory leak with the demo?
I can run everything on max. And I mean MAX. But when I play a second battle it'll start to lag for a second here or there. so I stop, quit the game and restart the demo and no problems. Assume it's just a memory leak? Won't happen in the game itself?
dannothecolonel
10-16-2006, 18:35
My specs are as follows
AMD Sempron 2600+ 1.6 ghz
Nvidia Geforce 6800
512mb RAM
When I tried running the demo, the battles lagged, but the graphics were also screwed up in other ways ( soldiers would appear and disappear, strange lines radiating from units, knights appearing to fly through the air). This seems to suggest to me that i might be having some issues with my graphics card's compatibilty, as opposed to simply lacking RAM or processor speed. Then again, I don't know what I'm talking about, so what do you all think?
really don't want to have to buy a new computer to play this :(
Dave1984
10-16-2006, 18:42
My specs are as follows
AMD Sempron 2600+ 1.6 ghz
Nvidia Geforce 6800
512mb RAM
When I tried running the demo, the battles lagged, but the graphics were also screwed up in other ways ( soldiers would appear and disappear, strange lines radiating from units, knights appearing to fly through the air). This seems to suggest to me that i might be having some issues with my graphics card's compatibilty, as opposed to simply lacking RAM or processor speed. Then again, I don't know what I'm talking about, so what do you all think?
really don't want to have to buy a new computer to play this :(
More likely the processor speed and the RAM, to be honest, as I have the 6800 and I can run everything on max smoothly.
More likely the processor speed and the RAM, to be honest, as I have the 6800 and I can run everything on max smoothly.
Unlikely, sounds like a card issue. Install new drivers and stop overclocking it is a good start. Might be a power supply or overheating issue too.
Any Conroe chip is in another league in terms of raw power to any other chip on the planet. I've been a hardware enthusiast for more than 10 years now and I don't ever remember such a massive jump in performanec before in a single chip revolution.
The sensible chip to go for is the 6300, though, cause they all overclock to similar levels and you'll get a much higher FSB from the lower multiplier of the 6300 than, say, the 6600.
i went with a 6600 because O/C'ing was not an option in my HTPC case with all passive components.
but yes, overclockers do love the 6300/6400 chips
dannothecolonel
10-16-2006, 20:20
I've already reinstalled the latest drivers from the Nvidia site, amd i don't think there are likely to be power issues since the card works fine for other games. I don't think I am overclocking it either.
GeneralMikeIII
10-16-2006, 20:32
Hi, I'm new here and looking into buying a new PC for MTW2 at the start of next year. Currently I'm looking at-
Core2Duo E6600 2.4Ghz
Radeon X1900XT 256
2Gb RAM
Any comments/advice on if this will give a good performance would be great!
Also anyone got any idea if that CPU or graphics card are likely to come down in price anytime soon?
Tom, I was looking at the same machine I think, or close. I posted much earlier in this thread (like page 4 or 5), and the response I got was that there is going to be a release of a new generation of cards, CPUs, a new directX version, and Windows Vista all coming before or around the end of the year. I decided to wait, since when all that new stuff comes out the old stuff (like the stuff you are looking at) is going to go on sale, and you can get the new stuff for just a little more than the machine you are looking at, and the new stuff is supposed to be beastly. It might be a good idea to wait and see before purchasing a new system.
The first DX10 card will be available in November (NVidia G80 core) and ATI's effort will be more like February (R600 core) and Vista should be released in home user flavour around the same time next year so there's a long time to go yet. And don't forget that you'll be no a brand new hardware platform, a brand new software platform and with a totally new driver architecture... that spells issues to me :inquisitive:
I decided to upgrade now (well, about a month ago) and not bother with DX10 for a while.
Vista wil be expensive. DX10 cards will be very expensive. It won't work.
Ugrade now and enjoy M2TW as it's supposed to be played. :2thumbsup:
:jumping:
GeneralMikeIII
10-16-2006, 22:50
Ugrade now and enjoy M2TW as it's supposed to be played. :2thumbsup:
:jumping:
Yeah, that's the problem for me... my machine is a labtop. I got a Pentium M processor I think at 1.5 GHz and less than 500 Mb of Ram. The graphics card is an Intel 82 something stupid integrated piece of junk. This is far too gone to try to save. I got to get something totally new, and M2 isn't coming out 'till November either, so I'll probably get a new computer then, after the NVidia cards come out. Someone said something about a quad core processor too, and I'm pretty sure they said that would be coming out around the same time. Even if they are out of my budget, the fact that they are out will lower the price of the existing stuff that is out now.
the new nVidia G80 is going to be 700+ million transistors crammed into the old 0.09u fabrication process.
that means big chips, which also means expensive to produce, powerhungry, frequency limited, and therefore noisy to cool.
i personally am waiting for the spring refresh built using the smaller 0.65u fabrication process, hopefully mitigating all the problems mentioned above.
besides which, it will be a long time before anything gets released that actually makes use of the new features of DX10.
Someone said something about a quad core processor too, and I'm pretty sure they said that would be coming out around the same time. Even if they are out of my budget, the fact that they are out will lower the price of the existing stuff that is out now.
quads-core is lovely and fully intend to go there, but it will have no impact on gaming for the next 12 months at least, possibly even 18 months.
G'day all. I thought I would chip in with a laptop config that has (sort of) managed to run the MTWII demo. I was able to run it at an acceptable speed with a number of settings turned to LOW (but I was able to keep unit detail to HIGH at least to see the units). If the overall settings are turned to MEDIUM it slows down to a crawl. I have a feeling I need more RAM, which is the only thing I can uprade, really.
Pentium M 760 2Ghz
1GB RAM
Nvidia GO 6200 with Turbocache (128MB dedicated)
I'm thinking of adding another 1GB module - do you think it will make a big difference?
Tom Lloyd
10-17-2006, 09:07
Tom, I was looking at the same machine I think, or close. I posted much earlier in this thread (like page 4 or 5), and the response I got was that there is going to be a release of a new generation of cards, CPUs, a new directX version, and Windows Vista all coming before or around the end of the year. I decided to wait, since when all that new stuff comes out the old stuff (like the stuff you are looking at) is going to go on sale, and you can get the new stuff for just a little more than the machine you are looking at, and the new stuff is supposed to be beastly. It might be a good idea to wait and see before purchasing a new system.
Thanks for the advice, I think I'll wait until Januaryish to buy, cause then a combination of prices coming down, longer to save up, and hopefully some cash for Christmas will mean I can get a pretty decent system!
I do have one other question, is it going to be a good idea (if I can afford it) to get a motherboard that can do SLI and a slightly less expensive graphics card, but with the possibility to add another later, or does it make more sense to just go for the best single graphics card system I can get right now?
I'm currently leaning towards the latter and just sticking with the x1900xt.
the thought of spending 2x £180 on a 7900GTO doesn't make much sense compared to spending 1x £360 on a 8800GTX.
buying one £250 8800GTS in November with the intention of adding another one in spring for about £200 would be a better plan if you must have mega-power and want SLI to achieve it for you.
sunsmountain
10-17-2006, 16:30
No, it doesn't make sense.
I had an Athlon 2400+ before with a comparatively fast GPU(6600GT) and with my new processor(E6600) even Gothic 2 got a performance boost, both need to be fast for good performance and don't forget about memory.
Also IIRC VSync forces your graphicscard to put out exactly as many pictures as your monitor displays per second. That means if your monitor runs at 60Hz, you will get a constant 60fps framerate. The problem here is if your graphicscard is too slow and can calculate only 20fps, it will put out 3 times the same picture anyway. I don't know exactly what VSync is good for, but it may fix some bugs with certain graphicscard-monitor combinations.
Concerning bloom, I think this refers to edges of objects where the light(from behind) will fade into the object, though I am unsure about the connection/differences between this and HDR effects(which, to me, seem to do exactly the same thing).
Though an upgrade to an E6600 is quite a leap, all your Total War games would have gotten the same performance boost had you upgraded to an Athlon64 3500+. The point is that in STW, MTW, RTW, the CPU set the rate at which your V-Sync was divided to get frames per second.
Example: 80 Hz monitor.
Good processor (3 Ghz): 40 fps, max.
Medium processor (2 GHz): 30 fps, max.
crappy Processor (1 Ghz): 20 fps, max.
GPU settings could influnce this +/- 5 to 10 fps, but CPU set the base.
VSync prevents rending and tearing of graphical images, meaning the soldiers will display in one piece and sharp no matter how fast you spin the camera.
Bloom is HDR for beginners, it uses a far simpler algorithm to get similar, but not quite the same, effects as High Dynamic Range lighting does.
Personally, I think bloom looks bloomin' (:laugh4:) awful and i'm quite disappointed that the full game won't support Pixel Shader 3.0 or HDR :shame:
My humble machine:
Intel Pentium IV 2.4 Ghz
1.5 Gb Ram
ATI RADEON 9600
:juggle2:
To run or not to run?
To run or not to run?
I reckon it should mate
Big King Sanctaphrax
10-18-2006, 12:41
i'm quite disappointed that the full game won't support Pixel Shader 3.0 or HDR
Is there any confirmation of this yet? I was hoping these features just weren't in the demo build. I'm sure I remember reading that the game would support Shader 3.0.
I asked on this forum and got a "no" :shame:
I reckon it should mate
Yippie!
:bow:
Belgolas
10-18-2006, 21:49
Well I think I am going to upgrade my comp in the beginning of 2007. That way I get my Canada revenue cheque or whatever it is called and the price drops and the new hardware coming out. I don't think you will need a Quad core or a DX10 GPU for a while. Plus Vista is going to suck, well at least it is better than xp but it is too expansive.
About the first DX10 GPU it will need 400 or 450 watts and for SLI 800 watts. It will require to power connections from the power supply. That is a lot of power and that means a lot of heat, but the cooling on it does not look to be like the beats of the cards out now. I would not buy the new cards till the first generation has all the tweaks and errors fixed.
AlJabberwock
10-19-2006, 05:27
Depending on what else you are running on your system and given the nature of the increased needs of the video card I would not be surprised if 450 were quite insufficient... Moreover, the key element has become the matter of the +12v rail. Your mobo will need 10 to 11amps minimum on the +12v, and your vid cards in the GeForce 7k range typically are calling for 6 to 12. A SLI set up for 7900's calls for around 36 amps altogether between cards and mobo! Thats the minimums. Given that there are fluctuations, it never hurts to be over... significant undepowering will not only create negative visual effects, it will cause irreperable harm to your system components. (Almost always the most expensive ones!).
Cheers!
Al Jabberwock
Basilios II Voulgaroktonos
10-20-2006, 11:39
Now i have a machine with:Proccesor pentium4 3,2(hyper threading)
1GB ddr ram(speed i think its 533)
ATI RADEON 9800XT 256 MB
RTW i played it always in full graphfics in everything but now i dont know if i will be able to play M2TW in full graf and i wonder if i should take a nother machine...
I found 1 Laptop that i like with:CENTRINO2 DUALCORE 2Ghz
ATI RADEON X1600 512MB
2GB ram dd2 i think speed 667
What do you say hold the old 1 or take the new 1?i would apriciate any help in this mater
Sorry for my english but i am not a native english speaker!!!
Firstly, laptops suck. Seccondly, the X1600 is a rebranded X800 series which has been ported over to a PCIe bus. So your X1600 would only be one generational leap from you 9800XT and probably won't be clocked as fast as a proper one, either - more equivolent to an X800Pro than an X800XT.
One thing is for sure, though; in a game like M2TW, the 2Gb of RAM will be a big help ~D
Basilios II Voulgaroktonos
10-20-2006, 12:25
yes but i didnt understand something.you did not tell me the x1600 is a good grafic card?and with the proccesor 2ghz dual core i dont have a problem..
Sorry, the processor is fine, the memory is fnie. The graphics card is no more than adequate at best. I'm sure it will play the game, yes, but you wno't get the eye-candy ~:) You'd be much better off with an X1900 which is roughly twice as powerful.
Basilios II Voulgaroktonos
10-20-2006, 12:36
the x1900 how much memory does it have?and you know how expensive is it?but maybe i should keap my old pc?but i think its old nowdays...
You can get the X1900 in many different flavours but you won't be able to upgrade your current PC because the graphics slot will be different. You'll be using AGP graphics and all of the new cards over the last couple of years are PCIe.
If you're going to build a new computer, always start by buying the best video card you can afford and 2Gb of RAM then build the rest around it. :2thumbsup:
Dave1984
10-20-2006, 18:33
Out of interest, how can I find out what FPS I'm getting in the demo?
GeneralMikeIII
10-20-2006, 19:37
Out of interest, how can I find out what FPS I'm getting in the demo?
There is a free download for a program called Fraps. It does a bunch of things, and one of them is display the FPS you get during a game. Follow the link, dl and install it, and then doubleclick on the shortcut it puts on your desktop before you play. If you look through the settings, it gives you a bunch of options and you can choose the ones you want. Have fun!
http://www.fraps.com/download.php
Dave1984
10-20-2006, 20:09
There is a free download for a program called Fraps. It does a bunch of things, and one of them is display the FPS you get during a game. Follow the link, dl and install it, and then doubleclick on the shortcut it puts on your desktop before you play. If you look through the settings, it gives you a bunch of options and you can choose the ones you want. Have fun!
http://www.fraps.com/download.php
Thanks alot for that, was very happy to see an average of 37fps at Pavia and 39fps at Agincourt... that's enough for me :2thumbsup:
ProudNerd
10-20-2006, 21:39
Definitely upgrading your RAM will be the quickest and cheapest fix. If your board can handle the extra, getting a 1 GB stick would be helpful.
I'm an Nvidia adherent, so if you go the graphics card route, the over clocked 6800s and 7200s (?) are probably reasonably priced (i.e., c. $200).
no a ram upgarde woudl eb useless go for a cheap graphics card like a 6600 or 300 first.
Surely a cheap graphics card wouldbe useless, too. Get a decent graphics card and the RAM upgrade.
ProudNerd
10-20-2006, 22:44
Surely a cheap graphics card wouldbe useless, too. Get a decent graphics card and the RAM upgrade.
He migth not be able to afford it. Thats why i assumed he still had such a horrible card. My vanilla 6600 can run mtw2 meduim wiht little stuttering with a sempron 2800+ processor and 1gb so he woudl get decent performace for peanuts.
Orda Khan
10-20-2006, 23:24
10 out of 10 for the content of this thread. You guys certainly know your stuff
.....Orda
He migth not be able to afford it. Thats why i assumed he still had such a horrible card. My vanilla 6600 can run mtw2 meduim wiht little stuttering with a sempron 2800+ processor and 1gb so he woudl get decent performace for peanuts.
i'm surprised you get decent performance with that lot - but I'll take your word for it :2thumbsup: I guess I'm just greedy - I've always been of the opinion that a game should be played with everything maxed out or you're just not playing the game the developers intended. but that's an expensive game to play, i admit, and not for everyone :shame: I upgraded in time for Rome and I've upgraded in time for M2... can't wait ~D
i'm quite disappointed that the full game won't support Pixel Shader 3.0 or HDR
A few characters & buildings on screen at a time in the few games that do use HDR to date makes modern top of the range crazy power PCs cry like a baby for mercy.
Imagine the screams of pain we would see from people without many thousands of dollars to spend on a massive upgrade to play M2TW.
As it is with PS2.0, bloom & SSE2 requirements, there is already some serious complaining going on.
PS2 is a big enough advance over the DX7 level of RTW for me.
I'm actually surprised they even went that far but since they did that, I'd say it would be likely that the next full TW game should have PS3/HDR
ProudNerd
10-21-2006, 00:36
i'm surprised you get decent performance with that lot - but I'll take your word for it :2thumbsup: I guess I'm just greedy - I've always been of the opinion that a game should be played with everything maxed out or you're just not playing the game the developers intended. but that's an expensive game to play, i admit, and not for everyone :shame: I upgraded in time for Rome and I've upgraded in time for M2... can't wait ~D
Oh don’t get me wrong I wholeheartedly agree which is why I got a am2 3500 cpu 1gb ddr2 667mhz and a asus motherboard. I haven’t decided on a gpu yet I cant afford much more so it will probably be a 7600 or whatever good I see on eBay! its hard to afford expensive things when you’re a legally blind pensioner :) I’m sick of this computer and I want something better I have to build my new one from scratch because of the new socket type but I’ve never built one myself before I’m looking forward to it!
I'm looking for recommendations on what to upgrade first, RAM or graphics card. My system:
Windows XP
2.6 Ghz P4
512 MB ddr400
Radeon 9200 128MB
I know ideally I should be increasing both, but my wife will not necessarily agree ;)...
Definitely upgrading your RAM will be the quickest and cheapest fix. If your board can handle the extra, getting a 1 GB stick would be helpful...
no a ram upgarde woudl eb useless go for a cheap graphics card like a 6600 or 300 first.
Surely a cheap graphics card wouldbe useless, too. Get a decent graphics card and the RAM upgrade.
He migth not be able to afford it. Thats why i assumed he still had such a horrible card. My vanilla 6600 can run mtw2 meduim wiht little stuttering with a sempron 2800+ processor and 1gb so he woudl get decent performace for peanuts.
In the end, I did decide to bite the bullet and upgrade both. I have another 1 gb of RAM on its way, and I'm working on acquiring either a 6800 GT OC or a 6800 Ultra (hooray for eBay). With AGP my options are limited, and I'm not about to start replacing my mobo, too, but I think I should be in a much better position with these upgrades. The reason I've survived with such a lousy graphics card so far is that I just don't play that many games anymore, I don't have the time with two young kids and a long commute. But I made time to play RTW when I could, so I figure M2TW is as good an excuse as any to do some upgrading.
Thanks to all for the helpful comments. If anyone has any other suggestions for an AGP card, or thoughts on whether a 6800 ultra is actually worth a few extra bucks over a GT or GT OC, that would be appreciated, too. Wish me luck on my eBay bidding!
edyzmedieval
10-22-2006, 15:55
What about my PC...
3.2 GHZ Intel Pentium IV with HT
512MB DDRAM
250GB HDD
ATI Radeon X700 256MB
I ran the Special Edition demo from Amazon, and I have the optimum settings from Medium to High. I want to run everything on high. What's needed?
More RAM?
What about my PC...
3.2 GHZ Intel Pentium IV with HT
512MB DDRAM
250GB HDD
ATI Radeon X700 256MB
I ran the Special Edition demo from Amazon, and I have the optimum settings from Medium to High. I want to run everything on high. What's needed?
More RAM?
To run everything on high you'll need a minimum of 1Gb of RAM {preferably 2Gb) and a much faster graphics card. You can pick up something like a NVidia 6800 GT (256Mb) for less than a hundred quid and that's got roughly twice the horsepower of your current card ~:) if you can push to more like two hundred quid then get an ATI X1900 XT which is one of the fastest out there and will have more than 4 times the power of your current card.
Will this run it? :
1 gig ram
Radeon 9280
Pentium 4 2.80 GHz
:wall:
Even on low?
You meet the minimum requirements but I wouldn't expect any fireworks ~;)
Basilios II Voulgaroktonos
10-23-2006, 11:42
i have found a computer to bye taht have everything very good except the video card wich i dont know if its worth it.its a aati radeon x1900 but i dont know if its the pro or the xt?there is a big difference betwen those 2 cards?i have found it o a packadge but how much is the X1900 pro and the xt?
PwnageBot2000
10-23-2006, 14:23
Hm, before I list my system specs, I'd like to ask about how graphics cards actually work(sorry, not a computer oriented preson:no: ). I'm seeing ones with about 256-512mb memory. However some of the lower memory (such as the 256mb) ones tend to be higher priced than say the 512mb. What makes a good graphics card?? I see it's not just the memory. Someone please help me.
Well anyway, my specs are
-Pentium for 3GHZ or 2.99 ghz (not sure, there's 2 values)
-512 mb ram
-ATI Radeon X700 Pro
Playing the demo with these specs worked out better than i originally thought it would. Obviously, i removed the shadows and the game ran much smoother. If anyone would like to suggest which specs to upgrade that would be nice.
Hi all,
I list my system specs:
AMD ATHLON xp 3200
2 Gb Ram Corsair
ATI RADEON 9800 pro 256 mb
Can I run M2tw with a decent detail? :juggle2:
Ps Sorry for my poor english... :idea2:
Thanks!
Lord_Phan
10-23-2006, 15:44
Hm, before I list my system specs, I'd like to ask about how graphics cards actually work(sorry, not a computer oriented preson:no: ). I'm seeing ones with about 256-512mb memory. However some of the lower memory (such as the 256mb) ones tend to be higher priced than say the 512mb. What makes a good graphics card?? I see it's not just the memory. Someone please help me.
Well anyway, my specs are
-Pentium for 3GHZ or 2.99 ghz (not sure, there's 2 values)
-512 mb ram
-ATI Radeon X700 Pro
Playing the demo with these specs worked out better than i originally thought it would. Obviously, i removed the shadows and the game ran much smoother. If anyone would like to suggest which specs to upgrade that would be nice.
http://www.gamespot.com/features/6156859/index.html
go here.
Hi all,
I list my system specs:
AMD ATHLON xp 3200
2 Gb Ram Corsair
ATI RADEON 9800 pro 256 mb
Can I run M2tw with a decent detail? :juggle2:
Ps Sorry for my poor english... :idea2:
Thanks!
ahhh...
I can't run the demo because I have the Athlon xp....
Anyone can reply to me? :help:
Thanks again!!!!
what are the minimum specs for the game? - they might have been posted earlier in thread, :2thumbsup:
+ how do i find the specs on my system (i am comparatively computer illiterate)
Lord_Phan
10-23-2006, 17:12
what are the minimum specs for the game? - they might have been posted earlier in thread, but i can't be bothered to check :2thumbsup:
+ how do i find the specs on my system (i am comparatively computer illiterate)
Sorry I can't be bothered to help you right now
heres the best i could do - but these figures mean very little to me :sweatdrop:
Minimum System Requirements:
English version of Microsoft® Windows® 2000/XP.
Celeron 1.8GHz Pentium 4® (1500MHz) or equivalent AMD® processor.
512MB RAM.
8x Speed DVD-ROM drive (1200KB/sec sustained transfer rate) and latest drivers.
11.0 Gigs of uncompressed free hard disk space.
100% DirectX® 9.0c compatible 16-bit sound card and latest drivers.
100% Windows® 2000/XP compatible mouse, keyboard and latest drivers.
DirectX® 9.0c.
128MB Hardware Accelerated video card with Shader 1 support and the latest drivers.
Must be 100% DirectX® 9.0c compatible.
Monitor must be able to display 1024x768 resolution or above.
+ again, how do i found out what i'v got :2thumbsup:
edyzmedieval
10-23-2006, 17:37
My Computer->Right Click->Properties
Lord_Phan
10-23-2006, 21:56
goto Run in the Start Menu, then type in "Dxdiag" then hit enter.
Direct X will tell you what you have
PwnageBot2000
10-23-2006, 23:08
Exactly what i was looking for. Thanks Lord_pham, this will help a lot and in coming years lol.
Belgolas
10-24-2006, 00:38
I currently have a...
2.8 Ghz pentium D 533mhz FSB
NO HT 256KB L2 Cache
ATI 256mb X700 GPU
128-bit
400 VPU clock
250 Mem clock
3g of DDR2 533mhz
Intel® Desktop Board D945PSN
I am thinking of upgrading to a...
3.2 Ghz pentium 4 800mhz FSB
with HT and a 1mb L2 cache
and a...
EVGA GeForce 7950 GT KO SuperClocked
512MB GDDR3
46.4 GB per second memory bandwidth
1450MHz
600 MHz clock
256-bit
Would this be a good setup for M2TW and other games and how much of an improvement is this? Should I wait or buy a different setup? All post are welcome. Or should I just upgrade the CPU or buy a dual core. I would like to keep it cheap. Do I need just to upgrade the GPU?
PwnageBot2000
10-24-2006, 02:16
Hey guys I've been looking on gamespot, which does a 2006 graphics card roundup. It separates cards into high-end, performance, mid, and budget. even looking at the budget cards, I see nothing close to my ATI Radeon x700 (Infact the lowest of the X1000 series hapened to be the x1300, which made me think my card was utter crap). Upon playing the demo however, without any shadows, the game ran quite smoothly. Does this mean i could get superb performance for purchasing budget cards that are $170 at the most?
my comp specs are
Pentium 4 2.99 GhZ
512 RAM
ATI Radeon x700 pro PCI express 256mb
(Infact the lowest of the X1000 series hapened to be the x1300, which made me think my card was utter crap).
Actually the X1300 is the budget card of the X1x00 series, while your x700 is the mid card of the preceeding Xx00 series. My X850XT for example beats some of the X1800 cards.
So don't judge by the higher model number. Look into performance tets.
Shaitan
i have found a computer to bye taht have everything very good except the video card wich i dont know if its worth it.its a aati radeon x1900 but i dont know if its the pro or the xt?there is a big difference betwen those 2 cards?i have found it o a packadge but how much is the X1900 pro and the xt?
An X1900 of any kind will run the game very well. The difference between the Pro and the XT is simply clock speed.nd fewer pixel pipelines. Basically, they are the same core and so support all of the same fancy features, it's just that the Pro (or GT) run on fewer pipelines and so can't do as many fancy shadings and lightings per second and they run at a slightly slower clock speed so they do everything else a little slower, too. In real world terms, depending on games and graphics settings, the XT will be between 10 and 40 percent faster than either a Pro or a GT.
blah blah blah. If anyone would like to suggest which specs to upgrade that would be nice.
Just read the rest of this thread, dude. Various upgrades have been recommended to enough people already for you to make a rational choice ~:)
I am thinking of upgrading to a...
3.2 Ghz pentium 4 800mhz FSB
with HT and a 1mb L2 cache
and a...
EVGA GeForce 7950 GT KO SuperClocked
512MB GDDR3
46.4 GB per second memory bandwidth
1450MHz
600 MHz clock
256-bit
Would this be a good setup for M2TW and other games and how much of an improvement is this? Should I wait or buy a different setup? All post are welcome. Or should I just upgrade the CPU or buy a dual core. I would like to keep it cheap. Do I need just to upgrade the GPU?
That processor would be OK and the graphics card more than adequate ~:)
You didn't say how much RAM you have.. in order to get the most from the rest of your setup you ought to be running at least 1Gb, and 2Gb for the best @D
Belgolas
10-24-2006, 15:01
I have 3GB of ram. I think I am just going to upgrade the CPU, and am going to wait for Quad cores and DX10 GPU's.
Nikodemus
10-24-2006, 16:52
Okay i think its time too ask for advice here then, if and what i should upgrade too.
my specs
Motherboard:
CPU Type
AMD Athlon 64, 2200 MHz (11 x 200) 3500+
Motherboard Name
MSI K8N Neo2 Platinum (MS-7025) (5 PCI, 1 AGP, 4 DDR DIMM, Audio, Dual Gigabit LAN, IEEE-1394)
Motherboard Chipset
nVIDIA nForce3 Ultra, AMD Hammer
System Memory
1024 MB (PC3200 DDR SDRAM)
BIOS Type
Award (07/28/04)
Display
Video Adapter NVIDIA GeForce 6800 GT (256 MB)
3D Accelerator nVIDIA GeForce 6800 GT
Gainward GS(turns a GT too a Ultra)
Monitor SAMTRON 98PDF/99DF/99PDF [NoDB] (HVAX626653)
Multimedia
Audio Adapter Creative SB0312 Audigy LS Sound Card
Audio Adapter nVIDIA MCP2-S - Audio Codec Interface
Do anyone of you more tech-savy types think if i would be able too play with
huge settings?
Your machine will be fine - certainly not every setting on high, but you'll get good performance and nice enough effects from that setup :2thumbsup:
Brighdaasa
10-24-2006, 21:47
i'd suggest adding another GB of ram, should benefit a game like MII:TW
i have a similar system except a X850XT and 1.5GB DDR400 ram, which ran the demo fine at 1600*1200 with everything maxed except shadows turned off
so at 1280*1024 it should run even huge battles fine
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.