Regarding PC and OS Requirements

wolfy142 · August 2008

first of all, i've build my own requirements for the game, since the game doesnt realy have a real requirement as stated, its all an illussion.... so lets begin:

my english is wrecked up, im from israel

Minimum Requirements:

1. P4 or a paralel (am i spelling this right?) version of amd 2.0 ghz

2. Geforce 6 or 7 or paralel version of ATI

3. Availabale HD Space: 3GB or more

4. Connection Speed: 750kb or more.

5. 256 or more RAM.

Average Requirements: (middle graphic)

1. Dual core or a pralel version of AMD 2.4 ghz or more

2. Geforce 7600 or 8 Series or a paralel version of ATI.

3. Available HD Space: 3GB

4. Connection Speed: 1.5mb or more.

5. 512 or more RAM.

High (max graphic), and no no slowdown almost even at ADC -.- Requirements

1. Core 2 duo/Core 2 Duo Extreme/ Core 2 Quad/ Core 2 Quad Extreme or a paralel version of AMD 2.6 Ghz or more

2. Geforce 8600 or more, or a paralel version of ati

3. Available HD Space: 3.5GB or higher.

4. Connection Speed: 3mb or more (nothing to do with graphics... lol)

5. 1GB or more of RAM.

Everyone that thinks they can play this and dont have less than the Average requirement, i think they need to play mario -.-

and no im not showing off, so if your going to flame me for bringing you the REAL requiriements, i think your not welcome

here is so you see the diffrence of memory and things, doesnt include the mhz of core clock, shader, and memory

EDIT: changed the ram requirements =,=

EDIT 2 (IMPORTANT): if your gonna buy 8800gts, buy the new one, in this video HERE

and yes you can overclock it to be faster than the 8800GTX, and it actually much less hot, has nice cooling device, which makes it cool baby

ranthe · August 2008

sorry buddy, your own requirements=fail. I have MUCH less than what's listed, and I still play MY-EN on full middle settings with slowdown ONLY in over-crowded areas of ADC.

PW=/=Crysis. You don't need a supercomputer to run it.

wolfy142 · August 2008

i think you should play mario

anima · August 2008

PW doesn't require much to play. I think if your PC was build within 5 years, it can play it. In short way, it kinda like your minimum requirement above, but you can still run the game with 256mb RAM.

wolfy142 · August 2008

if you want 10 fps on it ...

anima · August 2008

10fps on what? 1600x1200 resolution? lol, ram barely does anything to improve your display, your graphic card does.
Of course if my PC is slow, I will use low setting in 800x600 res.

wolfy142 · August 2008

RAM is instant memory, dont confuse it with page file lol?

anima · August 2008

RAM is randomly access memory, it transfer, store information between CPU, your additional card like graphic, sound, physic (this one is dead) and so on... If you got more RAM, especially in Vista, you PC will run hella faster.
And graphic card, as its name, is to improve the graphic of your game ^^. Low resolution, turn off any other running programs will help you run PW in 5 years old PC. Add more RAM will help the game load faster, but not much increasing the graphic quality...
Thx for accepting my post. I played it on an old PC before so I know... I think just keep it the way it is, cause if you run your maximum system in Vista, 1Gb of RAM seems...
What is a page file anyway? I am curious ^^.

wolfy142 · August 2008

anima wrote: »

RAM is randomly access memory, it transfer, store information between CPU, your additional card like graphic, sound, physic (this one is dead) and so on... If you got more RAM, especially in Vista, you PC will run hella faster.
And graphic card, as its name, is to improve the graphic of your game ^^. Low resolution, turn off any other running programs will help you run PW in 5 years old PC. Add more RAM will help the game load faster, but not much increasing the graphic quality...
Thx for accepting my post. I played it on an old PC before so I know... I think just keep it the way it is, cause if you run your maximum system in Vista, 1Gb of RAM seems...
What is a page file anyway? I am curious ^^.

if you have more than 20gb clear space, than go to my computer, right click, properties, advanced, and at performance click settings, than go to advanced in the small window opened, go to bottom at the "virtual memory", click change, put on custom, put 10gb initial size and max size, or if your denied put 4096 initial size and 4096 maximu, press SET, than restart computer, go to task manager, and see it.

it is also known as "SWAP" memory, memory if applications, and services, even your game, the higher you got the more you can run, but not faster, thats when the ram comes in....

oh and if your curios, here it is:

dual core

quad core

core 2 duo

core 2 quad

core 2 duo extreme

core 2 quad extreme

extreme? lol

yes those CPU's actually exists, dunno why it is named "extreMe"

super86 · August 2008

Nice post, I just wanted to point out that the 8600 is a crappy card. If you are going that rout go ahead and spend the cash on the 8800. It would be a much wiser investment.

PS. Xp FTW, Down with vista.

wolfy142 · August 2008

super86 wrote: »

Nice post, I just wanted to point out that the 8600 is a crappy card. If you are going that rout go ahead and spend the cash on the 8800. It would be a much wiser investment.

PS. Xp FTW, Down with vista.

first of all, 8600 is a good card to run pw,

second, 8800gt was the first in 8800 series.

than the 8800gts with only 96 stream processors and much lesser clock mhz than the 8800gt, and it was actually weaker (this is 320mb/600 mb series).

than come the 8800GTX, big brother to all (also heats up).

than the 8800ULTRA, big big big big big brother.

than the 8800gts gives a comeback, gets actually at max power and overclock 30 celsius degrees lower than the 8800gt and 8800GTX, which gives a variety of overclock, and its actually cheaper, so dont act like you know anything.

and yes vista has down symptom :P

anima · August 2008

Your method is using the hard drive like additional memory for the systems. Yup, I did use it for my old PC when I played PW 3 years ago.
... now you confused me wolfy. what is a page file, and how it relate with Intel's CPUs?

About graphic card, if you want to upgrade for PW, please check this link, very useful :
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-graphics-card,1987.html

As they say in that article, base on what you need and your pocket.

Vista runs good with enough memory (2gb). It is getting better and better. I am using both ^^.

super86 · August 2008

lol In terms of this game yes it would be a fine card but I was talking the long haul. Why not spend a little more for a better card. Of course this is coming from a avid First Person shooter player. Now some of those games have some insane requirements. I have personally been thinking about upgrading to vista(as much as I hate to) and getting the GeForce 9800 GX2. That card is super nice.

wolfy142 · August 2008

wrong, the geforce 9 series sucks, the future one is the 200 series, dunno why they "skipped" to the 200, lololololoolololoololololol

and anima, that site is a loser.... rofl tom & jerry's hardware lol

soukyuu · August 2008

AMD Athlon XP 2000+, 1GB Ram, 7600GT, winXP, 1280x1024: max settings w/o water effects @ 25-29fps

Intel C2D T7250 (2.0Ghz), 2GB Ram, 8600m GT, Vistax64, 1680x1050: max setting w/o water reflections @ 27-30 fps.

No need for extreme hardware if you know how to tweak it.

kazuma · August 2008

super86 wrote: »

Nice post, I just wanted to point out that the 8600 is a crappy card. If you are going that rout go ahead and spend the cash on the 8800. It would be a much wiser investment.

PS. Xp FTW, Down with vista.

I agree.

Vista sucks, I have it.

But you guys do remember when XP first came out, right?

Yeah that sucked too.
If you give Vista some time, Vista will be as good or maybe better.

Let's keep our fingers crossed, and hope for the best in the future! =D

soukyuu · August 2008

Vista sucks for older systems, older systems should stick with XP
On new systems it's better to use Vista, some components are not being supported by XP out of the box (AHCI, for example) and it's a hassle to slipstream them.

I don't want to start a "why does Vista (not) suck" discussion here, but too many people hate it w/o actually knowing how it works and why it does certain things.

karmelia · August 2008

wolfy142 wrote: »

first of all, i've build my own requirements for the game, since the game doesnt realy have a real requirement as stated, its all an illussion.... so lets begin:

The minimum and suggested sytems requirement are stated there : http://www.perfectworld.com/download

snaptrap · August 2008

Dual core? In 2005 there was not one game which required a dual core CPU at any setting. You're also listing graphic cards that weren't even available when this game was developed. Hey, but if you're looking for a rig that can run PW at 400fps, then those are the specs for you.

snaptrap · August 2008

kazuma wrote: »

I agree.

Vista sucks, I have it.

But you guys do remember when XP first came out, right?

Yeah that sucked too.
If you give Vista some time, Vista will be as good or maybe better.

Let's keep our fingers crossed, and hope for the best in the future! =D

Xp didn't feel like it was in beta when it was released, and there wasn't nearly as many serious issues. Microsoft rushed Vista to compete against OSX Leopard. Vista is a resource hogging PoS OS and that will never change. Even after SP1, nasty issues remain and new ones have appeared. This could be why Apple took a nice chunk out of Microsoft OS market share.

ren · August 2008

wolfy142 wrote: »

and yes vista has down symptom :P

"down syndrome" and vista isn't QUITE as bad as people say. although vista 32bit is completely useless garbage. but microcrap is still vile and evil and people shouldn't pay to use vista.

@kazuma: vista works absolutely fine for me, MORE stable than xp, but it's extremely annoying how much time you have to invest in degaying it, compared to a mere 20 minutes or less to fix up XP.

@OP: your requirements are bull, I could run the game at full settings at 1600x1200 with a 1.8ghz athlon and agp 6600, though ADC dropped to 5 frames per second.
duo/quad cores won't effect this game at all, it only uses one core. but duos have very efficient clock rate compared to an athlon XP or Pentiun 4/celeron/Core 1, and offloads cpu usage from other programs onto another core.
a 3ghz duo wold be ideal for making *ADC* not lag. pretty sure ADC lag has little or nothing to do with your gpu.

with my setup I get 12 FPS in adc; obviously the weakest point in my setup is the cpu at a mere 2.4ghz.

marc · August 2008

i have played this on high graphics mode, and its so worth it, the graphics rock
once u go high you will never wana go low again,

sahrai · August 2008

ren wrote: »

"down syndrome" and vista isn't QUITE as bad as people say.

Vista is a joke when companies selling Microsoft products are being forced to sell it on PC's that are clearly unable to run it properly. That's the biggest problem with it. And do you think these companies are allowed to sell you XP? Nope.. they sell a product that is resource inefficient.

.... end of off topic.

snaptrap · August 2008

ren wrote: »

with my setup I get 12 FPS in adc; obviously the weakest point in my setup is the cpu at a mere 2.4ghz.

Many confuse hertz with performance, something Intel themselves recently discovered when AMD was kicking their asses with lower frequency CPU's that were more efficient.

ren · August 2008

snaptrap wrote: »

Many confuse hertz with performance, something Intel themselves recently discovered when AMD was kicking their asses with lower frequency CPU's that were more efficient.

That's not recently, the Core 2 line is more efficient than its old models and it's been out for a while now. Don't know if that was directed at me or the people with Pentium 4's/Celerons/Core 1's.

I know that all Core 2's pretty much **** an equivalent clock rate amd these days. Intel's "fake mashed together quad" even **** amd's "true quad" in the benchmarks I read. Hell... on stuff not using all 4 cores, a c2d beats amd's quad <_<

douglas · August 2008

no worrys here ^_^ 1g video card pcie 60fps!, 2g ddr3 ram , 1T hard drive, 12mbps internet, P4 quad core 3.9gh hyper threaded, 5.1 suround sound, 1900x1600 lcd hdmi monitor 42in, and 6 fans to keep it all cool ^_^ any questions ( custom build )

snaptrap · August 2008

ren wrote: »

That's not recently, the Core 2 line is more efficient than its old models and it's been out for a while now. Don't know if that was directed at me or the people with Pentium 4's/Celerons/Core 1's.

I know that all Core 2's pretty much **** an equivalent clock rate amd these days. Intel's "fake mashed together quad" even **** amd's "true quad" in the benchmarks I read. Hell... on stuff not using all 4 cores, a c2d beats amd's quad <_<

Recent enough. It's only been about 3-4 years. As for all Intel C2's beating AMD's equal clock rates; that's untrue. Most of those idiots (such as Tom's hadware) don't know how to benchmark system equally. Most of them use hacks. AMD CPU's are more flexible when it comes to overclocking. Also, I don't think Intel CPU's make up for their cost when compared to AMD.

xkwisite · August 2008

Your specs are all wrong, I can run this game with everything on max with:

Windows Vista 32(Yes, i know but it's not that bad)
Dual core 2.8 ghz
2 GB's of memory
Geforce 7300 LE 512mb

I average about 20 FPS with that and drop down to about 9 or so in ADC west.

reality · August 2008

My desktop is so old the laptop im getting is like 4 times better then it. I still manage to play Perfect world fine on low settings.

wabbitt · August 2008

wolfy142 wrote: »

1. P4 or a paralel (am i spelling this right?) version of amd 2.0 ghz

I think the word you want is equivelant

Regarding PC and OS Requirements

Comments

Categories