Lite-On is a good performer for cheap. And they're fairly reliable too. Avoid Sony and HP. Asus and Samsung are ok, but I generally avoid them too since Lite-On drives are so inexpensive.
If you want the best, there's no doubt that Plextor has the most reliable and tolerant optical drives (their drives can often read damage discs that no other manufacturer's drives can read). Plextor isn't that much more expensive, but they don't have the fastest drives out there at any given moment.
i havd a 460w PSU but the calculators say i need arround 520, is it worth getting a new one?
how much is it realy affecting the speeds/performance?
It shouldn't affect performance at all. But it will affect reliability and could shorten the lifespan of your hardware and PSU.
Here's what happens when you need more power than your PSU was designed to supply:
1.) Wattage doesn't change. But if your components need more power than you have available, the voltage supplied drops in order to meet the amperage demands (volts * amps = watts).
2.) Some hardware is more tolerable than others when it comes to the voltage they're given. CPUs and GPUs might hiccup, return incorrect calculations, or completely lock-up or power-down when not given enough voltage. If your system is acting strange, this would be one possibility. Let's say you're gaming for a couple hours and your system is crunching away at running the game for some time. Your PC is heating up a bit and your video card is probably at it's peak for its normal operating temperatures. Your PSU is also pretty warm by now. For PCs, more heat = more power requirements. And with PSUs, a hotter operating environment = less power supplied. If your PC is freezing up or games crashing after a couple hours of gameplay, an old or inadequate PSU could be a potential culprit.
3.) Do this frequently (stress components by supplying less voltage to meet amperage requirements), and your hardware's lifespan gets shorter and shorter.
When in doubt, always get a PSU that's a little more than what you need. Now, with that said, keep in mind that PSU calculators are designed to help you find a suitable PSU just based on wattage, not amount of 12V required (most crucial voltage for CPUs and GPUs). One power supply rated at 600W may pout out 35 amps of 12V, while another rated at 700W might only put out 18A across two rails. Check the 12V amps supplied by your PSU verses how much wattage your video card needs. If your video card peaks at 240W (20 amps of 12 volts), and your PSU puts out 18 amps on two 12V rails, you might be pushing it. Granted, the total wattage of any one device isn't necessarily going to be all 12V, but for video cards, the 12V input is the bulk of it.
I love my Tagan Black Pearl A+ WCR (which was sold by a/b/s, but now apparently unavailable), but it isn't cheap and it's overkill for many... if you can still find one. Tagan designed this case to have parts interchangeable with Lian-Li cases. Too bad they're a thing of the past now. Here's mine: inside and outside
Lian-Li has always been a favorite of modders due to simple, elegant designs, with tons of replaceable parts. But these are expensive, and again overkill for most. If you want the best, this i
Silverstone makes some very clean, quality cases, but they too are pricey. A little overpriced in my opinion, but excellent cases. If you ever wanted to make an HTPC (home theater PC), I would only look to Silverstone. For regular PCs, there are better cases and better prices.
And that brings me to Antec, which is a very good compromise. Most of their top and mid-range cases have a clean design, rugged frame, and very reasonable price. The Antec 300 is great for budget builders who still want a solid case. The Antec 1200 case is top-of-the-line for Antec at an otherwise mid-level price in terms of all cases.
XP SP3
P4 (HT) 3.4
2g ram
nvid 8500 (pretty sure this needs to go)
Curious if the processor will cut it
Also on another note..........
I would like to get a new comp everytime the gameing industry wants to change their stuff or some new piece of computer tech hits the shelves, but it is not in the cards, don't have that kind of money and don't really have tha patience to track down and number crunch to build the ultimate of ultimate gameing rigs either lol.
So if anyone questions why many of us don't have cutting edge, it has a lot to do with how fast the industry changes and the lack of capital to keep up with those changes to be honest.
The system reqs seem a bit on the high end side from what I have seen of the vids and seen of the CO vids. I hope the mins are not a hard min that must be adhered to, to the letter in order just to play the game, I think if that is the case then a quite a few people are probably going to get hosed.
I am not saying the game should be completely and utterly toned down to oblivion for older machines, but a dual core proc as a min, no ifs ands or buts, seems a bit high, when the industry standard still seems to support moderately high end single cores. Its the proc speed I am worried about on this thing.
XP SP3
P4 (HT) 3.4
2g ram
nvid 8500 (pretty sure this needs to go)
Curious if the processor will cut it
Actually, your 8500 GT should be ok. It's at the bottom edge of what works well for moderate to high settings, but it should get you by until you can upgrade. On that note, your CPU definitely won't cut it. You could probably run STO on it, but it won't be an enjoyable experience.
I'd upgrade your PC. You can get something pretty good for $400 without a video card; you can keep and squeeze by with that 8500 GT video card.
Also on another note..........
I would like to get a new comp everytime the gameing industry wants to change their stuff, but it is not in the cards, don't have that kind of money and don't really have tha patience to track down and number crunch to build the ultimate of ultimate gameing rigs either lol.
So if anyone questions why many of us don't have cutting edge, it has a lot to do with how fast the industry changes and the lack of capital to keep up with those changes to be honest.
Meh, cutting edge is for enthusiasts. Don't fret it. You don't have to be on the cutting edge to enjoy STO, let alone most gaming.
I understand the frustration with PC technology outpacing itself all the time in the marketplace. But I have to admit, your P4 is pretty old, even without gaming and by regular PC standards. From the specs, that PC is 3 years old or so, especially since it's a later P4 at 3.4GHz. And an 8500 seems like a more recent upgrade from whatever was with that P4 when you got it, so I'd say you added the 8500 a year or so after you got the PC?
400 dollars may not seem much to some, but to many of us, that is a chunk of change indeed, please be mindful of that, that we cannot plunk down 400 dollars just at the drop of a hat every time the industry wants to set a new standard and what not.
Yup, I agree. Money is relative, and what's little to one person might be a lot to another.
The computer industry and gaming industry nickels and dimes people to death to try and keep up, some of us may be slow with the times , but we do try.
Also, I am not saying all gaming companies do this, but some do.
If you're in-the-know (ie: keep up with the hardware and the industry), and if you can build your own PC from components, you can actually do very well with much less. The PC I built would have easily cost $4k if I didn't know where to skimp and where to invest. For example, if you buy a pre-built PC that's high-priced for gaming, there's going to be things in there you don't need, and the ones you do you can get for far less if you bought them as components. And for things like the motherboard, memory, and drives, you can actually get far superior quality and performance hand-picking them.
Yeah, I know, it's not for everyone. Just like a lot of things in life, to get the most out of gaming and PCs you need to be shrewd and know where and where not to invest. I've spent far too much on my PC and gaming in general, but if I was on a budget, I'd know exactly where my money is and isn't going. For gaming and getting the most for your buck, pre-built PCs just don't cut it. So if you don't want to invest the time and effort with PC component purchasing and building, I'd recommend making friends with a local enthusiast to help you.
The system reqs seem a bit on the high end side from what I have seen of the vids and seen of the CO vids. I hope the mins are not a hard min that must be adhered to, to the letter in order just to play the game, I think if that is the case then a quite a few people are probably going to get hosed.
I am not saying the game should be completely and utterly toned down to oblivion for older machines, but a dual core proc as a min, no ifs ands or buts, seems a bit high, when the industry standard still seems to support moderately high end single cores. Its the proc speed I am worried about on this thing.
Yup, I agree and have been arguing that very point. Their minimum requirement of an NVIDIA 7950 is way too high, and their minimum CPU requirement is a little off too. But you have to look at it from their viewpoint. Sure, you can play STO on a lesser PC, but if you're not content with it, you're going to be complaining to our community and to Cryptic.
It seems like software developers these days are putting very high requirements out to avoid the complaints about lag and slow gameplay. They aren't so much "requirements" as "cover-our-behind-specs". Your P4 and 8500 will run STO. How smoothly though is another matter. If you want smooth gameplay with a minimal amount of lag and reasonable load time for switching areas, you'll want to upgrade. If you just want to get by with what you have and game performance is secondary, you're fine.
Ty for response Cipher, and yea the vid card was added when EvE went to trinity I think and needed shader 2 or 3, can't remember which.
Warhammer lagged bad and so did Aion in populated areas. The game doesn't have to run like a well oiled machine, just that it will run till I can get enough put back to get a new comp, dont want to feel like I wasted money on the game for something I can't play for a few months just to make sure I get in on the limited supply perks for getting an early edition.
I guess you can say "thank God for open beta" for some of this stuff.
Also by lag, I mean performance lag due to vid issues or something, it seemed very grabby and not like in a bad internet connection kind of way.
Ty again for the response and totally get what your saying.
When you said i should go with a better PSU, you mean quaility or the amount of W
Quality-wise. The wattage was fine at 650. Antec sells decent PSUs for their higher-end models, but for their low and mid-level PSUs, they're much worse. It's because they have multiple manufacturers making different models for them that they brand with the Antec name.
Quality-wise. The wattage was fine at 650. Antec sells decent PSUs for their higher-end models, but for their low and mid-level PSUs, they're much worse. It's because they have multiple manufacturers making different models for them that they brand with the Antec name.
Okay figured i'd ask so i wouldn't lookifor higher wattage.
Im pretty sure I'll be ok but opinions are always welcome.
CPU: AMD Phenom X3 8450 Triple Core Processor at 2100 Ghz
GPU: ATI Radeon 3650 Overclocked Edition 1 gig DDR2
RAM: 6 gigs
OS: Vista 64-bit
Thinking either 1024 x 768 with some AA/special settings or 1280 x 1024 (highest available) with no AA/special settings. I played the free bloodmoon weekend and CO ran on my rig well. Just wanted to get some more opinions.
On Newegg? Right here: http://www.newegg.com/Store/SubCategory.aspx?SubCategory=57. If you're ever in doubt on where to find something, just search on their site by the category. Then click on an item and you'll see the breadcrumb trail of the categories it's under.
I'm not sure what the requirements mean when they say "Intel HD graphics." My graphics card is a poopy integrated graphics chip.
So, will this setup work for this game?
OS: Whatever it needs to be
Processor: Intel Core 2 Duo, 2.4 GHz
RAM: 4 GB DDR2
Graphics card: GMA X3100
It's a MacBook, circa early 2008. I didn't intend it for heavy gaming, but I hope my graphics card can squeak by for this one.
Just say the word and I'll drop my computer into BOOT CAMP!
Yeah, their requirements of "Intel HD graphics" is a little shady. Your 3 series is a little old, but it's not bad for the 3 series. I think by "Intel HD" they mean the new 4 series chips that are capable of HD video playback. Still, for any gaming, I'd completely avoid built-in Intel GPUs. And yours is probably not going to cut it for performance (read: poor gameplay experience). Your CPU and memory is fine though.
Im pretty sure I'll be ok but opinions are always welcome.
CPU: AMD Phenom X3 8450 Triple Core Processor at 2100 Ghz
GPU: ATI Radeon 3650 Overclocked Edition 1 gig DDR2
RAM: 6 gigs
OS: Vista 64-bit
Thinking either 1024 x 768 with some AA/special settings or 1280 x 1024 (highest available) with no AA/special settings. I played the free bloodmoon weekend and CO ran on my rig well. Just wanted to get some more opinions.
Yup, yours is fine. You should be able to get 1280x1024 with 2x or 4x AA on STO. ATI cards for the 3, 4, and new 5 series are pretty good with AA. That won't be your performance bottleneck. High quality lighting and such would hurt your performance in games more than AA for that card.
Not sure how to direct this comment to you, so I just titled it and perhaps you will see it.
I have updated a few components. You can see them below under my sig. I think this setup will hold out for quite some time. Check out the sweet PSU. Remember, I was using generic PSU until recently. Also, I decided to go with the 250 GTS on the principle that it uses less power and is relatively efficient, but certainly an upgrade ( not a huge one, but still better ) from the 9800 GT which I will use as a back-up unit.
I'm planning on using bootcamp with my macbook but still wasn't sure if it would handle the game (REALLY hope it does). It's a late 2008 macbook. Here are the specs:
I'm planning on using bootcamp with my macbook but still wasn't sure if it would handle the game (REALLY hope it does). It's a late 2008 macbook. Here are the specs:
I mean, I'm playing the game no matter what! I already pre-ordered it lol. I just wanna know if it's going to be slow or at least playable.
It appears that most of your system will be fine as far as the 2 GB RAM, and the Core 2 Duo at 2.4 GHz. But I'm not too sure about your graphics card. Integrated graphics cards usually leave alot to be desired. Your GeForce 9400M has only 16 stream processors. The card was indeed designed to play games, but not on any high level. I do think it will work, but you will need to play on med. settings with a lower resolution - perhaps 1024 x 768.
Maybe Cipher-Nemo could give you a better insight.
Will I be able to run this game with P4 3.6 , Nvidia 9800 512 vid card and 3 gb of ram ?
Laren
The video card and memory are fine. The CPU might be a bottleneck according to Cryptic's STO requirements. You'll probably be able to run it, but I'd upgrade your motherboard and CPU (and that would require new memory too since it will have a different memory controller). Keep your video card, though, as that's fine.
The sound card market is a tough one, and unfortunately, it's in a much worse shape than in the past. Here's the two major reasons in my opinion:
EAX. This is Creative Labs' pre-set library of effects to create ambiance. It currently ranges from version 1.0 to 5.0. The problem here is that every version after 2.0 is proprietary and pretty much exclusive to Creative Labs' sound cards with chips such as the X-Fi. This means all other sound chip manufacturers have up to EAX 2.0 and nothing beyond that. This halts game developers from investing too much time into anything past EAX 2.0, and it makes a Creative Labs card a requirement if you want to experience everything in EAX 3.0 to 5.0 for a specific game that supports it. It hurts the sound card market, and of course it hurts developers and consumers alike.
Built-in sound. Pretty much most motherboards these days come with built-in sound capabilities, be it part of a chipset or an actual sound chip. This is a good thing for consumers, but it also hurts the sound card market and future development since most people just settle for built-in sound since they already have it with their motherboard or pre-built PC. The same is true for laptops.
Now of course some manufacturers are including high-end or mid-range sound chips with their motherboards, but those are typically only high-end motherboards or laptops. What all of this means is that there's less incentive for manufacturers to invest development into better sound processors. Sure, development continues, but as seen in our sound technology over the years, that development is slow.
In the end, we're stuck with a choice between shoddy Creative Labs cards and chips that have EAX 5.0 or very good quality cards with off-brand processors that have only EAX 2.0 support (and of course cruddy, cheap cards and chips that have the worst of both worlds). But the point is, we can never have the best of both worlds until this EAX proprietary nonsense gets trashed. Asus added emulation to their more expensive cards (ie: Xondar) to simulate one feature of EAX 5.0, and have incorrectly called it EAX 5.0 support. But that is a huge battle between Creative Labs and Asus. Asus battles the Creative Labs giant to get rid of the proprietary EAX library (which is great), but at the same time they're marketing EAX 5.0 support which is hurting consumers and the market.
So ,with all of that said, your better options are a card with an X-Fi chip, C-Media chip, or Asus chip.
The Asus high-end cards are pricey. They're good performers, but they too cannot fully support EAX 5.0. A C-Media is a good compromise because it's less expensive, can really sound great on a high-end card, and supports EAX 2.0 with no misleading or awkward emulation. An X-Fi card, with native EAX 5.0 support, will give a good gaming experience, but at a sub-par configuration and compatibility experience. Many reports issues with PCI IRQ steering with the X-Fi chip and other expansion cards, and some games are still struggling with sound glitches for X-Fi chips. But some don't experience any issues.
As for the C-Media chip, these are the most compatible since that company also makes many built-in sound chips (along with other manufacturers). So if you want my personal recommendation, I'd get a quality card around the $80 to $160 mark, from a manufacturer that uses a C-Media chip. Asus, AuzenTech, and HT|Omega all have mid and high end sound cards that sound great and run reliably for many years. I'm still using my Auzentech from 2007 (it's a 2006 model). Many others are still using their Creative Labs Audigy 2 card from many years ago too (the Audigy 2 chip is very solid and more compatible and stable than the X-Fi chip). M-Audio is a mid to high-end manufacturer, but they target audiophiles, not gamers, and therefore not the best chips or drivers for games.
The only chip I'd avoid is any model by VIA. Audio chips by VIA are only found in cheap cards or built-in on motherboards, and you really get what you pay for here: sub-par sound with poor reliability (good compatibility though).
I love my Auzentech card, but Auzentech pretty much only makes cards with Creative Labs chips now (X-Fi or 20K2). I have an older Auzentech card that uses a C-Media CMI8788 chip. I avoid Creative Lab chips just because of their history of issues, both from personal experience and what's documented out there on the Internet.
Thanks for the info, theres no requirements to sound cards right?
Correct, other than it supporting DX9's Direct Sound. But that's more a driver compatibility aspect than a hardware one. On top of that, all sound chips out there support Direct Sound... unless we're talking about a sound card from may be 1994, lol.
I've been meaning to grab a new rig and this game may be the deciding factor. Only problem I have is that my rig works fine for everything else I use it for (including wow). Decisions decisions. However, you can grab a pretty nice rig for a grand from Dell.
Whatever happens I'll be following along!!!
Thanks again
Last night I took delivery of my new notebook, a Toshiba Qosmio X505. I'm quite happy with it so far, though even I'm surprised by just how truly massive it is. I'm forcing myself out of the habit of using the term "laptop" because, at 18.4 inches of screen, it just seems ludicrous. My question, though, is with regards to the Core i7 720QM processor.
I'm comfortable that this processor will be able to run STO given its designed overclocking. My understanding from my pre-purchase research is that this function activates automatically; in theory, after I've installed the game on February 2nd, I activate the launcher and the Core i7 automatically configures itself to achieve the requisite Ghz. Is this so? Is there something I need to be doing, now or then, to ensure the Core i7 is appropriate operating?
For context, this laptop includes a GeForce GTS 250M GPU with 1GB of DDR5 and 4GB of DDR3 RAM.
Comments
Lite-On is a good performer for cheap. And they're fairly reliable too. Avoid Sony and HP. Asus and Samsung are ok, but I generally avoid them too since Lite-On drives are so inexpensive.
If you want the best, there's no doubt that Plextor has the most reliable and tolerant optical drives (their drives can often read damage discs that no other manufacturer's drives can read). Plextor isn't that much more expensive, but they don't have the fastest drives out there at any given moment.
Antec is fine. But since you're investing a good deal into your motherboard and PC, I'd go with a better PSU.
It shouldn't affect performance at all. But it will affect reliability and could shorten the lifespan of your hardware and PSU.
Here's what happens when you need more power than your PSU was designed to supply:
1.) Wattage doesn't change. But if your components need more power than you have available, the voltage supplied drops in order to meet the amperage demands (volts * amps = watts).
2.) Some hardware is more tolerable than others when it comes to the voltage they're given. CPUs and GPUs might hiccup, return incorrect calculations, or completely lock-up or power-down when not given enough voltage. If your system is acting strange, this would be one possibility. Let's say you're gaming for a couple hours and your system is crunching away at running the game for some time. Your PC is heating up a bit and your video card is probably at it's peak for its normal operating temperatures. Your PSU is also pretty warm by now. For PCs, more heat = more power requirements. And with PSUs, a hotter operating environment = less power supplied. If your PC is freezing up or games crashing after a couple hours of gameplay, an old or inadequate PSU could be a potential culprit.
3.) Do this frequently (stress components by supplying less voltage to meet amperage requirements), and your hardware's lifespan gets shorter and shorter.
When in doubt, always get a PSU that's a little more than what you need. Now, with that said, keep in mind that PSU calculators are designed to help you find a suitable PSU just based on wattage, not amount of 12V required (most crucial voltage for CPUs and GPUs). One power supply rated at 600W may pout out 35 amps of 12V, while another rated at 700W might only put out 18A across two rails. Check the 12V amps supplied by your PSU verses how much wattage your video card needs. If your video card peaks at 240W (20 amps of 12 volts), and your PSU puts out 18 amps on two 12V rails, you might be pushing it. Granted, the total wattage of any one device isn't necessarily going to be all 12V, but for video cards, the 12V input is the bulk of it.
That's more of a personal choice.
I love my Tagan Black Pearl A+ WCR (which was sold by a/b/s, but now apparently unavailable), but it isn't cheap and it's overkill for many... if you can still find one. Tagan designed this case to have parts interchangeable with Lian-Li cases. Too bad they're a thing of the past now. Here's mine: inside and outside
Lian-Li has always been a favorite of modders due to simple, elegant designs, with tons of replaceable parts. But these are expensive, and again overkill for most. If you want the best, this i
Silverstone makes some very clean, quality cases, but they too are pricey. A little overpriced in my opinion, but excellent cases. If you ever wanted to make an HTPC (home theater PC), I would only look to Silverstone. For regular PCs, there are better cases and better prices.
And that brings me to Antec, which is a very good compromise. Most of their top and mid-range cases have a clean design, rugged frame, and very reasonable price. The Antec 300 is great for budget builders who still want a solid case. The Antec 1200 case is top-of-the-line for Antec at an otherwise mid-level price in terms of all cases.
P4 (HT) 3.4
2g ram
nvid 8500 (pretty sure this needs to go)
Curious if the processor will cut it
Also on another note..........
I would like to get a new comp everytime the gameing industry wants to change their stuff or some new piece of computer tech hits the shelves, but it is not in the cards, don't have that kind of money and don't really have tha patience to track down and number crunch to build the ultimate of ultimate gameing rigs either lol.
So if anyone questions why many of us don't have cutting edge, it has a lot to do with how fast the industry changes and the lack of capital to keep up with those changes to be honest.
The system reqs seem a bit on the high end side from what I have seen of the vids and seen of the CO vids. I hope the mins are not a hard min that must be adhered to, to the letter in order just to play the game, I think if that is the case then a quite a few people are probably going to get hosed.
I am not saying the game should be completely and utterly toned down to oblivion for older machines, but a dual core proc as a min, no ifs ands or buts, seems a bit high, when the industry standard still seems to support moderately high end single cores. Its the proc speed I am worried about on this thing.
Sorry for the rant, lol.
Actually, your 8500 GT should be ok. It's at the bottom edge of what works well for moderate to high settings, but it should get you by until you can upgrade. On that note, your CPU definitely won't cut it. You could probably run STO on it, but it won't be an enjoyable experience.
I'd upgrade your PC. You can get something pretty good for $400 without a video card; you can keep and squeeze by with that 8500 GT video card.
Meh, cutting edge is for enthusiasts. Don't fret it.
I understand the frustration with PC technology outpacing itself all the time in the marketplace. But I have to admit, your P4 is pretty old, even without gaming and by regular PC standards. From the specs, that PC is 3 years old or so, especially since it's a later P4 at 3.4GHz. And an 8500 seems like a more recent upgrade from whatever was with that P4 when you got it, so I'd say you added the 8500 a year or so after you got the PC?
Yup, I agree. Money is relative, and what's little to one person might be a lot to another.
If you're in-the-know (ie: keep up with the hardware and the industry), and if you can build your own PC from components, you can actually do very well with much less. The PC I built would have easily cost $4k if I didn't know where to skimp and where to invest. For example, if you buy a pre-built PC that's high-priced for gaming, there's going to be things in there you don't need, and the ones you do you can get for far less if you bought them as components. And for things like the motherboard, memory, and drives, you can actually get far superior quality and performance hand-picking them.
Yeah, I know, it's not for everyone. Just like a lot of things in life, to get the most out of gaming and PCs you need to be shrewd and know where and where not to invest. I've spent far too much on my PC and gaming in general, but if I was on a budget, I'd know exactly where my money is and isn't going. For gaming and getting the most for your buck, pre-built PCs just don't cut it. So if you don't want to invest the time and effort with PC component purchasing and building, I'd recommend making friends with a local enthusiast to help you.
Yup, I agree and have been arguing that very point. Their minimum requirement of an NVIDIA 7950 is way too high, and their minimum CPU requirement is a little off too. But you have to look at it from their viewpoint. Sure, you can play STO on a lesser PC, but if you're not content with it, you're going to be complaining to our community and to Cryptic.
It seems like software developers these days are putting very high requirements out to avoid the complaints about lag and slow gameplay. They aren't so much "requirements" as "cover-our-behind-specs". Your P4 and 8500 will run STO. How smoothly though is another matter. If you want smooth gameplay with a minimal amount of lag and reasonable load time for switching areas, you'll want to upgrade. If you just want to get by with what you have and game performance is secondary, you're fine.
Warhammer lagged bad and so did Aion in populated areas. The game doesn't have to run like a well oiled machine, just that it will run till I can get enough put back to get a new comp, dont want to feel like I wasted money on the game for something I can't play for a few months just to make sure I get in on the limited supply perks for getting an early edition.
I guess you can say "thank God for open beta" for some of this stuff.
Also by lag, I mean performance lag due to vid issues or something, it seemed very grabby and not like in a bad internet connection kind of way.
Ty again for the response and totally get what your saying.
Quality-wise. The wattage was fine at 650. Antec sells decent PSUs for their higher-end models, but for their low and mid-level PSUs, they're much worse. It's because they have multiple manufacturers making different models for them that they brand with the Antec name.
Okay figured i'd ask so i wouldn't lookifor higher wattage.
Where do you find sound cards/devices?
So, will this setup work for this game?
OS: Whatever it needs to be
Processor: Intel Core 2 Duo, 2.4 GHz
RAM: 4 GB DDR2
Graphics card: GMA X3100
It's a MacBook, circa early 2008. I didn't intend it for heavy gaming, but I hope my graphics card can squeak by for this one.
Just say the word and I'll drop my computer into BOOT CAMP!
CPU: AMD Phenom X3 8450 Triple Core Processor at 2100 Ghz
GPU: ATI Radeon 3650 Overclocked Edition 1 gig DDR2
RAM: 6 gigs
OS: Vista 64-bit
Thinking either 1024 x 768 with some AA/special settings or 1280 x 1024 (highest available) with no AA/special settings. I played the free bloodmoon weekend and CO ran on my rig well. Just wanted to get some more opinions.
On Newegg? Right here: http://www.newegg.com/Store/SubCategory.aspx?SubCategory=57. If you're ever in doubt on where to find something, just search on their site by the category. Then click on an item and you'll see the breadcrumb trail of the categories it's under.
Yeah, their requirements of "Intel HD graphics" is a little shady. Your 3 series is a little old, but it's not bad for the 3 series. I think by "Intel HD" they mean the new 4 series chips that are capable of HD video playback. Still, for any gaming, I'd completely avoid built-in Intel GPUs. And yours is probably not going to cut it for performance (read: poor gameplay experience). Your CPU and memory is fine though.
Yup, yours is fine. You should be able to get 1280x1024 with 2x or 4x AA on STO. ATI cards for the 3, 4, and new 5 series are pretty good with AA. That won't be your performance bottleneck. High quality lighting and such would hurt your performance in games more than AA for that card.
But yeah, your system should run it smoothly.
I have updated a few components. You can see them below under my sig. I think this setup will hold out for quite some time. Check out the sweet PSU. Remember, I was using generic PSU until recently. Also, I decided to go with the 250 GTS on the principle that it uses less power and is relatively efficient, but certainly an upgrade ( not a huge one, but still better ) from the 9800 GT which I will use as a back-up unit.
Your thoughts appreciated.
Now i just got to find out which one is good for me
OS: XP
Processor: Intel Core 2 Duo, 2.4 GHz
RAM: 2 GB 1066 MHz DDR2
Graphics card: NVIDIA GeForce 9400M
I mean, I'm playing the game no matter what! I already pre-ordered it lol. I just wanna know if it's going to be slow or at least playable.
It appears that most of your system will be fine as far as the 2 GB RAM, and the Core 2 Duo at 2.4 GHz. But I'm not too sure about your graphics card. Integrated graphics cards usually leave alot to be desired. Your GeForce 9400M has only 16 stream processors. The card was indeed designed to play games, but not on any high level. I do think it will work, but you will need to play on med. settings with a lower resolution - perhaps 1024 x 768.
Maybe Cipher-Nemo could give you a better insight.
Will I be able to run this game with P4 3.6 , Nvidia 9800 512 vid card and 3 gb of ram ?
Laren
The video card and memory are fine. The CPU might be a bottleneck according to Cryptic's STO requirements. You'll probably be able to run it, but I'd upgrade your motherboard and CPU (and that would require new memory too since it will have a different memory controller). Keep your video card, though, as that's fine.
if you want to use a mac to run this, then you are going to have to use bootcamp and install windows (intel macs only).
The sound card market is a tough one, and unfortunately, it's in a much worse shape than in the past. Here's the two major reasons in my opinion:
- EAX. This is Creative Labs' pre-set library of effects to create ambiance. It currently ranges from version 1.0 to 5.0. The problem here is that every version after 2.0 is proprietary and pretty much exclusive to Creative Labs' sound cards with chips such as the X-Fi. This means all other sound chip manufacturers have up to EAX 2.0 and nothing beyond that. This halts game developers from investing too much time into anything past EAX 2.0, and it makes a Creative Labs card a requirement if you want to experience everything in EAX 3.0 to 5.0 for a specific game that supports it. It hurts the sound card market, and of course it hurts developers and consumers alike.
- Built-in sound. Pretty much most motherboards these days come with built-in sound capabilities, be it part of a chipset or an actual sound chip. This is a good thing for consumers, but it also hurts the sound card market and future development since most people just settle for built-in sound since they already have it with their motherboard or pre-built PC. The same is true for laptops.
In the end, we're stuck with a choice between shoddy Creative Labs cards and chips that have EAX 5.0 or very good quality cards with off-brand processors that have only EAX 2.0 support (and of course cruddy, cheap cards and chips that have the worst of both worlds). But the point is, we can never have the best of both worlds until this EAX proprietary nonsense gets trashed. Asus added emulation to their more expensive cards (ie: Xondar) to simulate one feature of EAX 5.0, and have incorrectly called it EAX 5.0 support. But that is a huge battle between Creative Labs and Asus. Asus battles the Creative Labs giant to get rid of the proprietary EAX library (which is great), but at the same time they're marketing EAX 5.0 support which is hurting consumers and the market.A good reference read to get your bearings on this issue can be found in this review: http://techgage.com/article/creative_eax_vs_asus_ds3d_gx_20/1.
.
Now of course some manufacturers are including high-end or mid-range sound chips with their motherboards, but those are typically only high-end motherboards or laptops. What all of this means is that there's less incentive for manufacturers to invest development into better sound processors. Sure, development continues, but as seen in our sound technology over the years, that development is slow.
So ,with all of that said, your better options are a card with an X-Fi chip, C-Media chip, or Asus chip.
The Asus high-end cards are pricey. They're good performers, but they too cannot fully support EAX 5.0. A C-Media is a good compromise because it's less expensive, can really sound great on a high-end card, and supports EAX 2.0 with no misleading or awkward emulation. An X-Fi card, with native EAX 5.0 support, will give a good gaming experience, but at a sub-par configuration and compatibility experience. Many reports issues with PCI IRQ steering with the X-Fi chip and other expansion cards, and some games are still struggling with sound glitches for X-Fi chips. But some don't experience any issues.
As for the C-Media chip, these are the most compatible since that company also makes many built-in sound chips (along with other manufacturers). So if you want my personal recommendation, I'd get a quality card around the $80 to $160 mark, from a manufacturer that uses a C-Media chip. Asus, AuzenTech, and HT|Omega all have mid and high end sound cards that sound great and run reliably for many years. I'm still using my Auzentech from 2007 (it's a 2006 model). Many others are still using their Creative Labs Audigy 2 card from many years ago too (the Audigy 2 chip is very solid and more compatible and stable than the X-Fi chip). M-Audio is a mid to high-end manufacturer, but they target audiophiles, not gamers, and therefore not the best chips or drivers for games.
The only chip I'd avoid is any model by VIA. Audio chips by VIA are only found in cheap cards or built-in on motherboards, and you really get what you pay for here: sub-par sound with poor reliability (good compatibility though).
For specific recommendations:
I love my Auzentech card, but Auzentech pretty much only makes cards with Creative Labs chips now (X-Fi or 20K2). I have an older Auzentech card that uses a C-Media CMI8788 chip. I avoid Creative Lab chips just because of their history of issues, both from personal experience and what's documented out there on the Internet.
Correct, other than it supporting DX9's Direct Sound. But that's more a driver compatibility aspect than a hardware one. On top of that, all sound chips out there support Direct Sound... unless we're talking about a sound card from may be 1994, lol.
3.2 pent 4
3.25 gb ram
Radeon x1800 graphics card
Going to upgrage soon with a whole new rig but this makes me a good choice for a beta tester, low end user,,, right .. right...
The closed beta thing is debatable.
But as for a new PC, I'd encourage it. Yours is below requirements for the CPU and right at them for the video card.
The "3.25" GB RAM is telling that your PC is either running a 32-bit OS or dedicating some system memory to video memory usage.
I've been meaning to grab a new rig and this game may be the deciding factor. Only problem I have is that my rig works fine for everything else I use it for (including wow). Decisions decisions. However, you can grab a pretty nice rig for a grand from Dell.
Whatever happens I'll be following along!!!
Thanks again