Page 55 of 66 FirstFirst ...
5
45
53
54
55
56
57
65
... LastLast
  1. #1081
    Will I be able to run at ~60 FPS at low/mid settings

    i7 3610QM 2.2Ghz turbo boost to 3.3ghz
    8gb ddr3 ram @ 1600mhz
    Nvidia GT 630M 2gb DDR3

    thank you in advance

  2. #1082
    Quote Originally Posted by glo View Post
    Unfortunately that video card isn't going to be able to perform well in the game. You may get away with acceptable FPS with most settings on low to medium with shadows turned off.
    No offence but he has radeon 7750 that is good graphic card.

    Last i checked guild wars 2 requirements are ATI Radeon™ X1800, ok it can be minimum but there is a massive difference between those video cards.

    I have radeon 5770 and i can run sw tor pretty smooth and it have the same minimum system requirements as guild wars 2 so with that you should be any problem on high in my opinion.

    ---------- Post added 2012-08-29 at 10:31 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Mkeoughjr View Post
    Seriously? Ughh kinda disappointing i was figuring a mix of med-high with shaders and shadows off, if not is there any cheap upgrades? Like maybe another 7750 crossfired?
    Look mate minimal system requirements for guild wars 2 are:

    Guild Wars 2 Minimum System Requirements*

    OS: Windows® XP Service Pack 2 or better

    CPU: Intel® Core™ 2 Duo 2.0 GHz, Core i3, AMD Athlon™ 64 X2 or better

    GPU: NVIDIA® GeForce® 7800, ATI Radeon™ X1800, Intel HD 3000 or better (256MB of video RAM and shader model 3.0 or better)

    You have much better graphic card then those, i think he doesn't know what he is saying.

    ---------- Post added 2012-08-29 at 10:34 PM ----------

    I have Athlon x2 250, radeon 5770 and no offence but most of the time i was around 30-40 fps in sw tor and it has the same minimal system requirements as guild wars 2 so you kinda are wrong.

  3. #1083
    Legendary! Holo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    In the Shadows
    Posts
    6,288
    Minimal system requirements is something else than a wishful experience. Actually minimal system requirements is probebly going to run the game at 30fps on lowest @ everything.

    Saying he will get low-medium with shadows off isn't unreal at all, unless he doesn't care about a stable 60fps.

    Although shadows don't have nearly the impact in this game as they have on wow.

    i5-3570k @ 4.4GHz|8GB DDR3 1600MHz|EVGA GTX 670 FTW x2 SLI|Samsung 830 128GB SSD

  4. #1084
    Quote Originally Posted by Access View Post
    No you're not.

    Completely maxed includes supersampling
    Why thank you captain obvious!

    And yes. Yes I am. I havnt seen it dip under 46 fps.

  5. #1085
    Quote Originally Posted by Nikijih View Post
    Why thank you captain obvious!

    And yes. Yes I am. I havnt seen it dip under 46 fps.
    Awesome, your gtx560 outperforms my gtx580 quite a bit! Lucky you


  6. #1086
    I am Murloc! Xuvial's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    5,047
    He hasn't mentioned what resolution he's running the game at, which is probably the biggest factor in performance.

  7. #1087
    Quote Originally Posted by Access View Post
    Awesome, your gtx560 outperforms my gtx580 quite a bit! Lucky you

    Dang, thats messed up man. Altho i'll be 100% honest, I have no idea why, but its not the first time i've been told its overperforming. Frankly this is my first rig I built myself and a pal of mine who's a lowly techy helped me put it together (even tho I had to redo it all 3 days later when i noticed my MB was OC-locked for 2nd generation chips and I had to exchange it >.>), and he was also left scratching his head a little when we ran Heaven DX11 benchmarks.

    The system is:
    i5 2500k @ 4.2 Ghz
    Asus DCUII GTX 560 ti @ 833 Mhz
    Asus P8Z68-V/Gen3 MB
    8 Gb DDR3 Gskill ram (2x4)
    Got an overkill 800 watter PSU with that, an Evo 2012 aftermarket cooler and a shitty 6yo HDD i salvaged. Running Windows 7 (x64)

    He hasn't mentioned what resolution he's running the game at, which is probably the biggest factor in performance.
    And yes, there is that, completely forgot. Im running 1900x600
    Last edited by Nikijih; 2012-08-29 at 09:26 PM.

  8. #1088
    Quote Originally Posted by Seweryn View Post
    No offence but he has radeon 7750 that is good graphic card.
    God..So wrong..

    7750 is in the crapcards category, ment for HD movies, its just at the top of the crap cards along with 7770 and 550 ti and soon 650 Ti.

    Your 5770 as you mentioned is the equivalent of todays 7870, 3 years ago.

    There were 3 models 5870 5850 and 5770, 5830 came out after, they probably had left over 5850 chipsets that werent working well.

    5750 was their top crapcard back then.

    Nowdays we have 7970 7950 and 7870 and 7850, those are the gaming cards, everything after that is a crap card thats ment for movies and old games, of course they can run games, the technology evolved but they wont be able to run the new stuff in 1 year from now on new engines.

    To make you understand that ATI switched numbers.

    They had 9 for dual core cards, instead they changed that with the 6000 series and went the xx90 for dual cards instead of x9xx as it used to be.

    Thats why 6990 and 7990 thats incoming exist/will exist.

    Also while i am typing, 7850 shouldnt even exist, ATI is doing a smart thing by downclocking their 7870 and selling them as a different card on an almost similar price when it came out.

  9. #1089
    I find myself pretty uneducated when it comes to computer bits and pieces. This game instantly caught my attention and like all uneducated buyers, I bought it without having a good look at my computer to see if it could run it.

    I did however go to the "can you run it" website and I passed the minimum requirements test. The bar at the top that shows how good you can run it went all the way as far as it could to the right, to the "fast" zone.

    Well that's cool and all. But standing still, I get about 8-9 fps at absolute minimum settings (somewhere like the starting zone, not even in a huge pvp map). My computer isn't great, I'm very well aware of that, but as far as I'm aware the website I used is pretty reliable. If I've gotta upgrade, I've gotta upgrade, but I'd prefer not to if I don't have to and I really want to know what's up.

    CPU: Intel(R) Pentium(R) D CPU 2.80GHz
    CPU Speed: 2.8 GHz
    Ram: 3.3GB
    OS: Microsoft Windows XP Professional Service Pack 3 (build 2600)
    Video Card: GeForce 210
    -pixel shader version: 4.1
    -vertex shader version: 4.1
    -Dedicated video RAM: 1.4 GB
    40 GB of free disk space (game already completely downloaded)

    What I'm asking, I guess, is if those specs (sorry if they aren't even specs, computer challenged here!) are 'bad' enough to warrant my 8-9 fps at minimum settings. As always, layman's terms are appreciated! Thank you much!
    Last edited by lopk; 2012-08-29 at 09:52 PM.

  10. #1090
    ^ You're smoking something broham. The 7750 is comparable to a 5770. PROOF

    7870 absolutely destroys both and is comparable to a 6970 at worst and a GTX 580 at best (more proof). Not sure what that line was about. Please do your research before you call someone's hardware a "crap card."
    Last edited by WALSRU; 2012-08-29 at 10:02 PM.

  11. #1091
    OP the RAM you suggested has CAS latency of 9 that is TERRIBLE.

  12. #1092
    I am Murloc! Xuvial's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    5,047
    Quote Originally Posted by ThisWillNotStand View Post
    OP the RAM you suggested has CAS latency of 9 that is TERRIBLE.
    Find me proof of how much of a performance boost CL7 or CL8 RAM provides over CL9 RAM in gaming. I will change the builds in a heartbeat if you find any such proof.
    Last edited by Xuvial; 2012-08-29 at 10:23 PM.

  13. #1093
    Quote Originally Posted by ThisWillNotStand View Post
    OP the RAM you suggested has CAS latency of 9 that is AVERAGE.
    Fixed that for you

  14. #1094
    Quote Originally Posted by WALSRU View Post
    ^ You're smoking something broham. The 7750 is comparable to a 5770. PROOF

    7870 absolutely destroys both and is comparable to a 6970 at worst and a GTX 580 at best (more proof). Not sure what that line was about. Please do your research before you call someone's hardware a "crap card."
    Its 3 years in technology ..Dear god i cant call you anything cause i will get banned.

    Learn to follow the evolving of technology in our time and day, thanks.

    Of course the god damn 7750 is as strong as 5770 ITS BEEN 3 YEARS.

    There are 3 gaming cards that come out every year or so from both companies.

    For nvidia its simply x80 x70 x60 <letter or not> for ATI , in their last 2 series is x870 x950 x970 and x850 because they want more money.

    When 5770 came out IN 2009 it was what 660 Ti and 7870 is now, ignore that FPS you cant call you anything cause i will get banned because the technologies are night and day after 3 years.

    Is that so hard to understand?

    Anyone that calls any card below x80 x70 x60 and x970 950 870 and 850, good for gaming has no clue what they are talking about and need to stop posting.

    Of course crapcards like 7770 will play WoW and any other game that came out BEFORE THEIR TECHNOLOGY EXISTED, if you are buying a PC to play old games, be my guest, when i buy stuff along with what i tell everyone i know to buy, i make them as future proof as possible PC's i can, i dont put crapcards like 7770 and 7750 and x50 Ti's in them when they want to play games.

    Its like telling me 7770 will play BF4 in 2 years, right?
    Last edited by potis; 2012-08-29 at 10:43 PM.

  15. #1095
    Quote Originally Posted by potis View Post
    God..So wrong..

    7750 is in the crapcards category, ment for HD movies, its just at the top of the crap cards along with 7770 and 550 ti and soon 650 Ti.

    Your 5770 as you mentioned is the equivalent of todays 7870, 3 years ago.

    There were 3 models 5870 5850 and 5770, 5830 came out after, they probably had left over 5850 chipsets that werent working well.

    5750 was their top crapcard back then.

    Nowdays we have 7970 7950 and 7870 and 7850, those are the gaming cards, everything after that is a crap card thats ment for movies and old games, of course they can run games, the technology evolved but they wont be able to run the new stuff in 1 year from now on new engines.

    To make you understand that ATI switched numbers.

    They had 9 for dual core cards, instead they changed that with the 6000 series and went the xx90 for dual cards instead of x9xx as it used to be.

    Thats why 6990 and 7990 thats incoming exist/will exist.

    Also while i am typing, 7850 shouldnt even exist, ATI is doing a smart thing by downclocking their 7870 and selling them as a different card on an almost similar price when it came out.
    Still i can run game good enough for me, didn't any problem playing witcher II, skyrim with upgraded graphics etc. It is good for me, the thing i need to replace really is my cpu since it is total crap.

    But thanks for the insight, most appreaciated.

  16. #1096
    Quote Originally Posted by potis View Post
    Its 3 years in technology ..Dear god i cant call you anything cause i will get banned.

    Learn to follow the evolving of technology in our time and day, thanks.
    I'm well aware of the progression. The driving force is price, the $100-$200 market is not going to see huge leaps and bounds in performance but they'll still sell like hotcakes because they run most games well (console graphics but I digress) and are easy to justify.

    I've owned HD 3850, HD 5770, GTX 460, HD 6970, and GTX 670. Thanks.

  17. #1097
    I'm running:

    - AMD 1035T OC'd to 3.12 GHz
    - 16GB Ripjaws DDR3 @ 1600
    - Diamond 4890s in CF OC'd to 875/1000
    - WD 10K Velociraptor for OS & GW2
    - 1080p at 2ms

    I'm getting slaughtered. With everything maxed, I'm at 30 FPS in low pop, and about 15 FPS at high pop.

    I'm concerned why I'm not running at a 40/60 FPS range. This machine crushed Crysis and Crysis 2 maxed at 1080p. I know GW2 hasn't been optimized yet, but come on! I guess it doesn't help that AMD legacy'd my 4890s with driver 12.6 when they released an optimized driver package for GW2 with 12.7.

    Does anyone have any ideas? Short of selling this build and moving to Intel/nVidia, I feel like I've done just about everything.

  18. #1098
    Hi guys wondering how you guys think this setup will perform at 1920x1080

    i52500k at 4.5GHz
    4870x2
    16gb ddr3 1333mhz

  19. #1099
    I am Murloc! Xuvial's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    5,047
    No idea because HD4870 is an old-generation GPU. Also you're running crossfire, which makes things even more unpredictable.

  20. #1100
    That's what I was thinking really, I will probably get it and see how it runs. Looking at some screenshots I definitely want to run this on max at 1920x1080 so will upgrade if needed, will be a choice between a 7870 and 660ti, either way I'll be overclocking it. Anyone using either of this two cards at this resolution?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •