|
Celeron D -builds and opinions-
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
25. April 2006 @ 13:41 |
Link to this message
|
|
Well even 768MB wouldhave been better that 512MB... I mean come on people!!! It recommends 1GB for Oblivion on PC!!! If it can work like that on 360 I should be scoring about 50FPS solid even with my weak rig. I hate it when they can optimize a game for consoles and then make it run like crap on a computer with similar specs >:(
It just kind of ticked me off when they released Half Life 2 on Xbox and it runs ok and then it barely manages TWO frames per second on my computer... ok, so it was about 40-45 with my 5700LE but still. They got FarCry to run well on a GeForce 3 Ti200 but it probably wouldn't run at all on a real computer. I sometimes feel cheated:( *sigh*
*sorry I'm just ranting now*
But I've got friends that have 128MB of RAM on their Xboxes and they run games much better than mine. The game industry is sort of messed up but if they can make the game work I'll try it:)
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388 |
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
25. April 2006 @ 13:59 |
Link to this message
|
|
You're forgetting one important factor - windows.
Windows not only uses lots of memory on its own, but also runs slower than games running through console firmware. I wouldn't feel cheated, you can play those games at high resolution, they can't, regardless of what happens.
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
25. April 2006 @ 20:28 |
Link to this message
|
|
True, very true. I suppose that makes sense. But I wonder why they don't optimize the games for PC like they do on consoles? I'm not talking like a 20FPS increase or anything but how about a 20FPS lowest frame limit? I mean look at the video hardware for the Xbox. It's a GeForce3Ti200 hybrid.
I'm pretty sure though that the source engine has this "framerate safety net". I had Half-life 2 running at a constant 19.9FPS on Extreme Graphics 2 with a Northwood Celeron 2.4GHz and 768MB RAM. Everything was as low as it could go but it was holding steady for the very first part of the first level. When combat started any chance of a playable experience died horribly. Pretty good looking, even on low \:D/
I'm also sure that Starwars Battlefront had this too because with highest details possible in 800x600 it was playable on the Extreme Graphics 2. This is all after my FX5700LE PCI died though. Otherwise I would never have bought those games.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
26. April 2006 @ 02:19 |
Link to this message
|
|
Ugh, Intel extreme graphics. That name sends shivers down my spine.
|
Senior Member
|
26. April 2006 @ 10:55 |
Link to this message
|
|
@Estuansis
Thank you for your question about pc optimizing. I actually like explaining this, because it creates an understanding that can really spread. It's nice.
Okay; there are very valid reasons for console versions being more optimized.
---Consoles have such limited hardware, that it is absolutely necessary for even subpar performance. If they didn't no one would play these at all.
---Console hardware vs. PC hardware:
Consoles have lower grade hardware than PCs usually. Consoles do, however have a consistent set of almost EXACT hardware, which always has the same architecture, down to a tee. PCs have overall software flow that is always the same, but many factors affect the way a system performs in different situations. There are too many pieces of hardware to individually program into this kind of depth for PCs. Consoles only need one set of instructions. It would take many months, sometimes even years to start this kind of optimizing for all the major hardware out there. They analyze, and understand the pipeline priorities, the exact speed rating of the internal memory, the exact speed and transfer rates of the cd and hard drive; and can account for all of these numbers to flow perfectly while counterbalancing eachother in what is most certainly a most advanced ballet of perfectly managed performance.
And again, windows=system hog.
Does my rambling make sense?
"Its not stupid, its advanced!" - The Almighty Tallest, Invader Zim |
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
26. April 2006 @ 11:33 |
Link to this message
|
|
Absolutely, and I agree 100%. You can do the same on a console as a windows PC with just half the hardware.
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
26. April 2006 @ 14:59 |
Link to this message
|
|
In other words, they can optimize for the consoles because they all use the same proprietary hardware and software? They can't optimize for computer beacuse there are too many components out there to make optimization a feasible idea?
I think I get it...
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
27. April 2006 @ 03:34 |
Link to this message
|
|
That and the fact that Windows is a resource hog!
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
27. April 2006 @ 07:02 |
Link to this message
|
|
I caught that... hmm. I guess I'm glad that I'm running dual boots of Windows and Red Hat. Red Hat does speed up my gaming a little... on the games that work with it.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
27. April 2006 @ 08:16 |
Link to this message
|
|
I'd be surprised if it didn't!
|
Senior Member
|
27. April 2006 @ 09:41 |
Link to this message
|
|
360 having 512 shared and PS3 having 256 system + 256 video.
Either way; it's a win, more ram would be even better on both; but it'll work very well, since there's no big OS stealing resources like Windows.
I wonder if a linux port of Oblivion would run much better. I have a huge issue with that one.
@Estuansis
I'm glad to have helped there. That question comes up a LOT; and it frustrated me until I finally understood why it was like that. It makes a lot of sense in hindsight though, with the explanation.
"Its not stupid, its advanced!" - The Almighty Tallest, Invader Zim This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 27. April 2006 @ 09:48
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
27. April 2006 @ 09:45 |
Link to this message
|
|
Absolutely. I bet you can do an awful lot with 512MB unstolen memory!
In fact, theoretically, you could set up two of the 3.2Ghz cores just for paging!
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
27. April 2006 @ 18:33 |
Link to this message
|
|
Seriously, The total size of the largest games is about 4-5GB. A small part of that world isn't going to take up an eighth of the whole friggin' disk! Half a gig of RAM should theoretically be enough for just about anything except for heavy 3D and Photo work.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
28. April 2006 @ 11:15 |
Link to this message
|
|
Hmmm, true though that would be, You easily see games using more than 512MB on windows, so it is feasible, especially when we're running 1080p.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
28. April 2006 @ 13:35 |
Link to this message
|
|
Hmm, I usually just play on 1024x768 with just about everything. I like the speed versus graphical clarity. I'm definitely not just a casual gamer but I am also not a perfection psycho.
If I need it cleared up I'll turn on my AA and AF a little. That usually gets the job done without putting as big a damper on my performance.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 28. April 2006 @ 13:37
|
