makrel

Free Play Account
  • Content count

    265
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Green Tag

About makrel

  • Rank
    Junior Member
  • Birthday
  1. I would for sure not go for that CPU and Motherboard - go for a Sandy Bridge CPU instead if you want to use the rig for gaming. I have a i3-2100 (only two cores so not very good if you use the PC for a lot of multi threaded apllications) but it beats the old i5 and i7 in gaming benchmarks. I would recommend a P67 chipset and a i5-2500K CPU - if you are on a budget (like me) you can go for the P67 chipset and buy an i3-2100 and then later upgrade to the i5-2500K CPU.
  2. My friend - I am not pulling this out of my a$$... Check the recommendations on Toms hardware: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gaming-cpu-intel-core-i7-amd-phenom-ii,2926-3.html These people pretty much write the scripture when it comes to gaming. For the price: The Core i3 is very good for gaming.
  3. I expect you already have a P67 or H67 motherboard ordered (or you are going to add that) since the CPU requires that. I have the Core i3-2100 CPU - given the price it is absolutely stellar! With my old 9600 GT GPU I was able to run at 30 fps in heavy fights with high player visibility settings. It is a really processer for this game - no doubt about that. I think it will easily outperform the phenom in the build you also mentioned - at stock speeds. Can´t say for overclocked setup though (you can not overclock the Core i3).
  4. To be honest - you will never get as much bang for your buck with a pre-built system as one you build yourself. Also - as an additional side effect - a system you build yourself is much easier to upgrade (since you know the components) than one you get pre-built. With regards to choosing CPU - check Toms Hardwares latest article: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gaming-cpu-intel-core-i7-amd-phenom-ii,2926.html I have a an Intel Core i3-2100 myself - that is really good value for money: - Very good for gaming at a low price even though it does not overclock - Upgrade path to i5-2400 or i5-2500K later when you get the money
  5. Had an old single core AMD Athlon FX-57@2,9 GHz that was waaaaay overdue for an upgrade. So I bought a P67 motherboard, some new Ram and a Sandy Bridge core i3-2100 CPU. Man - what a difference..... With same old GPU (9600 GT) i used to run 10 FPS in modest fighting in towns. Now it never drops below 30 and mostly is in 40-50 range. Best money ever spent
  6. Seriously - reconsider this processor. BGE has always - and probably will always - require a CPU with high performance. That processor has some very old (and outdated) architecture. For inspiration - check Tomshardwares latest guide on CPU´s http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gaming-cpu-core-i3-2100-recommended-processor,2895.html Personally - I have just bought a P67 motherboard with an core i3-2100 CPU. That is really good gaming performance with stock speeds - and when the day comes where I need a new CPU upgrade the board will take an core i5-2600K.
  7. Sticky thread deserves a sticky
  8. This is an integrated GPU (if I read correctly) which is not supported by the game anymore. Your specs look fine other than that - so buy a new video card and slot it in.
  9. Impossible to say without seeing you specs... You can get 100 FPS with a low end video card and a sub-standard CPU and low memory if you go out in the middel of nowhere and play with best performance and a resolution of 640 x 480. The fact that the scenes render tells you absolutely nothing about the gaming experince in general (and will not tell you anything about if your video card is up to spec).
  10. Hi all, Just wanted to post my own observations with FPS in 1.31 Beta for the old timers that might be trying the game out again who has older HW like myself. Please note: These recommendations are in now way endorsed by CRS - they are only what I have experienced. If you have your own experiences on this - please feel free to add. My rig for the record: CPU: Single core 2,9 GHz Athlon FX-57 GPU: Nvidia 9600 GT 512 MB Ram: 2 GB SDRAM OS: Windows XP 32 bit I run at 1280 x 968 with 4xAA and in-game settings on balanced (normal maps on). I get between 30 - 40 FPS in moderate fights and 15 - 25 in heavy fighting. My observations below: CPU: Even though you have a single core CPU you can still get decent framerates. The game only uses 1 cores so the goal is to get as high a cyclerate (GHz) as you can on your cpu and to have as few processes running as possible. Kill all other applications running in the background (bittorrent, backup, Itunes, etc) and use a low impact antivirus (I use Avast) or none at all (on your own risk!). Also - there are several good guides to optimizing your OS out there: http://www.firingsquad.com/guides/windows_xp_opt/ GPU: Make sure you have a GPU with at least 512 MB Ram. Most older rigs can often get GPU that are a few generations old if you do not have 512 MB Ram and try to get as high a fillrate as possible. In my own case the 9600 GT was a good trade off between price (did not want to spend a lot of money on upgrading GPU on this old rig) and fillrate. You might be in a situation (if your rig is really old) that your motherboard can only run with AGP cards - that can really hamper performance. In that case you might be better off with a total upgrade instead. Ram: Right now the game uses approx. 1 GB ram. That means that you can run it pretty well on 2 GB ram like I do - but you need to make sure that you run with as low a ram footprint from windows as possible. That usually means running windows XP. Remember that if you run 32 bit max ram availability is 3 GB. Also - use a program like Cacheman to optimize your ram utilization: http://www.outertech.com/index.php?_charisma_page=index I hope this helps some of you out there!
  11. Wow - that sounds insane. I have a single core 3000+ and rarely get below 10. Lowest I have seen is 5 for very brief moments. Sure you are not RAM restrained? Try using Cahceman to see how much free Ram you have available while running the game.
  12. Thank you very much for taking your time to respond. Your input is very much appriciated.
  13. Thanks for all the good input guys - still not convinced that dual-core will win out on single core but maybe I can test this in some way when 1.31 comes out. Please also remember that the prices listed are used prices - pricing on new components in Europe are way higher than what you see in the US. A new quad core CPU is easily 250 $ here.
  14. I don´t quite get this... When running the game windows isn´t really doing anything (any applications under windows that is). Off course the hardware layer is communicating with wwiionline application - but that won´t be on another core - will it? Mind you - I am talking about the specific situation where only wwiionline is running. I run no other background applications. I still can´t see what wwiionline would do with the other core - unless off course it was redone to do that which I presume is a major operation.
  15. So - in anticipation for change comming in 1.31 I am looking at an upgrade path. Upgrade to the video card awaits the System Requirements article. I have a pretty old system but a full system wide upgrade is just not possible at the moment. So I am looking a what I can do with the system - more specifically the CPU. My specs are as follows: CPU: AMD Athlon 64 3000+ Video: Nvidia Geforce 7600 GT Ram: 2 GB PC2700 SDRAM MB: Asus A8N-E socket 939 The problem is of course my Mother Board - although it supports PCI-E (and thus can support a good video card upgrade) the socket 939 is pretty much dead. So - I am looking at maximizing the CPU side with a used processer. The mother board can support a AMD X2 Dual-core processer up to 4800+ - but they are priced around 200 $. A single core 4000+ is 50-60 $ on the other hand. The question is: Will I really benefit from a dual core CPU running at the same clock speed as a single core in this game? Mind you - the PC is ONLY used for this game. So added benefits from the dual core really does not matter.