|
Re: Can you play NWN2?
Posted: 29 Oct 2006 03:48 PM |
| Wheres the site to test the requirements? |
Why search around when the answer is within you...?
|
|
  |
|
|
SR test
Posted: 29 Oct 2006 04:03 PM |
This is the site to run the test
www.systemrequirementslab.com/referrer/srtest |
Why search around when the answer is within you...?
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Can you play NWN2?
Posted: 30 Oct 2006 01:31 PM |
Blast it all to Abaddon: My laptop has a ATI Radeon 320 IGP... not happening for me, and I'm not quite in the market for a new system yet --until I take care of a couple other things, first-- MAN, I'm BUMMED! I've tried booting the Toolkit MANY times, and it only crashes every time.
I upped my Ram to 1024Mb, but my processor: well, wtf is an AMD Athlon (tm) XP2500 + and how many Gig does it offer? General Sys Info tells me I have 1.86Ghz and 960MB ram... If I'm LUCKY maybe the game itself might boot and play.
(I even got the Limited special edition pre-release pack that you can't even buy any more.)
I hope they make a patch for my vid-card... MAN, I don't want to have to buy a new system just for a game.
LESSON: If you like gaming DON'T buy a laptop.
K.I. |
"Life is a short trip... travel light"
--
PC Descriptions with Journal Links |
|
|
|
|
Re: SR test
Posted: 30 Oct 2006 01:54 PM |
| Well I'm impressed. According to the test site I might be able to play on a six year old computer I built myself. If not though.. its been due a few upgrades for awhile now. |
|
|
|
|
|
Re: SR test
Posted: 30 Oct 2006 05:36 PM |
alright, that system requirements test thing was all but useless.
Only good thing about it is it has the specs listed, but you can get those elsewhere. But having the thing test your system, doesn't seem to do anything. It said it was downloading and running it, and then came up with:
Minimum: yada yada yada
You have: undefined
FOR EVERY STINKIN THING!
Boy do I feel stupid for thinking that would actually work ...now I probably have a trojan or virus, or who knows what. *smirks*
But now I have a question for whoever might know the answer.
The minimum CPU speed, and recommended CPU speed for NWN2 is 2 and 3 GHz respectively... but it seems that half of the CPU's out there these days are named with some number that hasn't a #@$% thing to do with it's clock speed.
And looking at Intel's website doesn't help a bit either... they have that Core2 Duo, and talk about benchmark tests against their old P4 with HT, the Core2 performs almost twice as ...well, I'd say fast, but since this is not based on clock speed, that is kind of pointless, so... twice as good? (outperforms it by like 90%? )
So yeah... WTF? if I were to buy a Core2 Duo CPU, running at 2 GHz, how well would it run NWN2? who the hell can I even ask that question to? someone who specificaly has a P4 single-core computer running at 2 GHz, AND a Core2 dual-core computer running at 2 GHz, AND has NWN2 installed and can test it....
Maybe because it performs so much better, it would run the game better than a P4 3 GHz computer... but how the hell are we supposed to know unless someone out there specifically runs a comparison test?
Why do hardware manufacturers have to come up with the stupidest naming conventions ever?
...or at least come up with a standardized performance benchmark and label ALL of your @#%$##$ products with that so we know how to compare them. |
"I'm not closed-minded, you're just WRONG." - Bucky Katt
My characters n portraits |
|
|
|
|
Re: SR test
Posted: 30 Oct 2006 05:43 PM |
| Holy cow, BKatt. That is by far the best rant I've ever read. Well done! |
|
|
|
|
|
Re: SR test
Posted: 30 Oct 2006 06:30 PM |
| Bkatt, if they did that, then you'd know that someone elses product is better than that one, and not buy it, as inevitably happens when newer chips come out :o |
|
|
|
|
|
Re: SR test
Posted: 30 Oct 2006 06:44 PM |
I meet all of the recommended requirements +. You can bet yer money I'll be in NWN (Vives) 2.
I've still got atleast one more month before campaign season ends for me however. I am still alive :). |
|
|
|
|
|
Re: SR test
Posted: 30 Oct 2006 06:52 PM |
I fall below recommended...but above minimum...likely can play but not at high res nor color depth...if vives 2 is up I'd likely buy the game and play.
Yggz |
|
|
|
|
|
Re: SR test
Posted: 30 Oct 2006 08:02 PM |
| Just did the test. I'm good. I could upgrade my video card to have recommended status, but the rest is all up to specs. |
T'mok Gurzi
Resident Gnoll Warlord
patron for the noble yet drink addled
Timik Gorozai the Mistake |
|
|
|
|
Re: SR test
Posted: 30 Oct 2006 11:51 PM |
Holy cow, BKatt. That is by far the best rant I've ever read. Well done!
*in his best Buzz Lightyear voice* you're... mocking me, aren't you.
heh... but seriously... um... thanks, I think..
if that indeed was a sincere statement, and not dripping with sarcasm or something.
*chuckles*
In any case, I sent an email to my freind who works at Intel to ask him his opinion on what CPU to get. I probably could have done that -before- going off on that rant... but, you know... whatever. There's something theraputic about a nice rant.
Now, granted, his opinion is a bit biased, but he has at least admitted in the past that AMD has been kicking Intel's a$ all over the place for a while now... and last time I talked to him, he was very much excited about the Conroe CPU (or, the Core 2). And he's one of those engineer types... and a manager in the mobile chipset validation lab here in Folsom... so he usually knows what he's talking about when it comes to the processors. (as opposed to marketing, or some other bussiness related position or something.)
I'll be sure to pass on his insights when he replies.
...and wow, was that a hijack, or what? |
"I'm not closed-minded, you're just WRONG." - Bucky Katt
My characters n portraits |
|
|
|
|
Re: SR test
Posted: 31 Oct 2006 02:49 AM |
Wow, how I can understand your rant.
Rest assured, if you buy a core duo, you'll have a decent CPU to run the game, better than any other processor in the same price range (and a comparable AMD CPU costs more than twice as much). That's what I've seen from benchmaks.
Anyway, I'm a Mac user and out of gold. First I thought I'd just ignore NWN2 and stick with NWN1 until there's noone left to play with. A new Mac that can run NWN2 is way out of range, as is a comparable PC system.
But now I figured I have at least some spare parts lying around that would make it easier to build one of the cheapest gaming PCs capable of running the game. Problem is, I have no idea how good it will run, or if it will be such a pain that I should better forget about it at all and wait another year until I can afford something decent.
Here's what i can buy for about 250 gold (to be more specific, Euros or $, no big difference), maybe someone can take a look at it and say something, because I'm clueless if I'm on the right way.
- Cheap mainboard with PCIe and AM2 CPU connector, about 55$/€
- cheapest Athlon still available at my local store, that'll be a X64 3000+ for 75$/€
- one 512 MB memory stick (got another one lying around here) 55$
- noname case with 400W PSU for 25$
- cheap graphix card in the GeForce 7300GS or GT range, maybe another 55$
I still have a 160GB hard drive and optical drives lying around, so that's it.
What do you guys think, is it even worth the effort? I have never built a PC before, but I thought that might be an upgradeable system, so once I have more gold I can pop in a better CPU and graphics card. But for the moment that's all I can afford. Any thoughts? |
|
|
|
|
|
Re: SR test
Posted: 31 Oct 2006 06:24 AM |
Stick with the one stick of memory you have and get a better vid card now...upgrade the memory later...just my opinion. Ant that should work fine. Often you can find barebones kits with about everything included but the HDD and vid card. Just make sure it has the slot you want. ie PCI-E
Yggz |
|
|
|
|
|
Re: SR test
Posted: 31 Oct 2006 08:00 AM |
Generalizations here
1/ Most P4 systems need 2 sticks of memory for fastest performance
2/ The high end AMD cpus are faster than the high end Intel cpus and are less expensive.
3/ a 3GHz P4 cpu is faster than a dual core 2 GHz P4 based CPU. NWN and NWN2 are *not* multithreaded and cannot take proper advantage of your second cpu properly. Windows, however, might become a bit more responsive on a dual core cpu system
4/ These days, having enough memory is more important than having a marginally slightly faster (and much more expensive) cpu.
- Paul |
Purpose in life: finding better ways of allowing players to kill themselves. Repeatedly.
--
"...Cause he mixes it with love
And makes the world taste good."
--
<@James42> Lawful good isn't in your vocabulary, it's on your menu.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: SR test
Posted: 31 Oct 2006 04:05 PM |
Generalizations here
1/ Most P4 systems need 2 sticks of memory for fastest performance
2/ The high end AMD cpus are faster than the high end Intel cpus and are less expensive.
apparently not anymore
3/ a 3GHz P4 cpu is faster than a dual core 2 GHz P4 based CPU. NWN and NWN2 are *not* multithreaded and cannot take proper advantage of your second cpu properly. Windows, however, might become a bit more responsive on a dual core cpu system
4/ These days, having enough memory is more important than having a marginally slightly faster (and much more expensive) cpu.
- Paul
I don't think thats the case anymore. Looking around at sites like TomsHardware and others, it looks like the Core2 Intel CPU's are lightyears ahead of AMD now.
And I haven't read anything about the dual core architecture not being utilized by any programs or whatnot... in fact I only recall comming across one refferance to dual core not being the same as HyperThreading... but now I can't find that.
My freind at Intel wrote back, and in typical lazy fasion (he's really not lazy, but he definatly has this infuriating habbit of not entirely answering my questions) he pointed me to Tomshardware.com, and said they have all sorts of performance test results up.
the one actual answer he gave though was this: "I would think though that if you are spending money, and you want it to last a while - you would not even want to consider a P4 at this point. Unless you could get a screaming deal. Even the lowest Core2 will probably out perform the best P4 (maybe not Extreme Editions)"
I think it's very much like Tasra said.. they just have it ingrained in their head, not to make the comparison with rival products clear to understand, because they are afraid that you will like the competition better and go buy that.
But, from what he DID tell me, and from seeing the results on-line, it would be silly to buy any Intel CPU but the new Core2.
And from what research I did on the web, the Core2 vastly outperforms any AMD CPU, so it would be silly to get an AMD over a Core2.
Plus the Core2's are much much cheaper to make, and they have actually priced them accordingly. (though, demand might have pushed the prices up a bit now)
[edit] Keep in mind of course, if you are buying a new CPU - probably means a new motherboard, heat sink, memory, maybe new Power Supply, etc etc etc...
In my case, I was already planning on upgrading all that..
As for programs not being able to make use of the dual core, I'll have to do more research on that... but I had the impression that it was completely different from HyperThreading and isn't an issue. (perhaps I'll write back to my freind and ask him about -that-)
Also... I read a few articles that said that more memory was hitting a bottleneck with the CPU's out... up untill AMD's 64 bit, and these Core2 Intel CPU's hit the scene (but don't quote me on that) ...yada yada yada... more memory had hit a wall where it wasn't being used efficiently because the CPU wasn't fast enough (or efficient enough.. or something)
but recent CPU's have fixed that problem... so depending on what CPU you have.. more memory is only better up to a point. Though.. I think that point is over the 2 Gig mark, and how many of us have that much already? I know I don't.
So... I'm not going to claim I am the hardware answer man... hell, I just find out enough info to be dangerous most of the time, but that's what I have been digging up.
I'll keep reading and digging for a bit, but at this point, I'm leaning toward getting a middle of the road Core2 (2.13 GHz, which is supposed to run better than the best pentium or AMD), 2 Gig of RAM, and some sort of "no longer the leading edge" PCIE video card.
We'll see if I stick with that after more research. |
"I'm not closed-minded, you're just WRONG." - Bucky Katt
My characters n portraits |
|
|
|
|
Re: SR test
Posted: 31 Oct 2006 04:36 PM |
Not only can I play NWN 2, I currently own it.
Downloaded from Direct 2 Drive, so lets get Vives 2 up and running :). |
|
|
|
|
|
Re: SR test
Posted: 31 Oct 2006 06:31 PM |
Tomshardware.com is a good site....so is anandtech.com....
Frankly I thought the video card a 7300 iirc barely passable and thought the extra money spent on a video card would be better...didn't know about the 2 sticks of memory issue. I believe I recall the GeForce 7950 running around 120 US and thought the money would be better spent there.
I have an AMD Barton 2800 in this rig and 512 MB of memory NForce 2 chipset. It will run NWN2 but is not up to recommended specs. And yes it is aged...and due to be upgraded...but then again it does everygthing I want so....I won't upgrade until it won't
I have consistently saved big money by being able to wait for last years technology to be outdated and buying it when the "new" latest whiz-bang cpu and hardware have outmoded it. Especially after Christmas. ;-)
As for hyperthreading and the dual core .....I believe Paul on that one. As I understand it an application needs to be able to take advantage of hyperthreading to take full advantage of dual cores.
Yggz |
|
|
|
|
|
Re: SR test
Posted: 31 Oct 2006 06:56 PM |
| Actually that was the GeForce 7600GS with 256 MB of memory the GT supports higher clock speeds at about 20 bucks more. |
|
|
|
|
|
Re: SR test
Posted: 31 Oct 2006 07:01 PM |
Dual core processors will not improve the running of NWN 2, but they will improve your overall performance.
Windows XP for example can route itself and all other applications through the other core therefore freeing up all of one core's resources for the game. Windows XP and OS X are both said to be capable of handling dual core processors. |
Famous last words:
Mykal> it's my new wireless router.
* > Mykal has quit (Ping timeout)
Vulpina> Hey!! IRC didn't boot m.....
* > Vulpina has quit (Exit: DarkMyst WebChat) |
|
|
|
|
Re: SR test
Posted: 31 Oct 2006 07:27 PM |
I think I can live without a dual core processor as long as the single core will run the game fine.
This system will *only* run NWN2, my main computer for everything else will remain the trusty G4 Mac I'm using and that does all the other work fine, and once I can afford one I'll get a new Mac anyway (in 2 years?).
So on the PC there will be almost nothing running in the backround, even antivirus software might not be necessary since I'll only have an active internet connection for NWN online gaming.
As for the graphics card, I just found out that I can get a 7600GS for 10 gold more, so I'll probably go with that one. |
|
|
|
|
|
Re: SR test
Posted: 01 Nov 2006 01:53 AM |
alright, I asked him if dual core was the same as hyper threading.
His answer:
Sort of, and not really
Hyper-threading basically utilized un-used parts of the processor – moving things around to more efficiently use the processor. Made Windows think there were 2 procs there when there really wasn’t. Dual Core is actually 2 physical processors in the same package.
It is true that most apps don’t take advantage of this (at least right now). Most Adobe apps do – like photoshop, etc.. I’m not sure if any games do at this point. But the other advantage is that 2 separate apps running at the same time would be split between cores and could see improvement – for instance lets say you like to rip DVDs while playing Counter Strike – each one could run on its own core and there wouldn’t be any slow down.. or even just background windows tasks while doing something else.
Bottom line is both hyperthreading and dual core give a performance boost when more than 1 thing is happening at any one time – HT gives ~20%, DC can give ~80%
Buy Dual Core – you’ll need it later
So... that's straight from an Intel chipset validation engineer.
You're right, not a whole lot to take advantage of it fully yet.. but there will probably still be -some- increase, even if only running one game/program.. (just because the game can run seperate from the OS and any background stuff) But eventualy there will be more programs to make use of it. So, if not in need of an upgrade right now, still best to wait. (but thats the way I always look at it.. never upgrade till I'm pretty much forced into it)
...If I was somewhere in the middle of the system specs for NWN2, I would not be upgrading. Or even if my Video card was capable of running it, and the rest was as it is... just barely up to minimum... I would wait, but I -have- to upgrade the vid card, and everything else is on its last leg, so to speak, so I figgure I might as well put it out of its misery now.
Plus, I almost never JUST run NWN.. I play in windowed mode and have IRC, messengers, and a browser open while I play.. at the least.
And it looks like I can get away with it for around $600. I thought sure that I'd be pushing 1K
[Edit] of course, I still will likely wait untill Vives 2 is about ready to launch.. that, and the fact that Intel is supposed to be launching there quad core processors in November, means I can probably get what I want even cheaper |
"I'm not closed-minded, you're just WRONG." - Bucky Katt
My characters n portraits |
|
|
|
|
Re: SR test
Posted: 01 Nov 2006 03:11 AM |
The problem with hyperthreading and the intel dual core architecture is that it actually has an adverse impact on system performance.
With hyperthreading turned on, it actually reduces performance slightly because of the overhead involved in managing the threads of execution for threaded applications (like a database server for example) and because the chip cache gets thrashed with every switch between threads.
Turning off hyperthreading on my servers has increased performance for my particular applications (highly threaded java servlets) by about 10 to 20% on my xeon servers.
Hyperthreaded applications can make windows appear more "responsive" though which gives the subjective feeling for interactive applications of being faster.
With the intel dual core architecture, both CPUs are limited by what is called a "front side bus". This is the "doorway" into which data is fed into the cpu. The front side bus is naturally slower than what the cpu can actually handle, hence the need for on cpu caches. In a single processor system, it is a bottle neck. In a dual core system, each cpu when active would only get half of the front side bus bandwidth thus acting as a an additional bottleneck to a "doorway" that is already a bottleneck.
Dual processor systems (as opposed to dual core) have two buses and thus are less limited.
amd dual core systems do not share a bus like the intel dual core systems do.
Finally, another data point: My dual processor 1.6 GHz AMD servers outperform my 2.8 GHZ dual processor Xeon servers by at least 2 to 1 when running an identical workload. (highly threaded java servlets). The difference is staggering.
- Paul |
Purpose in life: finding better ways of allowing players to kill themselves. Repeatedly.
--
"...Cause he mixes it with love
And makes the world taste good."
--
<@James42> Lawful good isn't in your vocabulary, it's on your menu.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Can you play NWN2?
Posted: 01 Nov 2006 09:53 AM |
I doubt I will be able to play NWN 2. I meet the minimum specs except that my 128mb GeForce Video Card is not on the list :(
That's ok, because I just recently re-installed NWN on a "newer" PC and I can finally play with all the extras turned on (Yea!) and I'm back on Vives!
Who needs NWN 2. Maybe I'll buy in in a couple years after everyone has had a chance to create some great content for it. |
-Kalos
"When in doubt, tell the truth. It will amaze most people, delight your friends, and confuse your enemies" -Mark Twain
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Re: Can you play NWN2?
Posted: 02 Nov 2006 08:54 PM |
Ok ...I've seen d'loads for 49.99 US but I'd rather have a boxed set with manuals... Have not seen a boxed game anywhere... any help? Tried the local Game Stop and Wally world... Likely I need to shop where I work ... instead of where I live.
Really don't know if I should even spend the money on it since I no longer enjoy single player at all... Though I suppose we could arrange some Internet multiplayer games. I'm on cable modem and could host. Should be fast enough though my hardware might not be the best choice. |
|
|
|
|