7 replies to this topic

[Shining Light]

Hi folks.

In general, I have a pretty high-end machine, but I'm concerned that the game doesn't seem to move as fast as it should, which I think is due to the graphics card I'm using.
When I say the game isn't moving fast, I mean the action of the characters, whether it's running from A to B or in combat, they're slow and a bit juddery. In the lowest possible graphics/texture detail, the game runs ok, but I'd like more than just ok and to fully appreciate the game
I'm using my pc's default Intel G45/43 express Chipset, which is sort of ok, but I'm looking to improve on that.
I have 4GB RAM plus another 4GB by virtue or Readyboost, the processors are powerful enough, so I'm thinking it's the graphics card.

Opinions and suggestions for an improved card (for a W7 6x bit) please? I'm considering this one and it's stretching my budget to max, but it could be worth it.

Edited by Shining Light, 25 August 2010 - 12:38 PM.

[Archmage Silver]

What do I think? That's OVERKILL for DA! Just look at the recommended specs (not the minimum specs). And before I say anything else, DA is first and foremost a CPU heavy game. There's commonly 100% CPU utilization even on Dual Cores, Quad Cores being the most effective choice.

Recommended Specifications
CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad 2.4Ghz Processor or equivalent
RAM: 4 GB (Vista) or 2 GB (XP)
Video: ATI 3850 512 MB or greater / NVIDIA 8800GTS 512 MB or greater

Unless you run DA on extremely high resolution with everything maxed, DO NOT pay that much for a GPU. Now, if you play games like Crysis on full settings regularly, then it's another story altogether... but under no circumstances do you need that GPU for the RPGs on the market today, unless you really like to run them on full settings using some resolution my monitor doesn't even support.

You can easily buy something dirt cheap (in comparison) from the 4000 series, and do better than fine in DA. Just make sure you're getting a 512 or 1024 MB card, and it becomes a non-issue for DA. At the end of the day, it's not a very graphics intensive game.

[Jarno Mikkola]

Unless you run DA on extremely high resolution with everything maxed, DO NOT pay that much for a GPU.

But there's the fact that Shining Light might not like to buy another GPU in the comiing year for the next "Great RPG" that... well, sucks. The "Recomended" are that of the minimum recomended once and usually when you buy a GPU as a separate component, you usually wish to have more than the minimal 640x480 resolutions, in a monitor that for example can do 1920x1200. My Ati Radion HD4890 does really nicely on Dragon Age, Mass Effects etc. so I would suggest the 48xx as minimal.

[Archmage Silver]

Unless you run DA on extremely high resolution with everything maxed, DO NOT pay that much for a GPU.

But there's the fact that Shining Light might not like to buy another GPU in the comiing year for the next "Great RPG" that... well, sucks. The "Recomended" are that of the minimum recomended once and usually when you buy a GPU as a separate component, you usually wish to have more than the minimal 640x480 resolutions, in a monitor that for example can do 1920x1200. My Ati Radion HD4890 does really nicely on Dragon Age, Mass Effects etc. so I would suggest the 48xx as minimal.

Ah, but I've answered the actual question, you're making your own assumptions about next year. And no, the DA minimum specs aren't the same as the DA recommended specs, check the wiki. And your estimate of the 4800 series being the minimum choice is based on...? Unless you can provide me with a 4xxx series peformance chart for DA, I remain skeptical of the 48xx series being the only viable option for high performance. Of course, our banter is a bit meaningless without knowing what settings/resolution Shining Light actually plans on using.

[Darziak]

You can always have a run through with the System Requirements Lab.

[Shining Light]

Well, my monitor is able to support up to the 1900x1200, which probably is maxing it out a little bit, but I'd like something that's close to 1900x1080, with the graphic settings pretty high.
The card's also for future use, if any game I get in the future happens to rquire something relatively powerful, I'd like something able to support it.

As for the processors, I have quad cores 2.5 GHz so that seems to be fine. I think.

Darziak - I'll take a look, thanks

Thanks for the help, guys

[Archmage Silver]

No problem, let us know how it turns out performance-wise.

[Shining Light]

Ok, apparently the graphics card requires a higher wattage from the pc's power supply than is currently supplied. That's on hold until I've procured a more powerful one.