Upgrading your PC? pah!

father_jack

Have to laugh at those nerds who upgrade their PC's all the time, just been playing Fall Out 3 Las Vegas. On Ultra settings, except for disabling AA. 1920x1200. And it's great, with only rare slow down. AMD 4400 X2, 2GB RAM, 8800GT 512MB. So hardly top end, and pretty old machine.

Will Snow

i have to laugh at those roadies who upgrade their bikes all the time, despite the fact they are all fat shoots who just need to pedal faster and carbon fibre codpieces wont actually make them go any faster

Anonymous

I have to laugh at MTBers who are so insecure in themselves they feel the need to insult roadies (a lot of whom also ride mountain bikes) on the most irrelevant threads...

PhilofCas

Will Snow wrote:

i have to laugh at those roadies who upgrade their bikes all the time, despite the fact they are all fat shoots who just need to pedal faster and carbon fibre codpieces wont actually make them go any faster

northernneil

Will Snow wrote:

i have to laugh at those roadies who upgrade their bikes all the time, despite the fact they are all fat shoots who just need to pedal faster and carbon fibre codpieces wont actually make them go any faster

but when you are 16 stone in your full Team Sky kit 150 grams make a huge difference !

redddraggon

Father Jack wrote:

Have to laugh at those nerds who upgrade their PC's all the time, just been playing Fall Out 3 Las Vegas. On Ultra settings, except for disabling AA. 1920x1200. And it's great, with only rare slow down. AMD 4400 X2, 2GB RAM, 8800GT 512MB. So hardly top end, and pretty old machine.

Hardly a cutting edge graphical game either.

Weejie54

If games developers only developed games for cutting edge PCs, they wouldn't have much of a market. Hence, games can be quite readily run on the mid-range PCs (or lower end, even) being used by the majority of consumers.

invincible

northernneil wrote:

Will Snow wrote:

i have to laugh at those roadies who upgrade their bikes all the time, despite the fact they are all fat shoots who just need to pedal faster and carbon fibre codpieces wont actually make them go any faster

but when you are 16 stone in your full Team Sky kit 150 grams make a huge difference !

yeah means you can eat 150g more food 8)

freehub

Father Jack wrote:

Have to laugh at those nerds who upgrade their PC's all the time, just been playing Fall Out 3 Las Vegas. On Ultra settings, except for disabling AA. 1920x1200. And it's great, with only rare slow down. AMD 4400 X2, 2GB RAM, 8800GT 512MB. So hardly top end, and pretty old machine.

Yes oh wow, my 8800GT could play Crysis on high and looked better than very high when I finished modding that game.

I'm on a GTX260 running at GTX285 speeds now and on a quad core too, try playing GTA IV on that rig you have, guaranteed not to run on high.

redddraggon

freehub wrote:

I'm on a GTX260 running at GTX285 speeds now and on a quad core too, try playing GTA IV on that rig you have, guaranteed not to run on high.

Unlucky.

I'm on an i7 930 and HD5870, totally stock and doesn't break a sweat.

Will Snow

i dont think napoleonD quite got me there

Ollieda

I'm on a laptop and its got stuff inside that makes things work with big names that I don't know.......works fine!

desweller

Father Jack wrote:

Have to laugh at those nerds who upgrade their PC's all the time, just been playing Fall Out 3 Las Vegas. On Ultra settings, except for disabling AA. 1920x1200. And it's great, with only rare slow down. AMD 4400 X2, 2GB RAM, 8800GT 512MB. So hardly top end, and pretty old machine.

I can't believe you had the nerve to reel that lot off after calling other people 'nerds'.

Squillinossett

I run 1090T @ 4.2GHZ & Crossfire 5850's @ 5870 speeds, only run 4gb 1600mhz ram, as wont see a benefit to gaming to pop 8gb in.

This is overkill for all of today's games, but it means that for the next two years I will be able to play 95% of games on max settings, something you sadly wont be able too.

Try run Crysis 2 on your rig on full settings....then see what I mean...

freehub

Squillinossett wrote:

This is overkill for all of today's games, but it means that for the next two years I will be able to play 95% of games on max settings, something you sadly wont be able too.

Try run Crysis 2 on your rig on full settings....then see what I mean...

We'll see about that, post back in 2 years

Crysis 2 ain't out yet so you can't have played it.

dmch2

Buy a game you like, if the PC isn't up to it then man it up. simple.

There's not people who buy the latest graphics card every week just to have the latest are there? That'd be like amateur cyclists buying dura-ace or super record groupsets.

oh, hang on a minute... :?

(For the record I had to look up what gfx card I have. An ATI HD 4870 - I'd forgotten I'd abandoned NVIDIA... It played fallout 3, Dragon Age and Mass Effect 2 perfectly fine so I'm happy. Just need to pass this professional exam then I can breakout Fallout 3 NV which arrived last week).

jrduquemin

Squillinossett wrote:

I run 1090T @ 4.2GHZ & Crossfire 5850's @ 5870 speeds, only run 4gb 1600mhz ram, as wont see a benefit to gaming to pop 8gb in.

This is overkill for all of today's games, but it means that for the next two years I will be able to play 95% of games on max settings, something you sadly wont be able too.

Try run Crysis 2 on your rig....then see what I mean...

Fixed that for you :-)

father_jack

freehub wrote:

Father Jack wrote:

Have to laugh at those nerds who upgrade their PC's all the time, just been playing Fall Out 3 Las Vegas. On Ultra settings, except for disabling AA. 1920x1200. And it's great, with only rare slow down. AMD 4400 X2, 2GB RAM, 8800GT 512MB. So hardly top end, and pretty old machine.

Yes oh wow, my 8800GT could play Crysis on high and looked better than very high when I finished modding that game.

I'm on a GTX260 running at GTX285 speeds now and on a quad core too, try playing GTA IV on that rig you have, guaranteed not to run on high.

That's because GTA IV is a shoddy port. Funny how all other latest games run faster and look better than GTA IV. Even at 800x600 lowest detail, GTA IV is still unplayable. And looks like Quake I :roll: Latest Medal of Honour highest settings, native, except for no AA...perfect. Mafia II, great. guess since PC games are mostly Xbox ports, the demand for high end PC hardware isn't so great. Except for the odd one or two titles ie FS-X.

redddraggon

Father Jack wrote:

Latest Medal of Honour highest settings, native, except for no AA...perfect

Huh? MoH is nothing special graphics wise, and it's a shockingly bad game anyway.

Squillinossett

freehub wrote:

Squillinossett wrote:

This is overkill for all of today's games, but it means that for the next two years I will be able to play 95% of games on max settings, something you sadly wont be able too.

Try run Crysis 2 on your rig on full settings....then see what I mean...

We'll see about that, post back in 2 years

Crysis 2 ain't out yet so you can't have played it.

No, but I can g'tee that when it comes out, going off Crysis it will bring most rigs to their knees!

These are a huge number of rigs out there that will still struggle to play Crysis on top settings, still, two years after it was released.

Granted some of that was down to shoddy coding, but still, a killer!

freehub

Father Jack wrote:

freehub wrote:

Father Jack wrote:

Have to laugh at those nerds who upgrade their PC's all the time, just been playing Fall Out 3 Las Vegas. On Ultra settings, except for disabling AA. 1920x1200. And it's great, with only rare slow down. AMD 4400 X2, 2GB RAM, 8800GT 512MB. So hardly top end, and pretty old machine.

Yes oh wow, my 8800GT could play Crysis on high and looked better than very high when I finished modding that game.

I'm on a GTX260 running at GTX285 speeds now and on a quad core too, try playing GTA IV on that rig you have, guaranteed not to run on high.

That's because GTA IV is a shoddy port. Funny how all other latest games run faster and look better than GTA IV. Even at 800x600 lowest detail, GTA IV is still unplayable. And looks like Quake I :roll: Latest Medal of Honour highest settings, native, except for no AA...perfect. Mafia II, great. guess since PC games are mostly Xbox ports, the demand for high end PC hardware isn't so great. Except for the odd one or two titles ie FS-X.

GTA IV is actually quite a decent looking game with a very large and active environment.

There is as much demand for high end PC parts as there as ever been.

If you wanted a to make this thread to reassure you that you rig is not shite, well then it won't do that.

father_jack

GTA IV is actually quite a decent looking game with a very large and active environment.

Not saying it doesn't, it just runs a dog. GTA III and Mafia II look great too, and both run superbly- and Mafia II has newer post processing that GTA 3 lacks , GTA IV however does not run well. Even those with E6600 are getting 20fps on low :roll:

freehub

Father Jack wrote:

GTA IV is actually quite a decent looking game with a very large and active environment.

Not saying it doesn't, it just runs a dog. GTA III and Mafia II look great too, and both run superbly- and Mafia II has newer post processing that GTA 3 lacks , GTA IV however does not run well. Even those with E6600 are getting 20fps on low :roll:

GTA IV needs quad core.

father_jack

Why exactly?Because it's crappy port. Funny how other games don't need quad core they run fine on duals.

dmch2

There are very few games that use multiple cores. 2 cores works ok as all the background windows stuff runs on one and the game on the other. But TBH quad core is (mostly) only useful for a very few specially written things like server applications (eg databases and webservers) or photoshop.

father_jack

^ or video & music encoding, as it'll split the load between all four, then you can set priority. So for example can use 90% of all four cores, if you're just doing something like browsing/emails whilst it's encoding.

FS-X and Supreme Commander are two games that I know have superior performance on quads (and not because shoddy ports like GTA IV) Rockstar screwed up big time with GTA IV.

freehub

You can moan all you want about ports, they're here to stay so deal with it.

father_jack

yeah. But there are good and bad ports. And just lazy ones, when the menus are big and ugly, with Xbox styled buttons. :roll: ports to the PC should have improvement in graphics not a straight port (such as higher AA and AF, true native textures etc) Or you may as well just buy a console for gaming..

freehub

GTA IV had perfectly fine menus, the xbox buttons were present when an Xbox 360 controller was plugged into the PC.

You'd struggle with AA on GTA IV even if it were playable. Anything above 2xaa/4xaa on an 8800GT is a killer.

dmch2

Good point - forgot about encoding. I'm surprised that more games don't use multi-cores. I guess they're more excited at using the vector processors on the graphics cards to do physics instead.

On the other point - ports are definitely here to stay. It's a few years ago now but I used to work at a games company. Generally a team of half a dozen people would write a game over a year (with a few of them on it for longer) but then only one person was needed to port it and he only took months. Yet the ported game would sell as many copies for the same price = much more profit.