Performance, Graphical Settings, and your computer

[Rubesahl]

This is a question for anyone who's tried the beta. I want to know how high you could put the settings with the hardware you have, in a playable framerate of course. If anyone has a program like FRAPS and can give out the avarage framerate it'd be great http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/anime1.gif

This is so we can all have a good idea on how the game will play in our PCs. For example, my sister has an nvidia 5200fx, 1 gig of ram, and an athlon xp 1.7Ghz and PSO BB doesn't look or move good, in fact it looked quite bad compared to console versions. In my case I with an Athlon 64 2.4, an ati x800 pro and 1 gig of ram had pso bb in max settings and looked and moved good except when there were more than 5 people in the lobby >_>;; I guess this is also to find out if Sega has gotten better programming games for computer O_o ...

[Parn]

I'm running a PC with a 754 Socket Athlon 64 3000+ CPU (runs at 2 GHz), 2 GB PC3200 RAM, and a GeForce 6600GT AGP video card w/256 MB VRAM. I run 60 FPS 95% of the time, the other 5% being when there's like, 40+ characters on screen in the Guardian's Colony. I run the game at max settings.

[Rubesahl]

Excellent, thanks for the information ^_^ I guess I can expect similar performance on my side. Sadly my ram is not 3200, its 2700. My processor is only slightly higher than yours but I doubt itll make any difference. Hopefully I'll still be able to enjoy the max settings comodity.



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Rubesahl on 2006-04-22 12:14 ]</font>

[Dertia]

I hate my shitty computer. Even on lowest settings for PSO:BB It ran really slow lots of the time. Chances are, I won't have the money to upgrade this piece of crap for aqnother 2 and a half years.

[Kayai]

I think i should be able to run it pretty good but probably dumb it down just to make it run smoothly

[chichiri99]

I only just meet the minimum requirements in most areas, but I'm fine with low quality as long as I can play it http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_smile.gif

[ulyoth]

I am hopefully getting this set up next thursday (pay day!) i dont know much about computers although im planning on building this one myself.
AMD Athlon 64 3700+
1GB DDR PC3200
Sapphire X1600 XT 256MB
Is that a good set up?

[scott1114]

My computer has minimum requirements for psu and even on low-quality it lags like hell, so you should consider getting it on ps2 or x360 chichiri99, would be better for your gaming experience

[Inu_Shadi]

This is gonna be the setup Ill have for PSU...
AMD Athlon 64 3200+ 2.0 GHZ (over clocked to 2.4 GHZ)
1 GB DDR PC 3200
Nvidia e-GeForce Evga 7600 GT

[Lux]

On 2006-04-22 15:54, ulyoth wrote:
I am hopefully getting this set up next thursday (pay day!) i dont know much about computers although im planning on building this one myself.
AMD Athlon 64 3700+
1GB DDR PC3200
Sapphire X1600 XT 256MB
Is that a good set up?


You'll most-likely play on highest settings except there's like 100 players on the screen.

[ulyoth]

On 2006-04-22 16:02, Lux wrote:


On 2006-04-22 15:54, ulyoth wrote:
I am hopefully getting this set up next thursday (pay day!) i dont know much about computers although im planning on building this one myself.
AMD Athlon 64 3700+
1GB DDR PC3200
Sapphire X1600 XT 256MB
Is that a good set up?


You'll most-likely play on highest settings except there's like 100 players on the screen.


Cheers, i might even up the RAM to 2GB depending on how much i get paid.

[scott1114]

Well u guys are lucky t have money to waste on a computer, looks like I'll only be able to get cheap PS2 version..... and anyways I'm on DSL on comp I'll get broadband for ps2

[chichiri99]

thanx scott, but I don't like PS2s, they die, fast, I go through at least 2 a year :S and I don't have a 360, I am used to lag, on my old PC, PSO lagged real bad on lowest quality at 2 FPS XD

but this PC can play BB pretty good on high end, so I'm hoping it can play PSU alright on low end, but if not I can prob dig up the cash to upgrade it http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_smile.gif

[Oji_Retta]

On 2006-04-22 16:18, chichiri99 wrote:
thanx scott, but I don't like PS2s, they die, fast, I go through at least 2 a year :S and I don't have a 360, I am used to lag, on my old PC, PSO lagged real bad on lowest quality at 2 FPS XD

but this PC can play BB pretty good on high end, so I'm hoping it can play PSU alright on low end, but if not I can prob dig up the cash to upgrade it http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_smile.gif



My PS2 never died or had any problems. You must be playing yours 24/7 or something to have them burnout.

[chichiri99]

The lasers just keep dying, it really sux http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_frown.gif

[scott1114]

How can you all do to break ur ps2's? mine never broke and I had it for 2 years

[chichiri99]

I dunno, but I blame my brother (like always) anyway this is goin a little off-topic and it doesn't really matter anyways coz I already pre-ordered PC JP PSU so, meh

back on topic plz http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_smile.gif

[Inu_Shadi]

On 2006-04-22 16:10, scott1114 wrote:
Well u guys are lucky t have money to waste on a computer, looks like I'll only be able to get cheap PS2 version..... and anyways I'm on DSL on comp I'll get broadband for ps2


oO; DSL is broadband first of all, and whatever you have on your computer is what the PS2 will be running by in terms of Internet connection, unless you go to someone elses house with your PS2.

[Saraphim]

I have :
AMD 1.8 Ghz
nVidia Geforce 6100 (this is an integrated motherboard setup built by nVidia w/256 MB video ram)

512 MB ram

I meet most of the "recommended" specs (except CPU http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_frown.gif ) for PSU, but I run PSOBB on normal with advanced effect on with no problem (unless there are a lot of ppl in the lobby when I am in there), but I did have to drop the resolution to 800x600.

Will PSU run at a good acceptable rate, or will it just barely play it?

[Inu_Shadi]

On 2006-04-22 16:40, Saraphim wrote:
I have :
AMD 1.8 Ghz
nVidia Geforce 6100 (this is an integrated motherboard setup built by nVidia w/256 MB video ram)

512 MB ram

I meet most of the "recommended" specs (except CPU http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_frown.gif ) for PSU, but I run PSOBB on normal with advanced effect on with no problem (unless there are a lot of ppl in the lobby when I am in there), but I did have to drop the resolution to 800x600.

Will PSU run at a good acceptable rate, or will it just barely play it?


Where are the reccomended specs? all i can find the the minimum for PSU

[kassy]

On 2006-04-22 12:09, Parn wrote:
I'm running a PC with a 754 Socket Athlon 64 3000+ CPU (runs at 2 GHz), 2 GB PC3200 RAM, and a GeForce 6600GT AGP video card w/256 MB VRAM. I run 60 FPS 95% of the time, the other 5% being when there's like, 40+ characters on screen in the Guardian's Colony. I run the game at max settings.



What resoltuion are you playin at?

[Saraphim]

On 2006-04-22 16:42, Inu_Shadi wrote:


On 2006-04-22 16:40, Saraphim wrote:
I have :
AMD 1.8 Ghz
nVidia Geforce 6100 (this is an integrated motherboard setup built by nVidia w/256 MB video ram)

512 MB ram

I meet most of the "recommended" specs (except CPU http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_frown.gif ) for PSU, but I run PSOBB on normal with advanced effect on with no problem (unless there are a lot of ppl in the lobby when I am in there), but I did have to drop the resolution to 800x600.

Will PSU run at a good acceptable rate, or will it just barely play it?


Where are the reccomended specs? all i can find the the minimum for PSU



My bad Inu, the recommended specs I saw was from PSOW (copied below)

Operating System: Win 2k/Win XP
Processor: 1.6 GHz Pentium 4
RAM: 256 MB
Video Card: 3D card with 64 MB of VRAM
Direct X 9.0c
Hard Drive Space: 8.0 GB
Network Connection: Broadband

Recommended requirements have not been released officially. However, one can assume that 512MB or above will be recommended, along with the best darn video card you can afford! Also, take note that according to Sega Direct, you will REQUIRE a DVD-ROM drive to install the game.

It says unofficail, so that's what it is. i could have sworn there was a recommended CPU, but I am most likely mistaken (again).

[scott1114]

On 2006-04-22 16:40, Inu_Shadi wrote:


On 2006-04-22 16:10, scott1114 wrote:
Well u guys are lucky t have money to waste on a computer, looks like I'll only be able to get cheap PS2 version..... and anyways I'm on DSL on comp I'll get broadband for ps2


oO; DSL is broadband first of all, and whatever you have on your computer is what the PS2 will be running by in terms of Internet connection, unless you go to someone elses house with your PS2.

Well I'll get cable internet in my room so I'll be ok, I guess

[Inu_Shadi]

On 2006-04-22 17:08, scott1114 wrote:


On 2006-04-22 16:40, Inu_Shadi wrote:


On 2006-04-22 16:10, scott1114 wrote:
Well u guys are lucky t have money to waste on a computer, looks like I'll only be able to get cheap PS2 version..... and anyways I'm on DSL on comp I'll get broadband for ps2


oO; DSL is broadband first of all, and whatever you have on your computer is what the PS2 will be running by in terms of Internet connection, unless you go to someone elses house with your PS2.

Well I'll get cable internet in my room so I'll be ok, I guess


I have DSL, lol i think its great, i wasnt saying it was bad.

[scott1114]

Isn't great for psu though

[Inu_Shadi]

On 2006-04-22 17:21, scott1114 wrote:
Isn't great for psu though


it will work fine, minimum is 256 kbps , i have 1.5 Mbps http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/anime1.gif lol , what you need more so is a fast computer that can process the speeds, ill be getting my built soon, this current computer is okay for PSOBB on normal settings, it would be horrible for PSU
AMD 1.2 GHZ
384 MB PC133 Ram
ATI Radeon 5500 AGP, running at AGP 4x

[Omega_Nova]

For the final game this'll be my set up

AMD Athlon 3000+ (939)
512 MB RAM
GeForce 6600 LE
nForce4 chipset

Hopefully I'll be able to run it at mid to high end with little to no loss, also depending on how much I get paid for my job I'll probably look at upgrading the RAM and graphics card again.

[vitius137]

currently I have (don't know all the stats, sry):

Pentium 4
3.2 GHz
1024 MB RAM
ATI RADEON 9550

I hope thats good enough for highest settings.

[Rubesahl]

The only thing there holding you back a bit is the video card. Its not crappy or anything, but maybe not enough for high settings but prob good for mid settings.

[vitius137]

i think so too. i was thinking of upgrading the card anyway, have any suggestions on which would be good?

[Rubesahl]

Depends on budget... From experience, the ATi x800 pro is great if you have a budget of like 250-300$. I play everquest 2 with max settings with it and it moves smooth indoors and in the fields but in towns I need to disable shadows so it moves smoother cause of the ammount of chars and NPCs. I could also play Doom 3 in Very high qual (the one before extreme qual), Fear also in v-high qual and they all look great. Otherwise get the latest ATi x1900 *_* Main problem is that, if I'm not mistaken, its PCI express only, so besides paying like 500 dollars for the card, you have to invest in a new mobo if yours doesn't support pci express. In my case I just like ATi over Nvidia, but there are Nvidia counterparts to ATi models which play pretty much the same >_>; From experience in video cards, ati and nvidia have always been head to head, no real way to say who plays better than the other cause it depends on the games. Usually nvidia is the preffered card for developers and it usually wins a couple of frames over ati. Anyways this all depends in the model and game. Hope I gave u an idea there.

[vitius137]

alright thanks a lot. first ill try playing psu with what i have now (and maybe ill clear out my harddrive a little) and if im not happy w/ the results I'll upgrade my gfx card. thanks for the info.

[Rubesahl]

Yep, I'd do that, who knows if they improved the engine for PC and maybe you can have it close to max settings. And no problem http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_smile.gif

[Blitzkommando]

On 2006-04-22 22:33, vitius137 wrote:
i think so too. i was thinking of upgrading the card anyway, have any suggestions on which would be good?


The X1600 Pro is pretty good. Your system looks a bit old from the stats, AGP board, Socket 478. The X1600 Pro is pretty cheap and would give a decent boost over the 9550. AGP is pretty much phased out of the high end market and is quickly being phased out of the mid-range as well. As essentially one of the final generation cards it is a pretty good card to go out on.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814102680
$139.00, Sapphire

[Para]

CPU:
AMD Athlon 64-bit 3200+ @ 2ghz
Motherboard:
A8n-VM CSM-UAYGZ
Memory:
OCZ 1024mb Dual Channel DDRAM Performance Series
Graphics Adapter:
Sapphire Radeon x550 256mb DDRAM

For sure I can run it... but speaking more on what people would need to make their PSU run fairly fast...
1) Graphics Card. However not just graphics card but the architecture it uses... I'm using PCIx graphics card and that is a lot faster than your old AGP graphics card. No matter how fast a GPU may be, it will always be limited by its bus. If you are wondering, I bought my graphics card for 87 CDN dollars and my overall setup gives me about 80fps on a DM map higher end graphic settings.
2) Memory. Depending on how many programs you tend to have running in system tray, its a good thing to investigate how much memory they take up oppose to how much memory you have free. If running PSU (assuming that it takes up 256mb of memory) forces your OS to start using its page file while playing PSU will dramatically slow your computer down greatly, especially during loading sequences and normal gameplay.
3) CPU. Usually what CPU requirement is listed should be the target speed you want.

[Nedeti]

select Fram skip "2" its bettert for FPS on PSU Beta

[Parn]

On 2006-04-22 16:47, kassy wrote:
What resoltuion are you playin at?
Wow... don't know why I didn't mention my resolution, heh. I'm running 1024x768 with 4x Anisotropic Filtering. I'm probably going to throw on 4x Antialiasing tomorrow and see how things handle, though I'll probably have to set the framerate cap to 30, as I doubt I'll maintain 60 FPS with that running.

[Lux]

On 2006-04-22 22:43, Rubesahl wrote:
Depends on budget... From experience, the ATi x800 pro is great if you have a budget of like 250-300$. I play everquest 2 with max settings with it and it moves smooth indoors and in the fields but in towns I need to disable shadows so it moves smoother cause of the ammount of chars and NPCs.

Shadows don't have to do with your graphics card, it's your CPU that's too weak there.



Rubesahl:
From experience in video cards, ati and nvidia have always been head to head, no real way to say who plays better than the other cause it depends on the games. Usually nvidia is the preffered card for developers and it usually wins a couple of frames over ati. Anyways this all depends in the model and game.

OpenGL games work better with NVidia and DirectX with Ati most of the time.




Parn:
I'm running 1024x768 with 4x Anisotropic

4x is quite a waste, I claim you won't notice anything above 3x while lowering Anistropic filtering gives you a huge performance boost, so I don't think it's worth putting it that high up.

In your position i'd lower Anistropic or even turn it off but play on 1280x1024 that'll have a much nicer effect on the visuals.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Lux on 2006-04-23 09:22 ]</font>

[kassy]

On 2006-04-23 07:09, Parn wrote:


On 2006-04-22 16:47, kassy wrote:
What resoltuion are you playin at?
Wow... don't know why I didn't mention my resolution, heh. I'm running 1024x768 with 4x Anisotropic Filtering. I'm probably going to throw on 4x Antialiasing tomorrow and see how things handle, though I'll probably have to set the framerate cap to 30, as I doubt I'll maintain 60 FPS with that running.



Whoops, I should have realised your res from your screenshots that were posted, thanks for the response, I'm a resolution junky, delicious 1600x1200 is my target for PSU, my set-up is as follows...

P4 650 3.4 GHz
2GB Samsung DDR2 PC4200 533MHz ram
150GB 10,000rpm HDD
Nvidia 7900 GTX 512MB

Just waiting on my new power supply to arrive then I'm gonna order an nvidia 7900, currently reading loads of reviews and trying to decide whether to go with a card from BFG or from XFX.


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: kassy on 2006-04-23 10:14 ]</font>

[vitius137]

you guys all have such nice graphics cards :'(

[Ennie]

Man.. I think I won't be playing PSU anytime soon... ;_;

[Jack]

On 2006-04-23 10:25, vitius137 wrote:
you guys all have such nice graphics cards :'(



If you're on a budget, look into the Radeon X800 GTO2. It can be easily modded (http://www.techpowerup.com/articles/overclocking/vidcard/127) to become an X850 XT. In very technical terms, this means it'll go like hot shit.

[ShinMaruku]

I'll be having this crap on my PS3, while my computer could go stupid crazy, I'd rather have this on my 32 in LCD screen with my boomerang

[Ffuzzy-Logik]

On 2006-04-22 23:01, Norvekh wrote:


On 2006-04-22 22:33, vitius137 wrote:
i think so too. i was thinking of upgrading the card anyway, have any suggestions on which would be good?


The X1600 Pro is pretty good. Your system looks a bit old from the stats, AGP board, Socket 478. The X1600 Pro is pretty cheap and would give a decent boost over the 9550. AGP is pretty much phased out of the high end market and is quickly being phased out of the mid-range as well. As essentially one of the final generation cards it is a pretty good card to go out on.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814102680
$139.00, Sapphire

I bought this card a month or so back, and it runs great with PSOBB, highest settings on everything with only slight lag in crater areas (seabed lags crazily still, but I can deal with that, even CCA runs smoothly). I'd imagine it will work on high settings (or at least mid-range) for PSU as well.

specs for me are:
3.01 GHz P4 (zomg HOT)
1 gig of DDR
The above-mentioned Radeon X1600 PRO AGP with 512 MB GDDR2

[Chronosv2]

I'm not quite sure how well my system will run PSU, but here are my specs. I do know I meet most (if not all) requirements.

(Taken from DirectX Diagnostics Utility)
Operating System: Windows XP Professional (5.1, Build 2600) Service Pack 2
Processor: Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 2.00GHz
Memory: 512MB RAM
DirectX Version: DirectX 9.0c (4.09.0000.0904)
Card name: RADEON 9200
Manufacturer: ATI Technologies Inc.
Chip type: RADEON 9200 AGP (0x5961)
DAC type: Internal DAC(400MHz)
Display Memory: 128.0 MB
Current Mode: 1024 x 768 (32 bit) (60Hz)

--Drives--
Drive: C:
Free Space: 18.4 GB
Total Space: 58.6 GB
File System: NTFS
Model: Maxtor 4D060H3
Drive: F:
Model: LITE-ON DVDRW LDW-851S



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Chronosv2 on 2006-04-23 17:06 ]</font>

[vitius137]

On 2006-04-23 16:33, Jack wrote:


On 2006-04-23 10:25, vitius137 wrote:
you guys all have such nice graphics cards :'(



If you're on a budget, look into the Radeon X800 GTO2. It can be easily modded (http://www.techpowerup.com/articles/overclocking/vidcard/127) to become an X850 XT. In very technical terms, this means it'll go like hot shit.


thx, ill try that. how much will an X800 GTO2 card cost?
EDIT: incase the modding is a failure... will the card still be bette
r than my RADEON 9550?

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: vitius137 on 2006-04-23 18:33 ]</font>

[VioletSkye]

On 2006-04-23 18:27, vitius137 wrote:


On 2006-04-23 16:33, Jack wrote:


On 2006-04-23 10:25, vitius137 wrote:
you guys all have such nice graphics cards :'(



If you're on a budget, look into the Radeon X800 GTO2. It can be easily modded (http://www.techpowerup.com/articles/overclocking/vidcard/127) to become an X850 XT. In very technical terms, this means it'll go like hot shit.


thx, ill try that. how much will an X800 GTO2 card cost?
EDIT: incase the modding is a failure... will the card still be bette
r than my RADEON 9550?

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: vitius137 on 2006-04-23 18:33 ]</font>

MUCH, MUCH better.

[Jack]

On 2006-04-23 18:27, vitius137 wrote:

thx, ill try that. how much will an X800 GTO2 card cost?
EDIT: incase the modding is a failure... will the card still be bette
r than my RADEON 9550?



Miles better. You'd probably need to change your motherboard though, the GTO2 only comes in PCI-Express flavour. The 9550 is an AGP card. I suppose I should clarify that it'd be a good choice if you're putting together a new PC or making a big overhaul to your system - most older PCs will only have AGP slots. In your case, I'd recommend a GeForce 6800 GT or a Radeon X800 XT. I've got a Radeon X800 XT PE (PE just means it's overclocked out of the box), and it runs more or less everything with no trouble.

[Brus]

I cant wait to get this game AAAH. I just got a new set up (not strictly for this game I swear)
DFI LanParty UT SLI-DR
Opteron 146 @ 2.8ghz 1mb L2
Corsair twinx2048-4200 3-4-4-6
Geforce 7900GT CO SC (550/1640)
and a 20.1" Widescreen monitor

This game had better support 1680x1050!

[Nedeti]

1280x1024 is the highest yet... thats what im using since i can't go higher

[VioletSkye]

On 2006-04-23 19:38, Jack wrote:


On 2006-04-23 18:27, vitius137 wrote:

thx, ill try that. how much will an X800 GTO2 card cost?
EDIT: incase the modding is a failure... will the card still be bette
r than my RADEON 9550?



Miles better. You'd probably need to change your motherboard though, the GTO2 only comes in PCI-Express flavour. The 9550 is an AGP card. I suppose I should clarify that it'd be a good choice if you're putting together a new PC or making a big overhaul to your system - most older PCs will only have AGP slots. In your case, I'd recommend a GeForce 6800 GT or a Radeon X800 XT. I've got a Radeon X800 XT PE (PE just means it's overclocked out of the box), and it runs more or less everything with no trouble.


You don't necesarily have to go with a GTO2, you could get an AGP 4X/8X X800 for around the same price. The card I found is refurbished but still comes with a full warranty. SAPPHIRE Radeon X800 256MB 256-bit VIVO AGP 4X/8X. (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814102532R)With this card you won't have to change out your motherboard (assuming that your motherboard is AGP and has no PCIX slot.)

[Brus]

On 2006-04-23 20:00, Nedeti wrote:
1280x1024 is the highest yet... thats what im using since i can't go higher



Is that the highest resolution your monitor can do because i know for some games you cant go higher than your monitor's native.

[vitius137]

my pc is fairly new so im not sure if it has a PCI slot. is there some way i can tell by looking at the motherboard or checking somewhere in the comp?

[VioletSkye]

On 2006-04-23 20:36, vitius137 wrote:
my pc is fairly new so im not sure if it has a PCI slot. is there some way i can tell by looking at the motherboard or checking somewhere in the comp?


Download CPU-Z (http://www.cpuid.com/download/cpu-z-133.zip) and run it. Then go to the MAINBOAD tab and check out the GRAPHIC INTERFACE area. You could also just give us the manufacturer and model number.



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: VioletSkye on 2006-04-23 20:48 ]</font>

[vitius137]

alright thanks http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_smile.gif

EDIT: here are the stats
-Motherboard-
Manufacturer | ASUSTeK Computer INC.
Model | P4P800S-X
Chipset | Intel | i865P/PE/G/i848P
Southbridge | Intel | 82801EB (ICH5)
Sensor | Winbond | 17

-BIOS-
Brand | American Megatrends Inc.
Version | 1008.008
Date | 01/04/2005

-Graphic Interface-
Version | AGP version 3.0 http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_frown.gif
Transfer Rate| 8X
Max Supported| 8X
Side Band | enabled
--
I know u dont want all that info but i have nothing else to do >.>
anyway, i dont have the ICP thingy. ill just get the best card i can for this mother board OR!!!!!!
I'll get a job and save up a ton of money and EXTREME upgrade everything... maybe get a new computer altogether (sick and tired of sharing comp with parents. they have so many useless files that take up alot of space)


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: vitius137 on 2006-04-23 21:00 ]</font>

[VioletSkye]

That's actually not a bad board. You can max your RAM up to 2GB and it has 2 SATA 150 slots. The downside is no Firewire and no PCIX slot. Of course you can always throw in a Firewire card if you need it http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_razz.gif



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: VioletSkye on 2006-04-23 21:07 ]</font>

[vitius137]

yes... max my RAM...i know how to do that........?

[VioletSkye]

How much RAM do you currently have and how many slots do they occupy? You can use CPU-Z for that info also. Run CPU-Z and in the MEMORY tab list the SIZE and then in the SPD tab list how many SLOTS show RAM. BTW your motherboard only has 2 memory slots.



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: VioletSkye on 2006-04-23 21:14 ]</font>

[Ffuzzy-Logik]

Isn't 2 GB a bit overdoing it? 1 GB should suffice, right? >_>

[VioletSkye]

For PSU, yeah 1 GB should be fine, I was just pointing out that the max his motherboard will support is 2GB. Having more RAM certainly won't hurt though, especially if you plan on trying to use integrated video.

[vitius137]

ok
it shows i have 1024 of DDR RAM and when i go to the spd tab.....
theres a drop down list that shows i have 2 slots... i think both have RAM in them cuz it shows DDR on both of them
PS. thanks for helping me out with this stuff. im super noob T_T
heres the thing in case u wanna see it.
http://img131.imageshack.us/img131/6383/screen033gg.th.jpg (http://img131.imageshack.us/my.php?image=screen033gg.jpg)
http://img231.imageshack.us/img231/7732/screen049ct.th.jpg (http://img231.imageshack.us/my.php?image=screen049ct.jpg)

[VioletSkye]

You have 1GB (1024MB) of RAM total, which should be just fine for PSU. Its DDR 400 PC3200. The DDR means Double Data Rate (with DDR2 being second generation DDR) and although it operates at a clock speed of 200MHz, it makes 2 reads or writes per clock cycle giving it an effective speed of 400MHz (hence the 400 in the title of the RAM.) The 3200 stands for the maximum throughput of 3200MB per second. I won't get into the CAS, RAS to CAS, RAS Precharge or TRAS as none of that is really relevant to this topic http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_lol.gif

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: VioletSkye on 2006-04-23 21:47 ]</font>

[Shade-]

nvm, didn't see it was multi pages X_X


Anyway, here I go:

CPU: Athlon 64 3800+ (2.4gh)
RAM: 1gb Kingston
HDD: WD 250 GB 7,200 rpm
GPU: BFG Nvidia Gforce 6800 GT

Monitor is a 19" Scepter with 12ms response time, not good, but a non-FPS shouldnt demand more than that. I'm hoping I can run at 1280x1024 (native) with 30-60 fps. Anything added on top (AA, AF) is butter. (but I love my butter too =P)

I've got some fun speakers too that will make me happy.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Shade- on 2006-04-23 22:18 ]</font>

[vitius137]

right now my resolution is 1152 x 864........ My monitor is 18" and when i set it to 1280 x 1024 it looks a bit grainy (mostly just the writing) but i havent tried it for a game yet.

[Shade-]

On 2006-04-23 22:23, vitius137 wrote:
right now my resolution is 1152 x 864........ My monitor is 18" and when i set it to 1280 x 1024 it looks a bit grainy (mostly just the writing) but i havent tried it for a game yet.



What is your screens native resolution?

[Jack]

On 2006-04-23 22:23, vitius137 wrote:
right now my resolution is 1152 x 864........ My monitor is 18" and when i set it to 1280 x 1024 it looks a bit grainy (mostly just the writing) but i havent tried it for a game yet.


Is it a flat screen monitor? You won't be able to set it any higher than the monitor's top resolution. Most 17 inch flat screens have 1280 x 1024 as their top resolution.

[Velocity_7]

I can run it somewhat but the framerate is really iffy; 45-60 FPS. I want to get it to go 60 FPS, or at least do auto-frame skipping along the lines of Unreal Tournament or something. I'm already running on lowest settings (but left Post-effects on as I still want to see the glow from my large sword).


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Velocity_7 on 2006-04-24 15:06 ]</font>

[beatrixkiddo]

>_> I technically meet the requirements...

3.1 GHz Pentium 4
64 MB ATI integrated gfx card >______________________________>
512MB RAM

I play PSOBB at 640x480 resolution. The only thing that kills performance is running on higher resolutions or if I'm in a foggy area (CCA ;_;) or a full lobby. Anyone have an idea if I can run this or not? :/

[vitius137]

On 2006-04-24 02:49, Jack wrote:


On 2006-04-23 22:23, vitius137 wrote:
right now my resolution is 1152 x 864........ My monitor is 18" and when i set it to 1280 x 1024 it looks a bit grainy (mostly just the writing) but i havent tried it for a game yet.


Is it a flat screen monitor? You won't be able to set it any higher than the monitor's top resolution. Most 17 inch flat screens have 1280 x 1024 as their top resolution.



1280 x 1024 is my highest resolution. im gonna try playing psu with medium settings and go from there. (lag=upgrade comp, no lag=higher settings till i get some lag then use the last setting that worked with no lag)

[Inu_Shadi]

On 2006-04-24 18:08, beatrixkiddo wrote:
>_> I technically meet the requirements...

3.1 GHz Pentium 4
64 MB ATI integrated gfx card >______________________________>
512MB RAM

I play PSOBB at 640x480 resolution. The only thing that kills performance is running on higher resolutions or if I'm in a foggy area (CCA ;_;) or a full lobby. Anyone have an idea if I can run this or not? :/


Get rid of the integrated GFX, my current PC is
1.2 GHZ Athlon
384 MB RAM
ATI 9550 and it dosent lag at all in 640x480 in normal graphics mode for PSOBB.



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Inu_Shadi on 2006-04-24 19:05 ]</font>

[beatrixkiddo]

Erm, I'm on a laptop, I can't "get rid" of it.

[vitius137]

yay, same graphics card as me ^o^ lol

[Inu_Shadi]

On 2006-04-24 19:16, beatrixkiddo wrote:
Erm, I'm on a laptop, I can't "get rid" of it.


oh, sorry >.>

[Inu_Shadi]

On 2006-04-24 19:16, vitius137 wrote:
yay, same graphics card as me ^o^ lol


XD Soon my will pwn yours i just got a 7600 GT for my new PC, it will be built soon

[vitius137]

>.> pfft
least i got chicken

[Le_True_Noir]

right now i'm runing PSU on the all settings high my computer: AMD 64 4000+ (OC to 3.42), OCZ 3200 2GB (2 x 1GB), ASUS A8N-SLI Premium, x2 BFG 7800 gtx, HD 250SATA2 200SATA 300IDE, DVD LITEON SHM-165H6S, Sound B. Audigy 2 platinium,and Koolance case *SPOILER* pic

http://mysite.verizon.net/res7gdth/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/.pond/psu20060424_192914_014.jpg.w300h225.jpg



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Le_True_Noir on 2006-04-24 23:59 ]</font>


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Le_True_Noir on 2006-04-25 00:37 ]</font>

[Shade-]

On 2006-04-24 23:56, Le_True_Noir wrote:
right now i'm runing PSU on the all settings high my computer: AMD 64 4000+ (OC to 3.42), OCZ 3200 2GB (2 x 1GB), ASUS A8N-SLI Premium, x2 BFG 7800 gtx, HD 250SATA2 200SATA 300IDE, DVD LITEON SHM-165H6S, Sound B. Audigy 2 platinium,and Koolance case


OVER and KILL

Nice rig though http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/anime1.gif

[_Tek_]

Could someone with an uber pc show a comparison of images please? One with the best settings, and then one with all the settings on low.

[Le_True_Noir]

On 2006-04-25 00:07, _Tek_ wrote:
Could someone with an uber pc show a comparison of images please? One with the best settings, and then one with all the settings on low.

sure i will do it once the server is up on jp

[Le_True_Noir]

hi i toke the pic of the game on all settings high and all settings low but. i dont tink u going to tell the diffrence by yust looking at them i tinks its becuse of my x2 geforce 7800 gtx that no mater how low i put the settings it still looks good. *SPOILER* pic
all settings high
http://mysite.verizon.net/res7gdth/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/psu20060425_171717_000.jpg
all settings low http://mysite.verizon.net/res7gdth/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/psu20060425_172002_000.jpg

[_Tek_]

lol looks identical

[AC9breaker]

Not really the monsters on low quality look retardly skinny and pale also the Background sky and mountains look really fuzzy and wierd. Meanwhile on high the monsters have way more detail and look much more massive then on low. Quite a big dfference imo. Thanks for the comparison pics.

[_Tek_]

I was thinking that the resolution would be reduceable.

[Lux]

Version | AGP version 3.0 http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_frown.gif


Why are you sad? AGP v3.0 is the best AGP there is (8x transfer rate).

And uhm, everyone has a PCI slot, you mean PCI-Express. There's PCI (slow), AGP (faster), PCIE (fastest) which are the most commom nowadays.



On 2006-04-23 21:23, VioletSkye wrote:
For PSU, yeah 1 GB should be fine, I was just pointing out that the max his motherboard will support is 2GB. Having more RAM certainly won't hurt though, especially if you plan on trying to use integrated video.

2GB is total overkill, only graphics designers who work with huge images would need that. 1GB is absolutely fine for games, that should be enough to save all those textures to.
"Integrated video"? You mean VRAM? That's located in your graphics card (128MB to 256MB graphics card will do great right now):

[Lux]

i tinks its becuse of my x2 geforce 7800 gtx that no mater how low i put the settings it still looks good.

No.



On 2006-04-25 03:04, AC9breaker wrote:
Not really the monsters on low quality look retardly skinny and pale also the Background sky and mountains look really fuzzy and wierd. Meanwhile on high the monsters have way more detail and look much more massive then on low. Quite a big dfference imo.
No, they're absolutely identical. Those are also not the same monsters. They wouldn't look skinny just because the graphics were set lower.

The textures look bad even on the high quality version (look at the big rock in the foreground), I guess they didn't implement the best textures in the beta just to keep the download for the installer smaller, can anyone confirm that?

[kassy]

On 2006-04-25 01:52, Le_True_Noir wrote:
hi i toke the pic of the game on all settings high and all settings low but. i dont tink u going to tell the diffrence by yust looking at them i tinks its becuse of my x2 geforce 7800 gtx that no mater how low i put the settings it still looks good.


Shouldn't you be easily running the game at a higher resolution than 1024x768 with two 7800 gtx? what's your monitor's max res?

The differences in the screens are hardly visible, you should try and take two pics in the roughly the same spot, with some comparable landmarks/enemies.

some different resolution pics might also be cool, like a shot of an area at 680x480 and then a shot at 1280x1024 or 1600x1200 of the same area (just to show PS2 owners what they'll be missing, lol)



On 2006-04-25 08:57, Lux wrote:

The textures look bad even on the high quality version (look at the big rock in the foreground), I guess they didn't implement the best textures in the beta just to keep the download for the installer smaller, can anyone confirm that?



Ye the textures do look ugly on that rock, it's probably more likely a result of the PS2 being cr@p and all, haha, rather than not "implementing the best textures in the beta"

[VioletSkye]

On 2006-04-25 08:50, Lux wrote:
2GB is total overkill, only graphics designers who work with huge images would need that. 1GB is absolutely fine for games, that should be enough to save all those textures to.
"Integrated video"? You mean VRAM? That's located in your graphics card (128MB to 256MB graphics card will do great right now):


Actually 2GB is not total overkill and can make a sizeable difference framerate-wise in texture heavy games.

Integrated video does not refer to the VRAM in your graphics card, it refers to the graphic controllers and display memory chips being onboard (meaning they are a part of the motherboard) as opposed to a separate card with it's own GPU (graphics processing unit) to handle calculations. What that means is that the CPU ends up handling most of those calculations and a portion of the "system memory" is used instead of having dedicated VRAM (which is more expensive.) VRAM (unlike conventional RAM) is capable of being accessed by two different devices at the same time (the RAMDAC to access the VRAM for screen updates and the GPU to provide new data.) Because of this, integrated video has generally been awful for gaming. However with the newer chipsets and dual core CPUs, things are getting alot better. The latest chipsets are WAY faster and handle alot more of the game calculations than previous controllers and with newer CPUs being able to process executions on two separate cores, each with their own caches and cache controllers. AMD dual cores handle gaming a bit better atm because they use a highspeed bar for communication between the CPU cores instead of the slower FSB that the current Intel dual cores use. Heh, to be honest I'm kinda surprised you didn't know what integrated video meant, it's been a very common term for years and years http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_lol.gif

BTW not only graphics designers benefit from more RAM, pretty much anyone who games, multi-tasks, does rendering (both 2d and 3d) and video editting will notice a definite gain in speed and performance. Todays applications are far more complex and memory hungry then older versions.


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: VioletSkye on 2006-04-25 10:24 ]</font>

[Le_True_Noir]

On 2006-04-25 10:03, kassy wrote:


On 2006-04-25 01:52, Le_True_Noir wrote:
hi i toke the pic of the game on all settings high and all settings low but. i dont tink u going to tell the diffrence by yust looking at them i tinks its becuse of my x2 geforce 7800 gtx that no mater how low i put the settings it still looks good.


Shouldn't you be easily running the game at a higher resolution than 1024x768 with two 7800 gtx? what's your monitor's max res?

The differences in the screens are hardly visible, you should try and take two pics in the roughly the same spot, with some comparable landmarks/enemies.

some different resolution pics might also be cool, like a shot of an area at 680x480 and then a shot at 1280x1024 or 1600x1200 of the same area (just to show PS2 owners what they'll be missing, lol)



On 2006-04-25 08:57, Lux wrote:

The textures look bad even on the high quality version (look at the big rock in the foreground), I guess they didn't implement the best textures in the beta just to keep the download for the installer smaller, can anyone confirm that?



Ye the textures do look ugly on that rock, it's probably more likely a result of the PS2 being cr@p and all, haha, rather than not "implementing the best textures in the beta"

I will try to do it today ones the servers r up on jp around 3am and the downlaod size of he installer is only 555MB

[Sessilu]

Can i ask if these settings ( My Current Computer )
Will run PSU at least at Low End?
I run Psobb at Medium and at 800x600 that is.

My settings are as follow:

Taken from the Device Manager lol


Computer: ACPI Uniprocessor PC
Graphics Card: NVIDIA GeForcer 5200 FX
Intel(R) Pentium (R) 4 CPU 2.40 GHz
Sound...thingy: SoundMAX Integrated Digital Audio


Kinda like that...

Oh yeah will it look good 17- inch monitor?

I'm just to hyped for Psu i can't think right <.<

[Sev]

I've never really been bothered by resolution. The only time it gets to me is when I'm used to being on one resolution, then I have to change to a different one. It's extremely annoying.

Right now...

AMD Athon 64 3200+
2GB Patriot RAM
PCI Express, EVGA 6800GS (Going to change the card simply because they have a good 90 updgrade program and prices fell from the time I bought this. Not to mention new cards came out altogether.)

I shouldn't really have any problems. At least I don't think so.

[Le_True_Noir]

Ok here the new set of pic as requeted by kassy sorry kassy my monitor max res is 1280x1024 so i cant do 1600x1200 and trust me people i'm seting all things to high as far as i culd tell.
if there anything i shold change plz tell me yust look at the pic *SPOILER*
setting pic
http://mysite.verizon.net/res7gdth/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/settings.jpg

1024x768 all settings high
http://mysite.verizon.net/res7gdth/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/psuallthinginhighin1024x768.jpg

1280x1024 all settings high
http://mysite.verizon.net/res7gdth/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/psuallthinginhighi1280x1024.jpg

640x480 all setings low
http://mysite.verizon.net/res7gdth/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/psuallthinginlowin680x480.jpg




<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Le_True_Noir on 2006-04-26 02:23 ]</font>


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Le_True_Noir on 2006-04-26 02:29 ]</font>

[Lux]

Ah thanks for clearing that up VioletSkye, I didn't know what it was called in English (I'm German) http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_smile.gif. And yeah more RAM is always better of course for everyone (even business computers), I know. http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_smile.gif

[Zephyr_]

I have:
AMD Athlong XP-M (Barton Core) 1.8GHz, overclocked to 2.3GHz
nVidia GeForce 4 5200 FX Ultra
512 MB DDR-3500 RAM

And I can run everything at max, except Effects is at low, and Post Effects is set to OFF. If I turn effects up at all I get massive slow-downs =P.

[T_0_0_L]

What makes me mad is that no one has turned on their anti-aliasing yet, even though some people have the ability. Please, can someone post a screen with AA forced to 8X?

[Kayai]

dammit the only thing wrong with mine is my RAM:384 MB T.T

[Zephyr_]

On 2006-04-26 11:30, T_0_0_L wrote:
What makes me mad is that no one has turned on their anti-aliasing yet, even though some people have the ability. Please, can someone post a screen with AA forced to 8X?


I would do that myself, however 8x AA is major kill to my system. Even for 2x I get good lag. If I ever get free time to just play around (lol shared account), I might try it myself, just for picture reasons :3.

[Violation]

If I was in the beta I would do anything anyone asked :/ I would make a whole topic for it...

[Saraphim]

On 2006-04-26 02:10, Le_True_Noir wrote:
Ok here the new set of pic as requeted by kassy sorry kassy my monitor max res is 1280x1024 so i cant do 1600x1200 and trust me people i'm seting all things to high as far as i culd tell.
if there anything i shold change plz tell me yust look at the pic *SPOILER*
setting pic
http://mysite.verizon.net/res7gdth/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/settings.jpg

1024x768 all settings high
http://mysite.verizon.net/res7gdth/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/psuallthinginhighin1024x768.jpg

1280x1024 all settings high
http://mysite.verizon.net/res7gdth/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/psuallthinginhighi1280x1024.jpg

640x480 all setings low
http://mysite.verizon.net/res7gdth/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/psuallthinginlowin680x480.jpg




<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Le_True_Noir on 2006-04-26 02:23 ]</font>


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Le_True_Noir on 2006-04-26 02:29 ]</font>


Thanks for the comparison pics. Just one question, when set to low end, how bad is the frame skip? Before I got my desktop, the low end frame skip was terrible for PSOBB on my laptop.

[T_0_0_L]

Do you think someone can loan their acount? I know its a risk, but I just want to get some screens with everything maxed (Athlon XP 3200+, 1GB PC3200 RAM, AGP Asus X800 256MB, 250GB 7200RPM SATA HD) and with adaptive anti aliasing. I'll give you any collateral you need if you are really worried, but I have been a long time PSO junkey. Email me at [email protected] if you can. I am just tired of looking at these crappy shots -_-;;.

[Nisshoku]

I still find it funny that I can run PSU on my rig albeit a bit slow, but it does run. There's a few errors here and there within, but nothing so bad as to disrupt gameplay....

Graphics Card: NVIDIA GeForce 4 MMX440 DDR (32MB video card, lol.)
Processor:AMD Athlon XP2400+ Processor 2.0 Ghz

I pretty much have things on the smallest resolution, and the lowest settings I can pull off, and it still is a little slow...But, nothing I can't handle. I mean heck, I had dialup when testing JP BB. XP

[Le_True_Noir]

On 2006-04-26 19:22, Saraphim wrote:


On 2006-04-26 02:10, Le_True_Noir wrote:
Ok here the new set of pic as requeted by kassy sorry kassy my monitor max res is 1280x1024 so i cant do 1600x1200 and trust me people i'm seting all things to high as far as i culd tell.
if there anything i shold change plz tell me yust look at the pic *SPOILER*
setting pic
http://mysite.verizon.net/res7gdth/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/settings.jpg

1024x768 all settings high
http://mysite.verizon.net/res7gdth/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/psuallthinginhighin1024x768.jpg

1280x1024 all settings high
http://mysite.verizon.net/res7gdth/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/psuallthinginhighi1280x1024.jpg

640x480 all setings low
http://mysite.verizon.net/res7gdth/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/psuallthinginlowin680x480.jpg




<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Le_True_Noir on 2006-04-26 02:23 ]</font>


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Le_True_Noir on 2006-04-26 02:29 ]</font>


Thanks for the comparison pics. Just one question, when set to low end, how bad is the frame skip? Before I got my desktop, the low end frame skip was terrible for PSOBB on my laptop.


The frame skip all most made me sick so trust me u dont whant to play psu on your pc in low settings if u dont have a good pc yust get the PS2 ver.

[Sessilu]

Can some of the Beta testers tell me, if a GeForce Fx 5200 128 Mb is enough to at least run this on Low settings?
I really want to know before i get a heart attack and when i run psu, it doesn't work <.<
I would die that day, seriously v.v..

[SSNX]

On 2006-04-26 23:35, -Nisshoku- wrote:
I still find it funny that I can run PSU on my rig albeit a bit slow, but it does run. There's a few errors here and there within, but nothing so bad as to disrupt gameplay....

Graphics Card: NVIDIA GeForce 4 MMX440 DDR (32MB video card, lol.)
Processor:AMD Athlon XP2400+ Processor 2.0 Ghz

I pretty much have things on the smallest resolution, and the lowest settings I can pull off, and it still is a little slow...But, nothing I can't handle. I mean heck, I had dialup when testing JP BB. XP
Are you using the latest drivers?
I can't get PSU to start (I get a blank screen with music) and I have a similar card.
I’m not in the beta so its not that important, but I’d like to see if I can run it.

[Kayai]

AMD Athlon 64 Processor
nVIDIA Geforce 6100
2.01 GHz, 384 MB of RAM

Would my Computer lag like all hell broke loose if i tried to run this?

[Mitz]

On 2006-04-30 14:34, Kayai wrote:
AMD Athlon 64 Processor
nVIDIA Geforce 6100
2.01 GHz, 384 MB of RAM

Would my Computer lag like all hell broke loose if i tried to run this?




Probably not since it's twice as good as my stuff and mine isn't SUPER laggy. (but it lags a lot yeah)