Forum Settings
       
This Forum is Read Only

How and how much $ to get a proper PC?Follow

#52 Jul 01 2010 at 8:47 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
295 posts
Quote:
Ok here's the rig I put together, can someone tell me what I'm still missing right down to a ***** please?

---Tower----
XION Vantage Mid-Tower Case

---Processor----
AMD Athlon II x4 2.8 GHz

---GPU----
Radeon 5770

---Memory----
G.SKILL Ripjaws Series 4GB (2 x2G)

---Monitor----
Gonna use my HDTV Sony Bravia 56" (not for bragging but so you guys tell me if I need something to play it using the TV, I have a cable already but graphics compatible or anything wrong?)

---PSU----
some 650W PSU, haven't decided yet.

---Motherboard----
Biostar MCP6PB M2+ Motherboard

Everything else essential (i.e., mouse, keyboard, DVD drive, sound card, network card) taken into account. Am I missing any other essentials?


You are missing several screws in fact.

kidding aside, you'll probably want a hard drive :o. Using a TV is great, but make sure the imagine is sharp enough. Some TVs really pixelize small text. Other than that, you can probably pick up a 3.2 ghz core for the same price, and about $50 more you can find a nice 3.6 ghz duo core :P.
#53 Jul 01 2010 at 11:08 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
23 posts
Quote:
---PSU----
some 650W PSU, haven't decided yet.

http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleID=1720

It's best if you spend a little extra to buy a reputable brand-name PSU. Not sure if you already knew that, but I thought I'd tell you just in case.
#54 Jul 01 2010 at 11:48 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Aarre wrote:
Quote:
---PSU----
some 650W PSU, haven't decided yet.

http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleID=1720

It's best if you spend a little extra to buy a reputable brand-name PSU. Not sure if you already knew that, but I thought I'd tell you just in case.


Antec and CoolerMaster are better brands for PSU. Raidmax and Corsair are pretty good as well.
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#55 Jul 02 2010 at 9:47 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
742 posts
XFX is also a good brand. Try to find a PSU with a single large 12V rail. The power supply is about the only thing that you don't want to skimp on when building a PC. If your power supply fails it can damage your mobo and just about everything hooked up to it. Just make sure to buy a decent brand.
____________________________
Drake Wulfric - Selbina Server
#56 Jul 02 2010 at 12:37 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
***
2,536 posts
I'm trying to keep my CPU+GPU price around $350 (actually trying as best as I can to keep it under). Which do you think would be the best combo:



AMD Phenom II x4 955 3.2Ghz = ~$160

ATI Radeon HD 5770 = ~$170
or
Geforce GTX 260 = ~$200

Total = ~$330 to $360



Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300 2.5Ghz = ~$200

ATI Radeon HD 5750 1Gb = ~$140
or
Geforce 9800 GTX = ~$135

Total = ~$335 to $340



Intel Core i5 750 2.66Ghz = ~$195

ATI Radeon HD 5750 1Gb = ~$140
or
Geforce 9800 GTX = ~$135
or
ATI Radeon HD 5770 = ~$170

Total = ~$330 to $365



Edited, Jul 2nd 2010 1:41pm by Threx
____________________________
FF11 Server: Caitsith
Kalyna (retired, 2008)
100 Goldsmith
75 Rng, Brd
Main/Acc
Exp/Hybrid
Str/Attk
Spam/Others
#57 Jul 02 2010 at 2:24 PM Rating: Good
Sage
**
770 posts
One thing in this whole site i havent noticed anyone check is teh pwoer cypply, certain peices of hardware need a certain power supply voltage or whatever to work to there full capacity.
____________________________
I do not suffer from insanity.. I rather enjoy it.

{retired} Devalynn Mithra WHM extrodinare -Garuda (gives everyone a high paw! yeah!)

Church OF Mikhalia
#58 Jul 02 2010 at 2:41 PM Rating: Decent
*****
11,539 posts
Threx wrote:
I'm trying to keep my CPU+GPU price around $350 (actually trying as best as I can to keep it under). Which do you think would be the best combo:



AMD Phenom II x4 955 3.2Ghz = ~$160

ATI Radeon HD 5770 = ~$170
or
Geforce GTX 260 = ~$200

Total = ~$330 to $360


I'd suggest that one. AMD motherboards are less expensive than intel boards, so if you're trying to save money, that will help out.
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#59 Jul 02 2010 at 6:01 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
66 posts
Excited about FFXIV and wanted some tech-savvy folks input about my current rig. Built for the purpose to play Warhammer: Age of Reckoning and wanted to see if I'm in need to upgrade for FFXIV...

GIGABYTE LGA 1156 Intel P55
Intel® Core™ i7-860 processor(8MB Cache, 2.80GHz)
16GB Dual Channel DDR3 SDRAM @ 1333MHz
ATI Radeon HD 5770 1024MB GDDR5
1TB - 7200RPM, SATA 3.0Gb/s, 16MB Cache
____________________________
Phoenix Server, Final Fantasy XI (Retired)
Etoh 75 Warrior, 75 White Mage, 75 Black Mage, 75 Summoner
37 Ninja, 37 Red Mage, 37 Samurai, 37 Thief, 37 Monk, 37 Blue Mage, 37 Dark Knight

Volkmar Server, Warhammer: Age of Reckoning (Retired)
Diabolos Nox R40/RR80 Sorcerer
Greasuss R40/RR68 Choppa
Rhra R40/RR63 Zealot
#60 Jul 02 2010 at 6:31 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Anaris85 wrote:
Excited about FFXIV and wanted some tech-savvy folks input about my current rig. Built for the purpose to play Warhammer: Age of Reckoning and wanted to see if I'm in need to upgrade for FFXIV...

GIGABYTE LGA 1156 Intel P55
Intel® Core™ i7-860 processor(8MB Cache, 2.80GHz)
16GB Dual Channel DDR3 SDRAM @ 1333MHz
ATI Radeon HD 5770 1024MB GDDR5
1TB - 7200RPM, SATA 3.0Gb/s, 16MB Cache


Not at all. You look like you're pretty set. Have you run the benchmark yet? I would anticipate you should score well.
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#61 Jul 02 2010 at 6:44 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
66 posts
Haven't done a benchmark yet. As stated, the rig was built specifically to make Warhammer: Age of Reckoning playable. Thank you for the input. But if I wanted to do so upgrades, which components would you advise me to upgrade?
____________________________
Phoenix Server, Final Fantasy XI (Retired)
Etoh 75 Warrior, 75 White Mage, 75 Black Mage, 75 Summoner
37 Ninja, 37 Red Mage, 37 Samurai, 37 Thief, 37 Monk, 37 Blue Mage, 37 Dark Knight

Volkmar Server, Warhammer: Age of Reckoning (Retired)
Diabolos Nox R40/RR80 Sorcerer
Greasuss R40/RR68 Choppa
Rhra R40/RR63 Zealot
#62 Jul 02 2010 at 11:56 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
***
2,536 posts

Anaris85 wrote:
But if I wanted to do so upgrades, which components would you advise me to upgrade?


I'd say your GPU.

Your RAM is already way more than enough. Your CPU is close to top-tier. Only your GPU is a few notches below top tier, so I'd suggest you upgrade that.
____________________________
FF11 Server: Caitsith
Kalyna (retired, 2008)
100 Goldsmith
75 Rng, Brd
Main/Acc
Exp/Hybrid
Str/Attk
Spam/Others
#63 Jul 03 2010 at 12:13 AM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Threx wrote:

Anaris85 wrote:
But if I wanted to do so upgrades, which components would you advise me to upgrade?


I'd say your GPU.

Your RAM is already way more than enough. Your CPU is close to top-tier. Only your GPU is a few notches below top tier, so I'd suggest you upgrade that.


I would suggest an upgrade of my home address on a box with your system in it. I'll even pay shipping. >.>

But no, seriously; that's a pretty beastly system. I'd be surprised if your benchmark isn't at least 6000 on low/4000 on high, and I'm being conservative.

If you really have $350-$600 burning a hole in your pocket, go nuts.
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#64 Jul 04 2010 at 1:55 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
***
2,536 posts
Between:

AMD Phenom II x6 1055t 2.8Ghz
and
Intel Core i5 750 2.66Ghz

On the Tomshardware CPU Heirarchy it lists the i5 TWO tiers higher, while PassMark has the Phenom scoring significantly higher (5584 vs 4201).

Which is more reliable? =/
____________________________
FF11 Server: Caitsith
Kalyna (retired, 2008)
100 Goldsmith
75 Rng, Brd
Main/Acc
Exp/Hybrid
Str/Attk
Spam/Others
#65 Jul 04 2010 at 2:37 AM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Threx wrote:
Between:

AMD Phenom II x6 1055t 2.8Ghz
and
Intel Core i5 750 2.66Ghz

On the Tomshardware CPU Heirarchy it lists the i5 TWO tiers higher, while PassMark has the Phenom scoring significantly higher (5584 vs 4201).

Which is more reliable? =/


That's a toughie. The i5 is a Quad Core with an 8 MB L3 cache, whereas the X6 is a hexacore with a 6 MB L3 cache.

This page on Tom's lists the X6 higher than the i5 in terms of 3DMark score. This PCMark score puts the Core i5 notably ahead, this GTAIV benchmark lists the i5 at half of a FPS higher.

Normally I'd say to stick with passmark as a measure of overall speed/efficiency, but most of the gaming benchmarks on Tom's (FTA, Farcry, Left4Dead) show the i5 outperforming the Phenom II X6 Thuban.

So between the two, I'd probably go with the i5 750 in light of that.
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#66 Jul 04 2010 at 9:42 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
***
2,536 posts
Ah, ok, thanks. The i5 is about 30 bucks cheaper, too, where I'm at.

Another question, kind of a noob question, really:

Suppose I'm running a 2.66Ghz CPU. That would be running the system at 1333 x 2 right?

1. What would happen if I were to use a 1066 RAM stick (DDR3)?

2. What would happen if I were to use a 1600 stick?

3. If I were to OC that same CPU to 3.2Ghz (let's assume it's possible and doesn't fry) running at 1600 x 2. What kind of RAM should I use instead of the 1333?

Thanks.
____________________________
FF11 Server: Caitsith
Kalyna (retired, 2008)
100 Goldsmith
75 Rng, Brd
Main/Acc
Exp/Hybrid
Str/Attk
Spam/Others
#67 Jul 04 2010 at 10:26 AM Rating: Excellent
*****
11,539 posts
Threx wrote:
Ah, ok, thanks. The i5 is about 30 bucks cheaper, too, where I'm at.

Another question, kind of a noob question, really:

Suppose I'm running a 2.66Ghz CPU. That would be running the system at 1333 x 2 right?

1. What would happen if I were to use a 1066 RAM stick (DDR3)?

2. What would happen if I were to use a 1600 stick?

3. If I were to OC that same CPU to 3.2Ghz (let's assume it's possible and doesn't fry) running at 1600 x 2. What kind of RAM should I use instead of the 1333?

Thanks.


RAM speed just affects the maximum speed at which the RAM communicates with other devices. Also, the i5-720 is a quad core, not dual core processor. That means it has 4 cores that each run at 2.66. Now this does not mean you have a 10.64 GHz processor; just that you have the virtual equivalent of four individual 2.66 processors in one physical device. Processor core speeds are not cumulative; they all work simultaneously and independently. The main purpose is multitasking; if your program sends 8 sets of instructions to a single core processor and it takes that processor 1 second to process each instruction (clock speed), then it will take 8 seconds to process everything. If you send that same 8 instructions to a quad core that takes 2 seconds to process each instruction, then it will take 4 seconds (2x4 = 8) to process everything. So even though this theoretical second processor has a lower clock speed, it has more cores and can therefore do more at once.

Now if we took this same set of theoretical processors and sent two instructions that take 4 seconds each, the single core processor will take 8 seconds, and the quad core will take 4 seconds; the other two cores will not be utilized at all because they have nothing to process. This is also why some games or programs perform better on single or dual core processors than quad; if they don't fully utilize all of the processor cores, then the cores they aren't using might as well not even be there.

Technologically, there isn't too much more room to go up in terms of clock speed without getting diminishing returns. With the way applications run nowadays, it's better to put a 2.66-2.8 GHz Dual or Quad core in most systems than a 3.2 GHz single core. The difference in performance is not noticeable enough to your average person in terms of clock speed, but the multiple cores/threads work with software better to achieve a better effect.

Think of a processor almost like a classroom. If you have one really smart student, they can finish their work faster than a student who is not as intelligent. BUT, if you take 4 students and give them each 1/4 of the work to do, they will collectively finish faster than one person would have, even if he was smarter than they.

So the short version is: So long as your motherboard supports the RAM you're trying to use, the processor's core speed is not going to be "incompatible" with whatever you choose.

Edited, Jul 4th 2010 12:29pm by Mikhalia
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#68 Jul 04 2010 at 10:42 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
***
2,536 posts
Do you ever sleep? lol

Thanks for clearly explaining how the multiple cores work. :)


However, I'm still a bit confused about the RAM part. Suppose I run an i5 750 2.66Ghz. What would be shown in the bios? Would it show as "1333" with a x2 multiplier?

If the answer to the above question is yes, then how would 1066, 1333, and 1600 RAM sticks perform compared to each other?

Edit - Changed the question for clarity.



Edited, Jul 4th 2010 11:50am by Threx
____________________________
FF11 Server: Caitsith
Kalyna (retired, 2008)
100 Goldsmith
75 Rng, Brd
Main/Acc
Exp/Hybrid
Str/Attk
Spam/Others
#69 Jul 04 2010 at 12:05 PM Rating: Decent
36 posts
got www.hp.com
you can build a PC or laptop
this is an example of the Laptop and tower im looking to buy under 700$

Genuine Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit
AMD Phenom(TM) II Dual-Core Mobile Processor N620 (2.8GHz, 2MB L2 Cache)
3GB DDR3 System Memory (2 Dimm)
FREE Upgraede to 320GB 5400RPM SATA Hard Drive
ATI Mobility Radeon(TM) HD 4250 Graphics and 5-in-1 integrated Digital Media Reader & HDMI
15.6" diagonal High Definition HP LED Brightview Display (1366x768)
SuperMulti 8X DVD+/-R/RW with Double Layer Support
Microphone Only (no webcam) with 5-in-1 integrated Digital Media Reader and HDMI
Wireless-N Card with Bluetooth
Full-size keyboard with One touch launch keys and Action keys
6 Cell Lithium Ion Battery
No Modem
Microsoft(R) Office Starter 2010
HP Home & Home Office Store in-box envelope
price is 668 with tax and shipping



or tower im looking at

Genuine Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit
Intel(R) Pentium(R) Dual-Core processor E6600 [3.06GHz, 2MB L2, 1066MHz FSB]
FREE UPGRADE! 3GB DDR3-800MHz SDRAM [2 DIMMs] from 2GB
FREE UPGRADE! 500GB 7200 rpm SATA 3Gb/s hard drive from 320GB
1GB ATI Radeon HD 5450 [DVI, HDMI, VGA]
LightScribe 16X max. DVD+/-R/RW SuperMulti drive
Integrated Ethernet port, No wireless LAN
2 USB, front audio ports
No TV Tuner
Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Xtreme Audio
No speakers
HP USB keyboard and optical mouse
Microsoft Office Starter 2010
No additional security software
HP Home & Home Office Store in-box envelope

price is 672 with tax and shipping

crossrefrenceing with SEs specs this i think should do nicely
#70 Jul 04 2010 at 11:18 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Threx wrote:
Do you ever sleep? lol

Thanks for clearly explaining how the multiple cores work. :)


However, I'm still a bit confused about the RAM part. Suppose I run an i5 750 2.66Ghz. What would be shown in the bios? Would it show as "1333" with a x2 multiplier?

If the answer to the above question is yes, then how would 1066, 1333, and 1600 RAM sticks perform compared to each other?

Edit - Changed the question for clarity.


The bios would show it as 2.66. And the ram speed has nothing to do with the processor speed, or little to do with it. The Motherboard will support certain speeds of RAM, and the RAM will operate at a given frequency. The two will communicate at whichever is the lower of the two (e.g. if your motherboard supports 1600/1333/1066 and you install 1333, it will operate at 1333).

A higher speed RAM will perform faster (1333 DDR3 will be faster than 800 DDR2 for example). The core speed of the processor is independent of this. It seems like you're trying to think of the processor in terms of being a 1333 speed and thinking that it would work well/best with 1333 RAM; that statement isn't an accurate one.

Short version: Get a good processor and get good RAM and get a motherboard that is compatible with both. RAM speed and CPU speed are pretty much irrespective of each other.

And I do sleep. :)

vermillionreign wrote:
got www.hp.com
you can build a PC or laptop
this is an example of the Laptop and tower im looking to buy under 700$

AMD Phenom(TM) II Dual-Core Mobile Processor N620 (2.8GHz, 2MB L2 Cache)
ATI Mobility Radeon(TM) HD 4250 Graphics

or tower im looking at

Genuine Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit
Intel(R) Pentium(R) Dual-Core processor E6600 [3.06GHz, 2MB L2, 1066MHz FSB]
1GB ATI Radeon HD 5450 [DVI, HDMI, VGA]

price is 672 with tax and shipping

crossrefrenceing with SEs specs this i think should do nicely


Laptop processor is on the low side but might manage if the GPU were much better. The GPU is terribad. For reference, a Radeon 4250 with a Phenom II X4 (far better processor) netted me about a 500 on the benchmark. This system would probably get a 200-300ish. I would be EXTREMELY impressed if the game even installed on that laptop. Running it on even minimum settings is practically out of the question.

The desktop's processor is similarly low, and again the video card would need some upgrading. At least a 56xx to play the game on minimum settings at 5-10 FPS. As-is, I could see you getting maybe a 1000-1500 on the benchmark.

Look here for information on processors/video cards.

$600 is a good budget for a desktop if you are planning to upgrade parts in your existing system and can keep your OS, HD, DVD, case to save on money.

If you -must- buy retail, try here for some examples of what to look for and what -not- to buy. Estimated budget of retail system (customized with a better video card out of the box which will add about 160-180 on to the price) in total is about 850-950.

For a laptop, if you want to run FFXIV at bare minimum settings, at a really low FPS in the wilderness, and don't ever plan on going into any crowded areas, ever, consider budgeting about $1000ish. If you want something reasonable to look at, aim higher. If it doesn't include a mobile equivalent of a GTX 400 series or Radeon 5800 series (both of which perform WAY lower than their desktop equivalents), don't even consider it. For reference:

middle wrote:
Intel Core i5 540M 2.53GHz (3.06GHz Turbo Mode, 3MB Cache)
1GB ATI Radeon Mobility HD 5870
4GB Dual Channel DDR3 at 1066MHz

Only scored a 3000 on the benchmark on low settings. Lol.


That is a pretty kick *** laptop that probably set him back about $1500+ easy and it barely cleared 3000.

I'm saying this will all the confidence in the world: A $700 will not run XIV at anything that could even be considered anywhere near even remotely playable, if it even runs it at all. A -retail- desktop of the same price might be able to manage at minimum settings, so long as you limit your time in crowded areas.
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#71 Jul 05 2010 at 1:01 AM Rating: Decent
36 posts
Sounds to me you might as well drop 1,200~2,500 on a Ailenware Setup. But haveing looked at it thats far more expencive for my taste and has things i dont need or would use.

I just crossed SEs list with what im building says 2.0ghz duo processer or better,
Well the tower is 3.06 and the Laptop is 2.8 and there both duo processors

Both video cards are HD(high Def) video cards and are better then SEs listed cards , The tower card is a 1gig and the Laptop is 512MB (SEs requirement 512MB VRAM) Basicaly all i want the PC and laptop to do is run the game and fraps and go online with basic web browsing) Dont need much more then that lol. Well see ill get it then test the Bench if it fails ill send it back for a refund and just say it wont do what i want it to do easy.

Or i can get this one i just built for 721 shiped

Genuine Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit
AMD Phenom(TM) X4 830 quad-core processor [2.8GHz, 2MB L2 + 4MB L3 shared, up to 4000MHz]
3GB DDR3-1333MHz SDRAM [2 DIMMs]
FREE UPGRADE! 500GB 7200 rpm SATA 3Gb/s hard drive from 320GB
1GB ATI Radeon HD 5450 [DVI, HDMI, VGA]
LightScribe 16X max. DVD+/-R/RW SuperMulti drive
Integrated Ethernet port, No wireless LAN
2 USB, front audio ports
No TV Tuner
Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Xtreme Audio
No speakers
HP USB keyboard and optical mouse
Microsoft Office Starter 2010
No additional security software
HP Home & Home Office Store in-box envelope

And thats a tower only





Edited, Jul 5th 2010 3:02am by vermillionreign

Edited, Jul 5th 2010 3:11am by vermillionreign
#72 Jul 05 2010 at 2:04 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
66 posts
I ran the official benchmark...

High: 2498
Low: 4388

On low, my FPS was jumping from 70-80fps. Now, I know actual gameplay with other players around will decrease the fps but it does look promising. On high, I was seeing 40-55fps. My question is ... are these 2 resolution options the only ones we will be able to use once the game is released. I hope not because I perfer to go fullscreen.

As for upgrading, I will probably play thru the 8 day early start and then figure out if I need to upgrade my rig. I'm thinking video card will probably need to be upgraded. I have the money to buy to high-end video cards now but I rather play the actual game first before buying anything.
____________________________
Phoenix Server, Final Fantasy XI (Retired)
Etoh 75 Warrior, 75 White Mage, 75 Black Mage, 75 Summoner
37 Ninja, 37 Red Mage, 37 Samurai, 37 Thief, 37 Monk, 37 Blue Mage, 37 Dark Knight

Volkmar Server, Warhammer: Age of Reckoning (Retired)
Diabolos Nox R40/RR80 Sorcerer
Greasuss R40/RR68 Choppa
Rhra R40/RR63 Zealot
#73 Jul 05 2010 at 3:18 AM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
vermillionreign wrote:
Sounds to me you might as well drop 1,200~2,500 on a Ailenware Setup. But haveing looked at it thats far more expencive for my taste and has things i dont need or would use.


A laptop that will have the specs to run XIV will be expensive; remember I just linked a pretty top end one and it only scored a 3000. Laptops built for high requirement gaming are expensive.

vermillionreign wrote:
I just crossed SEs list with what im building says 2.0ghz duo processer or better,
Well the tower is 3.06 and the Laptop is 2.8 and there both duo processors

Both video cards are HD(high Def) video cards and are better then SEs listed cards , The tower card is a 1gig and the Laptop is 512MB (SEs requirement 512MB VRAM) Basicaly all i want the PC and laptop to do is run the game and fraps and go online with basic web browsing) Dont need much more then that lol. Well see ill get it then test the Bench if it fails ill send it back for a refund and just say it wont do what i want it to do easy.


The minimum specs are the MINIMUM. They will not get you pretty graphics. They won't even get you good graphics. Picture the following:

You just bought your brand new computer. You got it all hooked up. You install FFXIV on it.

You turn the resolution to the minimum.
You turn Antialiasing off.
Draw distance - lowest.
Water reflections - off.
Shadows - totally off.
Textures - minimum.
Terrain detail - minimum
Grass - off
Weapon/spell efffects and animations - completely off

Having done that, you step into an open field. No one is around. 10 FPS, maybe. You decide to step into a town, there are some people around... 2 FPS.

That is what a dual core processor and a 512 MB video card will get you. If you're fine with an extremely jumpy game with minimal detail and no spell/ability effects whatsoever, then I will not talk you out of purchasing that system. I'm just trying to warn you.

vermillionreign wrote:
Or i can get this one i just built for 721 shiped

Genuine Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit Irrelevant
AMD Phenom(TM) X4 830 quad-core processor [2.8GHz, 2MB L2 + 4MB L3 shared, up to 4000MHz] This is good.
3GB DDR3-1333MHz SDRAM [2 DIMMs] A bit low. You might manage.
FREE UPGRADE! 500GB 7200 rpm SATA 3Gb/s hard drive from 320GB Irrelevant
1GB ATI Radeon HD 5450 [DVI, HDMI, VGA] Expect very little graphical detail, you may be able to turn one or two things a bit up from minimum, you might even get 15-20 FPS out of it.
LightScribe 16X max. DVD+/-R/RW SuperMulti drive Irrelevant
Integrated Ethernet port, No wireless LAN Irrelevant
2 USB, front audio ports Irrelevant
No TV Tuner Irrelevant
Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Xtreme Audio Irrelevant
No speakers Irrelevant (Although you might want speakers; I guess you don't need them)
HP USB keyboard and optical mouse Irrelevant
Microsoft Office Starter 2010 Irrelevant
No additional security software Irrelevant
HP Home & Home Office Store in-box envelope Irrelevant

And thats a tower only


If you were going to go with that tower, I would HIGHLY suggest upgrading the video card if you want good performance. As is, that system might get about 2000ish on the benchmark. Maybe 2500, tops. It's better than what a dual core processor would give you, but I still think you're hurting yourself.
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#74 Jul 05 2010 at 3:20 AM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Anaris85 wrote:
I ran the official benchmark...

High: 2498
Low: 4388

On low, my FPS was jumping from 70-80fps. Now, I know actual gameplay with other players around will decrease the fps but it does look promising. On high, I was seeing 40-55fps. My question is ... are these 2 resolution options the only ones we will be able to use once the game is released. I hope not because I perfer to go fullscreen.

As for upgrading, I will probably play thru the 8 day early start and then figure out if I need to upgrade my rig. I'm thinking video card will probably need to be upgraded. I have the money to buy to high-end video cards now but I rather play the actual game first before buying anything.


I'm hoping that there will be fullscreen options as well; I loathe playing anything more involved than a browser game in a window.

I personally think your system should be fine as-is but I won't talk you out of upgrading your video card if you really want to push the settings even higher.
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#75 Jul 05 2010 at 3:30 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
66 posts
My last mmo, Warhammer Online, I started with middle-of-the-road graphics. Meaning it was good enough to play but the settings were toned down to get 27fps. Once I got my current rig, the game was set to max on everything. At 87fps and max settings, the game went from playable to something I wanted to play 8-10hrs a day!!

If upgrade on video card is needed. Then the ATi 5970 would be my target unit to get. I am a bit surprised and glad that FFXIV is as demanding as it is.
____________________________
Phoenix Server, Final Fantasy XI (Retired)
Etoh 75 Warrior, 75 White Mage, 75 Black Mage, 75 Summoner
37 Ninja, 37 Red Mage, 37 Samurai, 37 Thief, 37 Monk, 37 Blue Mage, 37 Dark Knight

Volkmar Server, Warhammer: Age of Reckoning (Retired)
Diabolos Nox R40/RR80 Sorcerer
Greasuss R40/RR68 Choppa
Rhra R40/RR63 Zealot
#76 Jul 05 2010 at 6:29 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
***
1,339 posts
I know I need to upgrade, but being between jobs atm in Florida (not to mention economy) puts that on the backburner. My system isn't *too* bad, it scores around a 3.4K on the benchmark in low so it'll at least be decent.

Problem is I've been out of touch with hardware upgrades for so long. I'll just list what I have and hopefully someone can suggest the largest upgrade (I'm just going to go on the guess it'll be GPU).

Mobo: XFX 680i SLI LT

CPU: Quad - Q6600

GPU: XFX 9800 GTX+

RAM: 8GB DDR2 Corsair XMS

I'm well aware that, due to the motherboard (not my favorite, but tigerdirect had a deal at the time for that and the CPU that I couldn't pass up 2 years ago), it all will need to go eventually. It's not a bad mobo, and has allowed me to push the Q6600 to 2.8 on air, but I'll be glad when I get rid of it.

#77 Jul 05 2010 at 7:51 AM Rating: Decent
44 posts
#78 Jul 05 2010 at 11:54 AM Rating: Decent


Ya, I'm surprised they'd take the time to build a bundle around such dated hardware. That's not a gaming rig, that's a, "I need something cheap to give ot my mother in law so she can view all the photos and videos we send her of the grandkids" rig.
#79 Jul 05 2010 at 8:42 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
***
2,536 posts
@StrijderVechter

Definitely your GPU. However, with the CPU/GPU combo you're using, I'm very surprised you managed to score 3.5k on the benchmark, even on low. o.O


@Mikhalia

Thank you for the explanation. So it doesn't matter which frequency my RAM is, no matter what my CPU is running at.
I've got another question. :) Earlier, you stated that the i5 750 seems to be a better choice than the Phenom II x6. But from your posts in another thread, you seemed to imply that the Phenom is better. Now my question is, if you had to choose between the two SOLELY for the purpose of playing FFXIV, and they are both the same price, which would you choose?

Edited, Jul 5th 2010 9:45pm by Threx

Edited, Jul 5th 2010 9:46pm by Threx
____________________________
FF11 Server: Caitsith
Kalyna (retired, 2008)
100 Goldsmith
75 Rng, Brd
Main/Acc
Exp/Hybrid
Str/Attk
Spam/Others
#80 Jul 06 2010 at 2:44 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
***
1,339 posts
Threx wrote:
@StrijderVechter

Definitely your GPU. However, with the CPU/GPU combo you're using, I'm very surprised you managed to score 3.5k on the benchmark, even on low. o.O


It isn't *that* horrible. However, when you know how to tweak things, you can get a lot of mileage out of something.
#81 Jul 06 2010 at 3:47 AM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Threx wrote:
@StrijderVechter

Definitely your GPU. However, with the CPU/GPU combo you're using, I'm very surprised you managed to score 3.5k on the benchmark, even on low. o.O


I am, too. He must have his parts severely overclocked.


Threx wrote:
@Mikhalia

Thank you for the explanation. So it doesn't matter which frequency my RAM is, no matter what my CPU is running at.
I've got another question. :) Earlier, you stated that the i5 750 seems to be a better choice than the Phenom II x6. But from your posts in another thread, you seemed to imply that the Phenom is better. Now my question is, if you had to choose between the two SOLELY for the purpose of playing FFXIV, and they are both the same price, which would you choose?


Basing my answer on this site

I went through and removed everything but two i5s and the only X6 on the list:
 
HIGH	LOW 	VGA 			OS 		CPU 		   		RAM 
4286 	6660 	Radeon HD5850OC 	win7(32bit) 	core i5 750 @ 3.67GHz   	4.00GB 
4155 	5259 	Radeon HD5850 TOXIC 1G 	win7(32bit) 	Intel core i5 750 @2.67 	4.00GB 
3811 	未試験 	Radeon HD5850 		win7(64bit) 	Phenom2 X6 1055T 		4.00GB


Same model of GPU. Same RAM. I did notice that the two with the i5s are running 32 bit OSes vs the X6 on a 64 bit OS... someone posed the question as to whether a 32 bit OS would run the game better than a 64 bit and this piece of information is making me wonder. 未試験, according to Google Translator, means "untested".

Based on this information, I'm inclined to believe the Core i5 may be a better choice than the Phenom II X6, but I do not know if the 32 vs 64 bit OS thing is skewing the results.
.
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#82 Jul 06 2010 at 3:50 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
***
1,339 posts
Mikhalia wrote:
Threx wrote:
@StrijderVechter

Definitely your GPU. However, with the CPU/GPU combo you're using, I'm very surprised you managed to score 3.5k on the benchmark, even on low. o.O


I am, too. He must have his parts severely overclocked.


As I stated, if you had bothered to actually read, the only thing OCed is the CPU, and that's only merely to a 2.8 (from 2.4). Nothing's overlocked with Rivatuner, and I don't do anything extraneous to push boundaries since everything's merely on air at this point. No, the GPU isn't overlocked. No, the RAM isn't overclocked.

Edited, Jul 6th 2010 5:53am by StrijderVechter
#83 Jul 06 2010 at 8:58 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
***
2,536 posts
Mikhalia wrote:
Basing my answer on this site

I went through and removed everything but two i5s and the only X6 on the list:
 
HIGH	LOW 	VGA 			OS 		CPU 		   		RAM 
4286 	6660 	Radeon HD5850OC 	win7(32bit) 	core i5 750 @ 3.67GHz   	4.00GB 
4155 	5259 	Radeon HD5850 TOXIC 1G 	win7(32bit) 	Intel core i5 750 @2.67 	4.00GB 
3811 	未試験 	Radeon HD5850 		win7(64bit) 	Phenom2 X6 1055T 		4.00GB


Same model of GPU. Same RAM. I did notice that the two with the i5s are running 32 bit OSes vs the X6 on a 64 bit OS... someone posed the question as to whether a 32 bit OS would run the game better than a 64 bit and this piece of information is making me wonder. 未試験, according to Google Translator, means "untested".

Based on this information, I'm inclined to believe the Core i5 may be a better choice than the Phenom II X6, but I do not know if the 32 vs 64 bit OS thing is skewing the results.
.



Now that I went ahead and looked through your list of results in the benchmark thread on this forum, I noticed this:

 
Low 	High	OS	Processor			GPU		RAM 
 
	3743	7x64	Phenom x6 1090T			GF GTX 480	4 GB DDR3 
5154	4064	7x64	Core i5 750 – 2.67		ATI 5850	4 GB DDR3  


The Phenom x6 / GTX 480 is a much more powerful combo than the i5 / 5850 one. The 1090T is ranked much higher than the i5 750 on PassMark, and ****, the GTX 480 is top of the food chain.

But the "inferior" combo scored better. And they're both using Win7 64bit.

Which leads me to now conclude that the lower-than-expected performance very likely has to do with the two Phenom II 6-core CPUs, not Win7 64.


But again, this is just the performance in the Benchmark, not in the actual game. It's very possible that the Benchmark itself is bugged.

Edited, Jul 6th 2010 10:03am by Threx
____________________________
FF11 Server: Caitsith
Kalyna (retired, 2008)
100 Goldsmith
75 Rng, Brd
Main/Acc
Exp/Hybrid
Str/Attk
Spam/Others
#84 Jul 06 2010 at 5:12 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Threx wrote:
Mikhalia wrote:
Basing my answer on this site

I went through and removed everything but two i5s and the only X6 on the list:
 
HIGH	LOW 	VGA 			OS 		CPU 		   		RAM 
4286 	6660 	Radeon HD5850OC 	win7(32bit) 	core i5 750 @ 3.67GHz   	4.00GB 
4155 	5259 	Radeon HD5850 TOXIC 1G 	win7(32bit) 	Intel core i5 750 @2.67 	4.00GB 
3811 	未試験 	Radeon HD5850 		win7(64bit) 	Phenom2 X6 1055T 		4.00GB


Same model of GPU. Same RAM. I did notice that the two with the i5s are running 32 bit OSes vs the X6 on a 64 bit OS... someone posed the question as to whether a 32 bit OS would run the game better than a 64 bit and this piece of information is making me wonder. 未試験, according to Google Translator, means "untested".

Based on this information, I'm inclined to believe the Core i5 may be a better choice than the Phenom II X6, but I do not know if the 32 vs 64 bit OS thing is skewing the results.
.



Now that I went ahead and looked through your list of results in the benchmark thread on this forum, I noticed this:

 
Low 	High	OS	Processor			GPU		RAM 
 
	3743	7x64	Phenom x6 1090T			GF GTX 480	4 GB DDR3 
5154	4064	7x64	Core i5 750 – 2.67		ATI 5850	4 GB DDR3  


The Phenom x6 / GTX 480 is a much more powerful combo than the i5 / 5850 one. The 1090T is ranked much higher than the i5 750 on PassMark, and ****, the GTX 480 is top of the food chain.

But the "inferior" combo scored better. And they're both using Win7 64bit.

Which leads me to now conclude that the lower-than-expected performance very likely has to do with the two Phenom II 6-core CPUs, not Win7 64.


But again, this is just the performance in the Benchmark, not in the actual game. It's very possible that the Benchmark itself is bugged.

Edited, Jul 6th 2010 10:03am by Threx


I didn't think I had any X6es on my list, but seeing that... yeah. The GTX 480 is a better card than the 5850, they're both the same RAM and OS, and the i5 preforms better.

So I'm going to have to say i5 750 over X6 with certainty now.
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#85 Jul 06 2010 at 5:59 PM Rating: Default
36 posts
I FINALY FOUND ME A PC THAT WILL KICK FFXIVs ****!!
Sorry this is a little long : ) but i just built this PC and it will cost me 762+ tax probaly less if i config. it differently but with what i wanted im happy. So look at my BEAST

•*BASE_PRICE: [+569]
•BUNDLE: None
•BLUETOOTH: USB Bluetooth 2.0 Adapter [+10]
•CD: 24X Double Layer Dual Format DVD+-R/+-RW + CD-R/RW Drive (BLACK COLOR)
•CD2: None
•CAS: NZXT Hades Gaming Case with Dual 200MM Fan and Tri-Temperature Display
•CASUPGRADE: None
•CS_FAN: Default case fans
•CPU: AMD Athlon™II X4 635 Quad-Core CPU w/ HyperTransport Technology [+30]
•FAN: Asetek 510LC Liquid Cooling System 120MM Radiator & Fan (Enhanced Cooling Performance + Extreme Silent at 20dBA)
•FREEGAME_VC02: None
•FA_HDD: None
•FLASHMEDIA: INTERNAL 12in1 Flash Media Reader/Writer (BLACK COLOR)
•FLOPPY: None
•GLASSES: None
•HDD: 500GB SATA-II 3.0Gb/s 16MB Cache 7200RPM HDD (Single Hard Drive)
•HDD2: None
•IEEE_CARD: None
•KEYBOARD: None [-4]
•MOUSE: None [-3]
•MONITOR: None
•MONITOR2: None
•MONITOR3: None
•MODEM: None
•MULTIVIEW: Non-SLI/Non-CrossFireX Mode Supports Multiple Monitors
•MOTHERBOARD: GigaByte GA-770TA-UD3 AMD 770 Chipset Support DDR3 Ultra Durable™3 Socket AM3 ATX Mainboard w/ 7.1 HD Audio, GbLAN, USB3.0, SATA-III, RAID, 1 Gen2 PCIe, 2 PCIe X1, & 4 PCI
•MB_ADDON: None
•MEMORY: 4GB (2GBx2) DDR3/1333MHz Dual Channel Memory (Corsair Dominator [+44])
•NETWORK: Onboard Gigabit LAN Network
•OS: Microsoft® Windows® 7 Home Premium [+104] (64-bit Edition)
•PRINTER: None
•PRINTER_CABLE: None
•POWERSUPPLY: 700 Watts - XtremeGear SLI/CrossFireX Ready Power Supply [+14]
•RUSH: NO; READY TO SHIP IN 5~10 BUSINESS DAYS
•SOFT1: Free Microsoft® Office® 2010 STARTER EDITION (Reduced-Functionality versions of Word and Excel that include advertising)
•SERVICE: STANDARD WARRANTY: 3-YEAR LIMITED WARRANTY PLUS LIFE-TIME TECHNICAL SUPPORT
•SOUND: HIGH DEFINITION ON-BOARD 7.1 AUDIO
•SPEAKERS: None [-5]
•TEMP: None
•TVRC: None
•USB: Built-in USB 2.0 Ports
•USBX: None
•USBHD: None
•USBFLASH: None
•VIDEO: NVIDIA GeForce GT 240 1GB 16X PCI Express [+3] (Major Brand Powered by NVIDIA)
•VIDEO2: None
•VIDEO3: None
•VC_PHYSX: None
•WNC: None
•_PRICE: (+762) <<< look at the total price
#86 Jul 06 2010 at 6:55 PM Rating: Decent
9 posts
would this be a good motherboard/cpu to get
http://www.frys.com/product/6149409?site=sr:SEARCH:MAIN_RSLT_PG


[Intel® Core™ i3 530 Processor
& BioStar TH55B HD Motherboard
Bundle Combo ]
#87xthunderblazex, Posted: Jul 06 2010 at 6:57 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) No.
#88 Jul 06 2010 at 7:58 PM Rating: Decent
36 posts
the AMD atholan II quad that im geting is on par with the Phenom 2 it colock at 2.9ghz and runs very well. i could add that processor for like 40 bucks but im happy this way
#89xthunderblazex, Posted: Jul 06 2010 at 8:25 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) 2.9 < 3.41
#90 Jul 06 2010 at 8:33 PM Rating: Good
****
5,684 posts
FYI, most people let price also influence their decisions.
____________________________
Almalieque wrote:
I admit that I was wrong

God bless Lili St. Cyr
#91 Jul 07 2010 at 1:35 AM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
vermillionreign wrote:
I FINALY FOUND ME A PC THAT WILL KICK FFXIVs ****!!
•VIDEO: NVIDIA GeForce GT 240 1GB 16X PCI Express [+3] (Major Brand Powered by NVIDIA)


Swing and a miss. That card comes in -well- under the minimmum requirements.

Mikhalia wrote:
Video: If it doesn't say "GeForce GTX 200/400" or "Radeon 48XX/57XX/58XX/59XX", it will not give anywhere near a decent performance.


Edited, Jul 7th 2010 3:42am by Mikhalia
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#92 Jul 07 2010 at 1:59 AM Rating: Decent
vermillionreign wrote:
I FINALY FOUND ME A PC THAT WILL KICK FFXIVs ****!!


I see your gleeful sarcasm and raise you an Smiley: oyvey

Now don't take this personally...I'm not picking on you, but I'm going to make an example of you so hopefully everyone can benefit.

This:

Quote:

Sorry this is a little long : ) but i just built this PC and it will cost me 762+ tax probaly less if i config. it differently but with what i wanted im happy. So look at my BEAST


•CD: 24X Double Layer Dual Format DVD+-R/+-RW + CD-R/RW Drive (BLACK COLOR)
•CAS: NZXT Hades Gaming Case with Dual 200MM Fan and Tri-Temperature Display
•CPU: AMD Athlon™II X4 635 Quad-Core CPU w/ HyperTransport Technology [+30]
•FAN: Asetek 510LC Liquid Cooling System 120MM Radiator & Fan (Enhanced Cooling Performance + Extreme Silent at 20dBA)
•HDD: 500GB SATA-II 3.0Gb/s 16MB Cache 7200RPM HDD (Single Hard Drive)
•MOTHERBOARD: GigaByte GA-770TA-UD3 AMD 770 Chipset Support DDR3 Ultra Durable™3 Socket AM3 ATX Mainboard w/ 7.1 HD Audio, GbLAN, USB3.0, SATA-III, RAID, 1 Gen2 PCIe, 2 PCIe X1, & 4 PCI
•MEMORY: 4GB (2GBx2) DDR3/1333MHz Dual Channel Memory (Corsair Dominator [+44])
•OS: Microsoft® Windows® 7 Home Premium [+104] (64-bit Edition)
•POWERSUPPLY: 700 Watts - XtremeGear SLI/CrossFireX Ready Power Supply [+14]
•SOUND: HIGH DEFINITION ON-BOARD 7.1 AUDIO
•VIDEO: NVIDIA GeForce GT 240 1GB 16X PCI Express [+3] (Major Brand Powered by NVIDIA)
•_PRICE: (+762) <<< look at the total price


is all you needed to post. You're not doing anyone any favors by barfing a page and a half of "Silly peripheral: none" mixed in with the components. It certainly doesn't help with the readability, and it only took me all of 60 seconds to strip out the space-wasting crap.

Please you guys, if you're going to post system specs, do your part to keep it readable.
#93 Jul 07 2010 at 2:27 AM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
The One and Only Aurelius wrote:
vermillionreign wrote:
I FINALY FOUND ME A PC THAT WILL KICK FFXIVs ****!!


I see your gleeful sarcasm and raise you an Smiley: oyvey

Now don't take this personally...I'm not picking on you, but I'm going to make an example of you so hopefully everyone can benefit.

This:

Quote:

Sorry this is a little long : ) but i just built this PC and it will cost me 762+ tax probaly less if i config. it differently but with what i wanted im happy. So look at my BEAST


•CPU: AMD Athlon™II X4 635 Quad-Core CPU w/ HyperTransport Technology [+30]
•MOTHERBOARD: GigaByte GA-770TA-UD3 AMD 770 Chipset Support DDR3 Ultra Durable™3 Socket AM3 ATX Mainboard w/ 7.1 HD Audio, GbLAN, USB3.0, SATA-III, RAID, 1 Gen2 PCIe, 2 PCIe X1, & 4 PCI
•MEMORY: 4GB (2GBx2) DDR3/1333MHz Dual Channel Memory (Corsair Dominator [+44])
•POWERSUPPLY: 700 Watts - XtremeGear SLI/CrossFireX Ready Power Supply [+14]
•VIDEO: NVIDIA GeForce GT 240 1GB 16X PCI Express [+3] (Major Brand Powered by NVIDIA)
•_PRICE: (+762) <<< look at the total price


is all you needed to post. You're not doing anyone any favors by barfing a page and a half of "Silly peripheral: none" mixed in with the components. It certainly doesn't help with the readability, and it only took me all of 60 seconds to strip out the space-wasting crap.

Please you guys, if you're going to post system specs, do your part to keep it readable.


FTFY. Optical drive, hard drive size, type of case... largely irrelevant. If I wanted to strip it even further, I'd say this:

•CPU: AMD Athlon™II X4 635
•MOTHERBOARD: GigaByte GA-770TA-UD3 AM3 ATX
•MEMORY: 4GB (2GBx2) DDR3/1333MHz
•POWERSUPPLY: 700 Watts - XtremeGear
•VIDEO: NVIDIA GeForce GT 240 1GB


EDIT: Video card is still bad though. I can almost hear Tom ******* now; "Video card smoke... don't breathe this."

Edited, Jul 7th 2010 4:29am by Mikhalia
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#94 Jul 07 2010 at 10:52 AM Rating: Good
***
3,178 posts
I'm racking my brain to come up with options to buy a used PC. Looking online seems to be sketchy at best. I'd rather like to buy from a gamer that is upgrading.

I have a $200-$300 budget at best. Is this impossible?

Anyone have ideas for buying used PCs?
#95 Jul 07 2010 at 11:09 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
3,599 posts
Just put together this Alienware laptop online. Pretty sure this should exceed the requirements. So sick of lowering textures to play FFXI. "Only" 1,100. But any Dell desktops were hardly editable (stock graphics card or worse.. integrated..) and cost 800 with no monitor... Figure for an extra 300 I could be set for a while.

Whatcha think?

PROCESSOR Intel® Core™ i3-350M 2.26GHz (3M cache)
VIDEO CARD 1GB ATI Radeon™ Mobility HD 5730
MEMORY 4GB Dual Channel Memory (2x 2GB DDR3)
HARD DRIVE 250GB SATAII 7,200RPM



Could also up it to the I-5 for another hundred.. If you're going in the pool you might as well get your hair wet..

Edited, Jul 7th 2010 1:14pm by Louiscool

Edited, Jul 7th 2010 1:15pm by Louiscool
____________________________


#96 Jul 07 2010 at 11:14 AM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
RufuSwho wrote:
I'm racking my brain to come up with options to buy a used PC. Looking online seems to be sketchy at best. I'd rather like to buy from a gamer that is upgrading.

I have a $200-$300 budget at best. Is this impossible?

Anyone have ideas for buying used PCs?


I don't know what your system is, and/or what needs to be upgraded.

A video card can run you $140-180 for a decent/good one, up to 300-500 depending on how high you want to go.
A processor and motherboard can run you $170-250 for a decent/good pair, up to $1000+, again, depending on how high you want to go.
A new power supply, if your current one is under 500W, will run you 80-120 for a good one. There were a couple nice brands (Antec and CoolerMaster are good) that were on sale last I looked.
RAM, if you upgrade your motherboard and the old RAM isn't compatible, will run you about $100-110ish.

If you're only upgrading 1-2 parts, a 300 dollar budget will work. If you're trying to upgrade everything at once, I would have to say no.

Disclaimer/guideline:

[quote=Mikhalia]Video: If it doesn't say "GeForce GTX 200/400" or "Radeon 48XX/57XX/58XX/59XX", it will not give anywhere near a decent performance.
CPU: If it's not at least a quad core processor it will not give anywhere near a decent performance.
Laptops: If you are looking at a laptop and it is priced under $1000, it will almost certainly not run FFXIV at all. Consult the above two points.
Minimum Requirements: If your system barely meets these, expect to benchmark at 1000-1500. That means lots of lag, 5 FPS, minimum settings, and don't even try to set foot in a crowded area or your system will explode.
Setting a reasonable budget: Quoting someone else -
[quote=The One and Only Aurelius][b]If you're going to go new, might as well push a bit and get something you're going to be happy with. Personally, if I just dropped $500-700 on a box of hardware to run a game and I still had to lower/disable all settings just to get 10fps in a crowded zone, I'd be ***************************

If you're looking to buy from old gamers who no longer want their parts, try lurking on this forum.

Sidenote: I'd like to clarify that I am not posting this link as an "advertisement"; this is a forum that I have posted on, and I know that they have a nice marketplace with reputable sellers.
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#97 Jul 07 2010 at 11:20 AM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Louiscool wrote:
Just put together this Alienware laptop online. Pretty sure this should exceed the requirements. So sick of lowering textures to play FFXI. "Only" 1,100. But any Dell desktops were hardly editable (stock graphics card or worse.. integrated..) and cost 800 with no monitor... Figure for an extra 300 I could be set for a while.

Whatcha think?

PROCESSOR Intel® Core™ i3-350M 2.26GHz (3M cache)
VIDEO CARD 1GB ATI Radeon™ Mobility HD 5730
MEMORY 4GB Dual Channel Memory (2x 2GB DDR3)
HARD DRIVE 250GB SATAII 7,200RPM


Passmark rating on that CPU and GPU are 2,016 and 676 respectively.
The GeForce GTX 9800 (minimum reccommended GPU passmark is 1152 and the minimum reccommended CPU is about 2,000ish.

So your CPU just barely qualifies to run the game on minimum settings, but the graphics card is not even close.

In terms of a laptop, you're pretty much going to need a 58xx series or equivalent to run the game. Definitely a quad core processor to match.
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#98 Jul 07 2010 at 11:42 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
3,599 posts
Mikhalia wrote:

Passmark rating on that CPU and GPU are 2,016 and 676 respectively.


Not that I'm disputing but is this just taken from the specs they list on the product purchase page and are assumed minimums, or do we know these as facts from the benchmark program?

Quote:

The GeForce GTX 9800 (minimum reccommended GPU passmark is 1152 and the minimum reccommended CPU is about 2,000ish.

So your CPU just barely qualifies to run the game on minimum settings, but the graphics card is not even close.


That's dissapointing ;; Using that site you sort of pointing to it'll cost 1500 to build something that sits slightly above minimum requirements. Switched out the CPU/GPU for:

PROCESSOR Intel® Core™ i7-620M 2.66GHz 2762 benchmark
VIDEO CARD 1GB ATI Radeon™ Mobility HD 5850 2408 benchmark

Edited, Jul 7th 2010 1:43pm by Louiscool
____________________________


#99 Jul 07 2010 at 11:46 AM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Louiscool wrote:
Mikhalia wrote:

Passmark rating on that CPU and GPU are 2,016 and 676 respectively.


Not that I'm disputing but is this just taken from the specs they list on the product purchase page and are assumed minimums, or do we know these as facts from the benchmark program?

Quote:

The GeForce GTX 9800 (minimum reccommended GPU passmark is 1152 and the minimum reccommended CPU is about 2,000ish.

So your CPU just barely qualifies to run the game on minimum settings, but the graphics card is not even close.


That's dissapointing ;; Using that site you sort of pointing to it'll cost 1500 to build something that sits slightly above minimum requirements. Switched out the CPU/GPU for:

PROCESSOR Intel® Core™ i7-620M 2.66GHz 2762 benchmark
VIDEO CARD 1GB ATI Radeon™ Mobility HD 5850 2408 benchmark

Edited, Jul 7th 2010 1:43pm by Louiscool


That should run it.

Gaming laptops are inherently exorbitantly priced. Once you factor in the consideration that XIV is the single highest requirement game "currently on the market", that just makes it even worse, because ANY part in a laptop is NEVER going to perform as efficiently as its desktop equivalent in terms of gaming.
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#100 Jul 07 2010 at 11:47 AM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Louiscool wrote:
Mikhalia wrote:

Passmark rating on that CPU and GPU are 2,016 and 676 respectively.


Not that I'm disputing but is this just taken from the specs they list on the product purchase page and are assumed minimums, or do we know these as facts from the benchmark program?


Passmark is a system benchmarking tool that has nothing at all to do with FFXIV. I was just comparing the benchmark scores through passmark for those individual parts to the benchmark scores for the pieces that SE says are the "minimum requirements".
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#101 Jul 07 2010 at 2:05 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
3,599 posts
Ok so for half the price of a laptop that "meets" specs it seems I can obliterate minimum specs.

http://www.dell.com/content/topics/segtopic.aspx/desktop-inspiron-580?c=us&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs&redirect=1

Processors
Intel® Core™ i5-750 processor(8MB Cache, 2.66GHz)

Memory
4GB2 Dual Channel DDR3 SDRAM3 at 1066MHz - 4 DIMMs

Video Card
ATI Radeon HD 5450 1GB5 DDR3

Price: 649

Video Card blows but Processor passmarks above 4000. Also ram is only DDR3 ;;

Buy a new shiny video card though and this should play FFXIV very well right? Pretty well? I'm thinking pop in a nice GTX 480 or something with the money I'm saving NOT buying a laptop.
____________________________


This forum is read only
This Forum is Read Only!
Recent Visitors: 21 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (21)