Forum Settings
       
This Forum is Read Only

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

#102 Jul 07 2010 at 2:57 PM Rating: Good
Sage
**
743 posts
Might need to upgrade the power supply (to support a better gpu), but it should do nicely.
____________________________
I think you've been smoking the Moko...
http://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/lodestone/character/350413/
http://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/lodestone/character/1628942/
http://www.nerdist.com/
Angus of Cerberus (retired)
#103 Jul 07 2010 at 4:16 PM Rating: Decent
36 posts
Quote:
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.



Well sence my PC im makeing wont do any good i decided to try to make another one. and so i did. and i accualy saved money. doing it and its even better then the one i had and its only 721$ (no tax included probaly like 820 max) Now i know this will run fine if not very VERY well. so ill save you all the long *** post and post the highlights

AMD Phenom™II X4 925 Quad-Core CPU w/ HyperTransport Technology

MOTHERBOARD: MSI NF750-G55 AM3 DDR3 NVIDIA nForce 750a SLI Chipset DDR3 ATX w/ Built-in Integrated Graphic Video, HDMI, 7.1 HD Audio, GbLAN, USB2.0, SATA-II, RAID, 2 Gen2 PCIe, 2 PCIe X1 & 1 PC

MEMORY: 4GB (2GBx2) DDR3/1333MHz Dual Channel Memory

And now the VIDEO card
NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250 1GB 16X PCI Express
specs link http://www.nvidia.com/object/product_geforce_gts_250_us.html
XIVS specs on the Nvidia 9600 http://www.nvidia.com/object/product_geforce_9600gt_us.html
and here the link to the PC company with the PC im getings full stats if you want to tool around it http://www.cyberpowerpc.com/cart/showcart.aspx?ref=upd

: ) all i need is windows 7 and that wont be hard to get

Edited, Jul 7th 2010 7:24pm by vermillionreign
#104 Jul 07 2010 at 10:06 PM Rating: Decent
*****
11,539 posts
vermillionreign wrote:
Quote:
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.



Well sence my PC im makeing wont do any good i decided to try to make another one. and so i did. and i accualy saved money. doing it and its even better then the one i had and its only 721$ (no tax included probaly like 820 max) Now i know this will run fine if not very VERY well. so ill save you all the long *** post and post the highlights

And now the VIDEO card
NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250 1GB 16X PCI Express


I give up.
____________________________
[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.
#105 Jul 08 2010 at 1:05 AM Rating: Good
vermillionreign wrote:
Quote:
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.



Well sence my PC im makeing wont do any good i decided to try to make another one. and so i did. and i accualy saved money. doing it and its even better then the one i had and its only 721$ (no tax included probaly like 820 max) Now i know this will run fine if not very VERY well. so ill save you all the long *** post and post the highlights

AMD Phenom™II X4 925 Quad-Core CPU w/ HyperTransport Technology

MOTHERBOARD: MSI NF750-G55 AM3 DDR3 NVIDIA nForce 750a SLI Chipset DDR3 ATX w/ Built-in Integrated Graphic Video, HDMI, 7.1 HD Audio, GbLAN, USB2.0, SATA-II, RAID, 2 Gen2 PCIe, 2 PCIe X1 & 1 PC

MEMORY: 4GB (2GBx2) DDR3/1333MHz Dual Channel Memory

And now the VIDEO card
NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250 1GB 16X PCI Express
specs link http://www.nvidia.com/object/product_geforce_gts_250_us.html
XIVS specs on the Nvidia 9600 http://www.nvidia.com/object/product_geforce_9600gt_us.html
and here the link to the PC company with the PC im getings full stats if you want to tool around it http://www.cyberpowerpc.com/cart/showcart.aspx?ref=upd

: ) all i need is windows 7 and that wont be hard to get


You broke Mikhalia Smiley: motz

Please pay close attention: an nVidia 2xx series video card is going to hose your performance. It's not going to run "very VERY" well. It's barely going to run at all. You'll be lucky to break a 2500 score on the high res benchmark with that card, and 2500 is the bottom of the "will play decently at default settings" bracket. in other words, you're going to be running with settings turned down/fully disabled just to avoid a massive lag fest in high volume areas. And the low res score isn't going to do much better for you.

nVidia 2xx series cards are adequate for FFXIV if that's what you've already got. If you're buying new, they're a waste of money. No budget rig will be running XIV "very VERY" well at release. It's an impossibility. You're either going to pay the money up front for a higher end rig or you're going to be settling for bare bones functionality, and that's just the way it is.
#106 Jul 08 2010 at 1:32 AM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
The One and Only Aurelius wrote:
vermillionreign wrote:
Quote:
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.



Well sence my PC im makeing wont do any good i decided to try to make another one. and so i did. and i accualy saved money. doing it and its even better then the one i had and its only 721$ (no tax included probaly like 820 max) Now i know this will run fine if not very VERY well. so ill save you all the long *** post and post the highlights

AMD Phenom™II X4 925 Quad-Core CPU w/ HyperTransport Technology

MOTHERBOARD: MSI NF750-G55 AM3 DDR3 NVIDIA nForce 750a SLI Chipset DDR3 ATX w/ Built-in Integrated Graphic Video, HDMI, 7.1 HD Audio, GbLAN, USB2.0, SATA-II, RAID, 2 Gen2 PCIe, 2 PCIe X1 & 1 PC

MEMORY: 4GB (2GBx2) DDR3/1333MHz Dual Channel Memory

And now the VIDEO card
NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250 1GB 16X PCI Express
specs link http://www.nvidia.com/object/product_geforce_gts_250_us.html
XIVS specs on the Nvidia 9600 http://www.nvidia.com/object/product_geforce_9600gt_us.html
and here the link to the PC company with the PC im getings full stats if you want to tool around it http://www.cyberpowerpc.com/cart/showcart.aspx?ref=upd

: ) all i need is windows 7 and that wont be hard to get


You broke Mikhalia Smiley: motz

Please pay close attention: an nVidia 2xx series video card is going to hose your performance. It's not going to run "very VERY" well. It's barely going to run at all. You'll be lucky to break a 2500 score on the high res benchmark with that card, and 2500 is the bottom of the "will play decently at default settings" bracket. in other words, you're going to be running with settings turned down/fully disabled just to avoid a massive lag fest in high volume areas. And the low res score isn't going to do much better for you.

nVidia 2xx series cards are adequate for FFXIV if that's what you've already got. If you're buying new, they're a waste of money. No budget rig will be running XIV "very VERY" well at release. It's an impossibility. You're either going to pay the money up front for a higher end rig or you're going to be settling for bare bones functionality, and that's just the way it is.


It's not the 2XX part, it's the GTS part. The GTX 2XX series are pretty good (A GTX 260 is rated higher than a Radeon 5770). Obviously the 4XX series are better.

So on the nvidia end, if it doesn't say "GTX", it's not worth buying.

EDIT: I really do need to reemphasize the bottom part of his post though, for any onlookers:

"No budget rig will be running XIV "very VERY" well at release. It's an impossibility."

If you're looking to spend a decent amount of money, you can expect decent performance.
If you're looking to spend A LOT of money, you can expect A LOT of performance.
If you're not looking to spend very much money at all, you will not get very much performance at all.

Always bear this in mind, ESPECIALLY when it comes to video cards and processors: The really inexpensive ones are inexpensive for a reason. The really expensive ones are expensive for a reason. If you could get "very very good performance" from a $100 video card, there would be no market for the $150-500 ones.

I keep saying this... I expect a lot of people who are "looking for a cheap machine to get by until March/until I can afford to upgrade" are going to be EXTREMELY disappointed come release day.

If you bought a system that has a Radeon <4700 or <5600 or a GeForce GT or GTS, you will be one of them. I suggest picking up another title at GameStop so that you have something else to play after FFXIV doesn't work and the store tells you they can't take back opened software.

Edited, Jul 8th 2010 3:37am 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.
#107 Jul 08 2010 at 1:56 AM Rating: Decent
Mikhalia wrote:
It's not the 2XX part, it's the GTS part. The GTX 2XX series are pretty good (A GTX 260 is rated higher than a Radeon 5770). Obviously the 4XX series are better.


Highest high res bench I've seen from a GTX 260 has been below 2500 and that was with an i7 920. ****, highest score I've seen out of a GTX285 has been just shy of 3200. nVidia 2xx series cards are not worth spending the money to buy as part of a new build. An extra hundred bucks will leave you much happier in the long run.
#108 Jul 08 2010 at 2:06 AM Rating: Decent
*****
11,539 posts
The One and Only Aurelius wrote:
Mikhalia wrote:
It's not the 2XX part, it's the GTS part. The GTX 2XX series are pretty good (A GTX 260 is rated higher than a Radeon 5770). Obviously the 4XX series are better.


Highest high res bench I've seen from a GTX 260 has been below 2500 and that was with an i7 920. ****, highest score I've seen out of a GTX285 has been just shy of 3200. nVidia 2xx series cards are not worth spending the money to buy as part of a new build. An extra hundred bucks will leave you much happier in the long run.



Really? o.o I would have expected them to at least score in the 3000-4000 range.

Oh well, I guess that changes my copypasta to "GTX 4XX Fermi or Radeon 57XX or 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.
#109 Jul 08 2010 at 2:20 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
*
105 posts
Well i pushed my computer as hard as i could without blowing it up lol

Core2Duo 2.5ghz overclocked to 3.6ghz
XFX 4850 Overclocked from 600mhz to 760mhz
4gig ram
blah blah blah

anyway, so with stock speeds on my hardware i scored 2500ish

overclocked speeds i scored 2800

so even with huge overclocks i only gained 300 points more which isnt much

so i would say dont attempt the game without at least a quad core and something above the hd4850 range
#110 Jul 08 2010 at 11:34 AM Rating: Decent
*****
11,539 posts
AckersFury wrote:
Well i pushed my computer as hard as i could without blowing it up lol

Core2Duo 2.5ghz overclocked to 3.6ghz
XFX 4850 Overclocked from 600mhz to 760mhz
4gig ram
blah blah blah

anyway, so with stock speeds on my hardware i scored 2500ish

overclocked speeds i scored 2800

so even with huge overclocks i only gained 300 points more which isnt much

so i would say dont attempt the game without at least a quad core and something above the hd4850 range


See? I'm not the only one saying it :)
____________________________
[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.
#111 Jul 08 2010 at 11:51 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
***
2,536 posts
Right now I'd really like to know how a Phenom II x4 965 + HD 4870 combination would score. I'm also curious whether the CPU will hold back two crossfired 4870.

I hear the 4870 and 4890 run pretty hot (temperature), though.
____________________________
FF11 Server: Caitsith
Kalyna (retired, 2008)
100 Goldsmith
75 Rng, Brd
Main/Acc
Exp/Hybrid
Str/Attk
Spam/Others
#112 Jul 08 2010 at 12:04 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Threx wrote:
Right now I'd really like to know how a Phenom II x4 965 + HD 4870 combination would score. I'm also curious whether the CPU will hold back two crossfired 4870.

I hear the 4870 and 4890 run pretty hot (temperature), though.


For what it's worth, passmark rates 4870x2 between the performance of a 5750 and a 5770. Based on my rig (Ph2x4 925 & 5770) I'd say you can expect to see 3900-4300ish with Ph2x4 965 & 4870x2.

I don't know about the temperatures though; you'd have to run furmark for that. Or look in CCC I guess.
____________________________
[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.
#113 Jul 08 2010 at 12:08 PM Rating: Decent
*
58 posts
For about the same price as 2x 4870 you could grab a 5850 or gtx 470 and get a pretty similar score on the benchmark. Add another later and you would be rocking.


Edited, Jul 8th 2010 2:18pm by HooraySoysauce
#114 Jul 08 2010 at 12:43 PM Rating: Good
Sage
*
78 posts
So far I can only afford upgrading my graphic card, since I think the rest is alright, but I am not sure about how compatible everything is... so if anyone can give me a hint here and tell me if this is alright.

the graphic card I have in mind is this one : Zotac GeForce GTS 250 1GB DDR3 PCI-E Video Card

As for my specs now:

Operating System: Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit (6.1, Build 7600)
BIOS: Phoenix - AwardBIOS v6.00PG
Processor: AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 4800+ (2 CPUs), ~2.5GHz
Memory: 8192MB RAM
Page File: 5498MB used, 10880MB available
Card name: NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GT
Display Memory: 512 MB
Mainboard: ASUS M2A-VM

So what I need to know, does the GTS250 will be good enough to run the game at a decent quality, and is it a decent upgrade from a 8600 GT, and will it work with my actual specs.

Thank you in advance.
#115 Jul 08 2010 at 1:04 PM Rating: Good
aeryne wrote:
So far I can only afford upgrading my graphic card, since I think the rest is alright, but I am not sure about how compatible everything is... so if anyone can give me a hint here and tell me if this is alright.

the graphic card I have in mind is this one : Zotac GeForce GTS 250 1GB DDR3 PCI-E Video Card

As for my specs now:

Operating System: Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit (6.1, Build 7600)
BIOS: Phoenix - AwardBIOS v6.00PG
Processor: AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 4800+ (2 CPUs), ~2.5GHz
Memory: 8192MB RAM
Page File: 5498MB used, 10880MB available
Card name: NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GT
Display Memory: 512 MB
Mainboard: ASUS M2A-VM

So what I need to know, does the GTS250 will be good enough to run the game at a decent quality, and is it a decent upgrade from a 8600 GT, and will it work with my actual specs.

Thank you in advance.


Aeryne, I'd think about shying away from the GTS series. Someone just pointed out on another thread the GTX 465. I was surprised to see such a reasonable price tag on the thing compared to the HD 58xx or the GTX 470-480.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130555&cm_re=gtx_465-_-14-130-555-_-Product

Here's an EVGA GTX 465 for $279.99 I know it's not exactly a 130-150 price range like the GTS 250 is, but for the extra money you're paying you'll see a massive difference in performance which will last you quite a while longer than the 250. It'll be well worth it, trust me.

Also, to anyone thinking of buying any video card, I highly recommend EVGA. I've bought my last 2 cards from them. Their customer service is excellent, you get a lifetime warranty, the RMA process is great should you need it, and they're just solid cards all around.
#116 Jul 08 2010 at 1:17 PM Rating: Default
**
576 posts
Mikhalia wrote:

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.


Exaggerate much?

The minimum recommended specs should still provide a playable experience, otherwise they wouldn't be recommended.

As I posted in another thread, my system is very close to the minimum specs (3Ghz C2D, 9600GT, 4GB DDR2), and I score ~2200 on the low res benchmark.

According to SE:
Quote:
[2000-2499] Slightly Low Performance
Capable of running the game, but may experience some slowdown. Adjust settings to improve performance.


I should be able to play the game reasonably well by adjusting settings. Of course I'll be playing at 720p, but it's not that big a deal.

I completely agree that people shouldn't be building to the minimum spec, but you're doing everyone a disservice by saying that people with rigs that meet the minimum will not be able to play at all...

Edited, Jul 8th 2010 3:18pm by Pickins
____________________________
FFXI, Siren: Pickins BST99.:~:.BLM75.:~:.RDM56
FFXIV, Siren: Miss Pickins - Builder of the Realm
#117 Jul 08 2010 at 1:23 PM Rating: Good
Sage
*
78 posts
:) thanks for the reply, I will wait another month before buying then, and get the GTX, would it work fine with my motherboard, etc?

I might have to upgrade my PSU too, not sure how many Watts it has right now, but I am sure this high end cards require a lot of power.
#118 Jul 08 2010 at 1:38 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
aeryne wrote:
So far I can only afford upgrading my graphic card, since I think the rest is alright, but I am not sure about how compatible everything is... so if anyone can give me a hint here and tell me if this is alright.

the graphic card I have in mind is this one : Zotac GeForce GTS 250 1GB DDR3 PCI-E Video Card

As for my specs now:

Operating System: Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit (6.1, Build 7600)
BIOS: Phoenix - AwardBIOS v6.00PG
Processor: AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 4800+ (2 CPUs), ~2.5GHz
Memory: 8192MB RAM
Page File: 5498MB used, 10880MB available
Card name: NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GT
Display Memory: 512 MB
Mainboard: ASUS M2A-VM

So what I need to know, does the GTS250 will be good enough to run the game at a decent quality, and is it a decent upgrade from a 8600 GT, and will it work with my actual specs.

Thank you in advance.


Aside: Can someone with premium give me a gif of a head banging against a desk?

@aeryne: No, as was just said a few posts up from this one, the GT and GTS series will not run the game. You will want to buy either a GTX 4XX series or a Radeon 57XX/58XX/59XX series. You will not want to purchase any card other than the ones I just listed.
____________________________
[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.
#119 Jul 08 2010 at 1:42 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Pickins wrote:
Mikhalia wrote:

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.


Exaggerate much?

The minimum recommended specs should still provide a playable experience, otherwise they wouldn't be recommended.

As I posted in another thread, my system is very close to the minimum specs (3Ghz C2D, 9600GT, 4GB DDR2), and I score ~2200 on the low res benchmark.

According to SE:
Quote:
[2000-2499] Slightly Low Performance
Capable of running the game, but may experience some slowdown. Adjust settings to improve performance.


I should be able to play the game reasonably well by adjusting settings. Of course I'll be playing at 720p, but it's not that big a deal.

I completely agree that people shouldn't be building to the minimum spec, but you're doing everyone a disservice by saying that people with rigs that meet the minimum will not be able to play at all...

Edited, Jul 8th 2010 3:18pm by Pickins


You're wrong, and your wording is why:

"The minimum recommended specs should still provide a playable experience, otherwise they wouldn't be recommended."

They aren't. You ever notice how game boxes have "minimum specs" and "recommended specs"? The minimum specs ARE minimum. They are NOT recommended, otherwise they would be recommended specs. I'm not exaggerating at all. If you meet the MINIMUM specs, you should be able to run the game on the MINIMUM settings. That's why they call them that. If you had the RECOMMENDED specs, you would be able to run the game at the RECOMMENDED settings.

You will not be able to play the game "reasonably well". You are "capable" of playing it and you "may experience some slowdown" on "low" settings. You can adjust these already low settings even lower to improve your performance.

To suggest that someone with a score of 2000 is able to play the game at even default settings would be doing them a disservice. If you scored low, expect to set the game to low settings to make it work. If you meet the minimum requirements, expect to set the game to the MINIMUM settings. Again, that's why game boxes list "minimum" and "recommended" separately.

I never said people who meet the minimum won't be able to play "at all"; I said they would be able to play at minimum.

Edited, Jul 8th 2010 3:45pm 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.
#120 Jul 08 2010 at 1:44 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
***
2,536 posts
Mikhalia wrote:
For what it's worth, passmark rates 4870x2 between the performance of a 5750 and a 5770. Based on my rig (Ph2x4 925 & 5770) I'd say you can expect to see 3900-4300ish with Ph2x4 965 & 4870x2.


Oh, doh, I didn't notice Passmark has 4870x2 listed, I was looking at the single 4870. And weird how the single one outperforms the double. -_- What's up with that?



HooraySoysauce wrote:
For about the same price as 2x 4870 you could grab a 5850 or gtx 470 and get a pretty similar score on the benchmark. Add another later and you would be rocking.


Yeah, I know. The problem is that I don't have the budget to start off immediately with a $250+ card. The plan is to start with the best card in the $150-200 range and maybe next year when I have a few more bucks to throw around I can slap on another of the same card for a boost. Trying to figure out which CPU I should get as to not bottleneck the performance of the crossfired cards.

Edited, Jul 8th 2010 2:47pm by Threx
____________________________
FF11 Server: Caitsith
Kalyna (retired, 2008)
100 Goldsmith
75 Rng, Brd
Main/Acc
Exp/Hybrid
Str/Attk
Spam/Others
#121 Jul 08 2010 at 1:46 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Threx wrote:
Mikhalia wrote:
For what it's worth, passmark rates 4870x2 between the performance of a 5750 and a 5770. Based on my rig (Ph2x4 925 & 5770) I'd say you can expect to see 3900-4300ish with Ph2x4 965 & 4870x2.


Oh, doh, I didn't notice Passmark has 4870x2 listed, I was looking at the single 4870. And weird how the single one outperforms the double. -_- What's up with that?


Hiccup/anomaly, possibly the result of overclocking.



Threx wrote:
HooraySoysauce wrote:
For about the same price as 2x 4870 you could grab a 5850 or gtx 470 and get a pretty similar score on the benchmark. Add another later and you would be rocking.


Yeah, I know. The problem is that I don't have the budget to start off immediately with a $250+ card. The plan is to start with the best card in the $150-200 range and maybe next year when I have a few more bucks to throw around I can slap on another of the same card for a performance boost.


The 5770 will run you about $160ish. The 5830 will run $200ish.
____________________________
[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.
#122 Jul 08 2010 at 1:49 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
***
2,536 posts
****, you're fast. I was just editing the last part of my previous post a bit. :P
____________________________
FF11 Server: Caitsith
Kalyna (retired, 2008)
100 Goldsmith
75 Rng, Brd
Main/Acc
Exp/Hybrid
Str/Attk
Spam/Others
#123 Jul 08 2010 at 1:57 PM Rating: Decent
**
576 posts
Mikhalia wrote:

You're wrong, and your wording is why:

"The minimum recommended specs should still provide a playable experience, otherwise they wouldn't be recommended."

They aren't. You ever notice how game boxes have "minimum specs" and "recommended specs"? The minimum specs ARE minimum. They are NOT recommended, otherwise they would be recommended specs. I'm not exaggerating at all. If you meet the MINIMUM specs, you should be able to run the game on the MINIMUM settings. That's why they call them that. If you had the RECOMMENDED specs, you would be able to run the game at the RECOMMENDED settings.

You will not be able to play the game "reasonably well". You are "capable" of playing it and you "may experience some slowdown" on "low" settings. You can adjust these already low settings even lower to improve your performance.

To suggest that someone with a score of 2000 is able to play the game at even default settings would be doing them a disservice. If you scored low, expect to set the game to low settings to make it work. If you meet the minimum requirements, expect to set the game to the MINIMUM settings. Again, that's why game boxes list "minimum" and "recommended" separately.

I never said people who meet the minimum won't be able to play "at all"; I said they would be able to play at minimum.

Edited, Jul 8th 2010 3:45pm by Mikhalia


Excuse me, I meant to say "minimum." The point still stands, I may have to lower settings and play at 720p, but the game will play. If it wouldn't SE would be opening themselves up legal issues (people love to sue).

Also, did you forget where you said 2-10 FPS would be all I could expect? That statement implies that you think the game will be unplayable.

We'll see come Sept. 22, but I'm willing to bet that I can get 30fps by lowering settings. (note that I never said anything about being able to play at default settings) Will it be perfect? No, but it will be functional, and I won't have to spend any money to upgrade.

____________________________
FFXI, Siren: Pickins BST99.:~:.BLM75.:~:.RDM56
FFXIV, Siren: Miss Pickins - Builder of the Realm
#124 Jul 08 2010 at 2:17 PM Rating: Good
Sage
*
78 posts
yeah, might be cheaper to simply survive with the computer you have and wait for the PS3 version, then get a PS3 an play there :P

As said before, even if it is minimum requirements, it should run, horribly and choppy, but some people are fine with that, until they get to upgrade or swap to PS3.

The reason why I asked about the 250 GTS is because there is a really good deal on a store in my town.... and I remember someone saying that if the score was around 1000 in this list http://videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html it should be alright at low details.

What I will possibly do is upgrade one of our computers graphic card, my husband scored 2000+ in the Benchmark, might not be enough to play at med or high details, but it will playable, so eventually we get the 465 GTX for his pc, and get a Ps3 next year.

#125 Jul 08 2010 at 2:19 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Pickins wrote:
Excuse me, I meant to say "minimum." The point still stands, I may have to lower settings and play at 720p, but the game will play. If it wouldn't SE would be opening themselves up legal issues (people love to sue).

Also, did you forget where you said 2-10 FPS would be all I could expect? That statement implies that you think the game will be unplayable.

We'll see come Sept. 22, but I'm willing to bet that I can get 30fps by lowering settings. (note that I never said anything about being able to play at default settings) Will it be perfect? No, but it will be functional, and I won't have to spend any money to upgrade.


As far as you and I are concerned, 2-10 FPS is unplayable. As far as SE's lawyers and a judge are concerned, "It will play."

Technicalities and all that, but all they need to legally defend in terms of "minimum specs" is that the game RUNS, not that it is playable with a decent framerate at any settings.

It seems the sticking point is in the wording. Whey you say "it should play reasonably well", and you mean "I should get 30 on minimum/low settings", many people will read "reasonably well" as "I can turn the settings up to good/very good and run it at 60 FPS; I just can't run it on maximum because it might drop to 45 FPS"

I just didn't want people reading your "you should be able to play the game reasonably well" the wrong way.
____________________________
[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.
#126 Jul 08 2010 at 2:21 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
aeryne wrote:
yeah, might be cheaper to simply survive with the computer you have and wait for the PS3 version, then get a PS3 an play there :P

As said before, even if it is minimum requirements, it should run, horribly and choppy, but some people are fine with that, until they get to upgrade or swap to PS3.

The reason why I asked about the 250 GTS is because there is a really good deal on a store in my town.... and I remember someone saying that if the score was around 1000 in this list http://videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html it should be alright at low details.

What I will possibly do is upgrade one of our computers graphic card, my husband scored 2000+ in the Benchmark, might not be enough to play at med or high details, but it will playable, so eventually we get the 465 GTX for his pc, and get a Ps3 next year.



It might manage to play the game on minimum/very low, maybe, but I'd rather tell you to buy a card that WILL run it on average or better.

For your money, you should be pleased with your purchase. I don't want to see you (or anyone else) dropping money on a brand new product that will result in low or minimum settings. I know I wouldn't be happy if I did.
____________________________
[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.
#127 Jul 08 2010 at 2:43 PM Rating: Good
**
576 posts
Mikhalia wrote:
[quote=Pickins]It seems the sticking point is in the wording. Whey you say "it should play reasonably well", and you mean "I should get 30 on minimum/low settings", many people will read "reasonably well" as "I can turn the settings up to good/very good and run it at 60 FPS; I just can't run it on maximum because it might drop to 45 FPS"

I just didn't want people reading your "you should be able to play the game reasonably well" the wrong way.


I completely agree with you there.

I've been using low to mid range cards for so long that what I meant was definitely the former. I suppose I should have been more clear.

Honestly, it can't be any worse than when I started FFXI with a Radeon 9000pro. That was really bad, but I still had fun with it. The jump to a 9700pro was so nice.

____________________________
FFXI, Siren: Pickins BST99.:~:.BLM75.:~:.RDM56
FFXIV, Siren: Miss Pickins - Builder of the Realm
#128 Jul 08 2010 at 3:00 PM Rating: Good
Pickins wrote:
Excuse me, I meant to say "minimum." The point still stands, I may have to lower settings and play at 720p, but the game will play. If it wouldn't SE would be opening themselves up legal issues (people love to sue).


I know, right? That would be awesome. "I can't afford a PC that will run the game but I can afford a lawyer to sue SE for the $50-$75 I spent on the game because my PC won't run it." Love those kinds of people. Funny thing is, you never really read of those cases going to court....
#129 Jul 08 2010 at 4:20 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Pickins wrote:
Mikhalia wrote:
[quote=Pickins]It seems the sticking point is in the wording. Whey you say "it should play reasonably well", and you mean "I should get 30 on minimum/low settings", many people will read "reasonably well" as "I can turn the settings up to good/very good and run it at 60 FPS; I just can't run it on maximum because it might drop to 45 FPS"

I just didn't want people reading your "you should be able to play the game reasonably well" the wrong way.


I completely agree with you there.

I've been using low to mid range cards for so long that what I meant was definitely the former. I suppose I should have been more clear.

Honestly, it can't be any worse than when I started FFXI with a Radeon 9000pro. That was really bad, but I still had fun with it. The jump to a 9700pro was so nice.



I just checked my 2003 FFXI+RoZ box and the minimum requirements for video was a "Radeon 9000 series". So you were right there, and I do believe you said "That was really bad" :)

So that's what I mean by minimum settings = minimum performance.
____________________________
[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.
#130 Jul 08 2010 at 4:24 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
The One and Only Aurelius wrote:
Pickins wrote:
Excuse me, I meant to say "minimum." The point still stands, I may have to lower settings and play at 720p, but the game will play. If it wouldn't SE would be opening themselves up legal issues (people love to sue).


I know, right? That would be awesome. "I can't afford a PC that will run the game but I can afford a lawyer to sue SE for the $50-$75 I spent on the game because my PC won't run it." Love those kinds of people. Funny thing is, you never really read of those cases going to court....


That's because despite the fact that people do in fact love the idea of suing, they can't afford it, or have lawyers tell them that their laswuit is not worth it. The reason the cases over $2 coffees and $50 video games never go to court is because no one wants to pay $100/hr for a lawyer to go to small claims court.

Ironically, I'd love to see a lawsuit suing a lawyer for charging too much to represent someone in a frivolous lawsuit. That'd be pretty funny.
____________________________
[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.
#131 Jul 08 2010 at 4:57 PM Rating: Default
36 posts
Did you even look at the difference in my Graphix card im getting with the MIN requirements from XIV? I really dont think you did so ill save you the trouble and post it.
MY video card witch is A Nvidia Geforce GTS 250
GPU Engine Specs:
Processor Cores 128
Graphics Clock (MHz) 738
Processor Clock (MHz) 1836
Texture Fill Rate (billion/sec) 47.2

Memory Specs:
Memory Clock (MHz) 1100
Standard Memory Config 512 MB or 1 GB
Memory Interface Width 256-bit
Memory Bandwidth (GB/sec) 70.4

Feature Support:
NVIDIA SLI®-ready 2-way, 3-way
NVIDIA PureVideo® Technology PVHD
NVIDIA PhysX™-ready
NVIDIA CUDA™ Technology
Microsoft DirectX 10


Maximum Digital Resolution 2560x1600
Maximum VGA Resolution 2048x1536
Standard Display Connectors Two Dual Link DVI
HDMI Via Adapter
Audio Input for HDMI SPDIF

And now for the Nvidia Geforce 9600 (XIVs MIN GPU)
GPU Engine Specs:
Processor Cores 64
Graphics Clock (MHz) 600
Processor Clock (MHz) 1500
Texture Fill Rate (billion/sec) 19.2


Memory Specs:
Memory Clock (MHz) 900
Standard Memory Config 512
Memory Interface Width 256-bit
Memory Bandwidth (GB/sec) 57.6


Feature Support:
NVIDIA SLI®-ready 3-way
NVIDIA PureVideo® Technology PVHD
NVIDIA PhysX™-ready
NVIDIA CUDA™ Technology
Microsoft DirectX 10
OpenGL 2.1
Bus Support PCI-E 2.0
Certified for Windows Vista
GeForce 3D Vision Ready

Maximum Digital Resolution 2560x1600
Maximum VGA Resolution 2048x1536
Standard Display Connectors Two Dual Link DVI, HDTV
HDMI Via Adapter Via Adapter
Audio Input for HDMI

So again As the OP says HOW MUCH $ TO GET A PROPER PC. Dosent say how much money to get the "BEST" were talking budget wise i just made a PC that will run XIV and run it better then MIN requirements. Its allways best to fact check things befor you just assume them.
So in a nuttshell i made a 727 dollar PC that will work just fine VS a 1000+ dollar one that will do more then i want it to. Again i want to play XIV not launch a rocket. : )



Edited, Jul 8th 2010 7:00pm by vermillionreign
#132 Jul 08 2010 at 5:41 PM Rating: Decent
**
576 posts
Mikhalia wrote:
The One and Only Aurelius wrote:
Pickins wrote:
Excuse me, I meant to say "minimum." The point still stands, I may have to lower settings and play at 720p, but the game will play. If it wouldn't SE would be opening themselves up legal issues (people love to sue).


I know, right? That would be awesome. "I can't afford a PC that will run the game but I can afford a lawyer to sue SE for the $50-$75 I spent on the game because my PC won't run it." Love those kinds of people. Funny thing is, you never really read of those cases going to court....


That's because despite the fact that people do in fact love the idea of suing, they can't afford it, or have lawyers tell them that their laswuit is not worth it. The reason the cases over $2 coffees and $50 video games never go to court is because no one wants to pay $100/hr for a lawyer to go to small claims court.

Ironically, I'd love to see a lawsuit suing a lawyer for charging too much to represent someone in a frivolous lawsuit. That'd be pretty funny.


Or, the lawyer sees the cash that they personally stand to gain from bringing a class action lawsuit. In the end, it's always the lawyers who win...
____________________________
FFXI, Siren: Pickins BST99.:~:.BLM75.:~:.RDM56
FFXIV, Siren: Miss Pickins - Builder of the Realm
#133 Jul 08 2010 at 6:04 PM Rating: Excellent
*****
11,539 posts
You bought a ****** video card, you can expect ****** performance. If you

vermillionreign wrote:
Did you even look at the difference in my Graphix card im getting with the MIN requirements from XIV? I really dont think you did so ill save you the trouble and post it.


I hightly doubt you know what half of that technical data even means. Thanks for the spam though.

vermillionreign wrote:
So again As the OP says HOW MUCH $ TO GET A PROPER PC. Dosent say how much money to get the "BEST" were talking budget wise i just made a PC that will run XIV and run it better then MIN requirements. Its allways best to fact check things befor you just assume them.
So in a nuttshell i made a 727 dollar PC that will work just fine VS a 1000+ dollar one that will do more then i want it to. Again i want to play XIV not launch a rocket. : )


You didn't make a 727 PC that will work just fine, you made a 727 dollar PC with a ****** card that will give you ****** performance and run the game *********

If your definition of low performance with lots of slowdowns and low FPS is "proper" and "works just fine" then I imagine your car must spew exhaust, overheat, get 5 MPG, have virtually no suspension, and have a broken tape deck.

But I guess the car runs just fine, and you showed all those poor bastards who spent way too much on theirs.

Bottom line, I've tried explaining that you're spending your money on a crap product. I'll say it very clearly:

If you have not already purchased it, you are about to waste seven hundred and twenty seven dollars on a brand new computer that is going to just barely run the game at abysmally low settings.

If you're fine with wasting your money on a ****** product, then I guess I have nothing else to say. My advice is meant for people who want to buy a system that will run the game relatively well, not one that will choke, gag, and sputter as it attempts to run it on low without having a heart attack.
____________________________
[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.
#134vermillionreign, Posted: Jul 08 2010 at 6:25 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35-mSexLFSM&feature=related Crysis game with that card
#135 Jul 08 2010 at 6:32 PM Rating: Good
24 posts
If you know so much about the card why even bother getting a second opinion? Just go ahead and by the card. Let us know who well your rig runs when the game comes out.
#136 Jul 08 2010 at 6:38 PM Rating: Default
36 posts
Im just saying people are saying you NEED this card or that card. And you really dont need to waste cash on something you dont really need. If you want to spend less then 1000 on a PC the one i made will do just fine. Now i will say if you want the BEST card then fine go spend 200+ on a card if that all you need is a video card. But if you want to save some money and still be able to play XIV then crossing what XIVs MIN. required card with the one im getting to save you cash is a great deal.

Not everyone has 1grand to drop **** in this econemy some dont have 200+ to upgrade. So its called being thrifty but smart.
#137 Jul 08 2010 at 6:46 PM Rating: Good
3 posts
I suppose this is kind of on-topic, but not sure at this point. The build I almost bought today was:

i7-930
GTX480
6GB Corsair Dominator
Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD3R
WD Caviar Black 1TB
Cooler Master 850W
Cooler Master HAF932 case

Now for the questions. IF I plan at some point adding a second GTX480 should I just get a 1000+W PSU now or should I expect decent results with the game for a reasonable amount of time? Is the CM HAF-932 big enough for the two video cards or should I be looking for a larger case?
The other question is with the price drop of the i7-950 coming in August, what do you think the chances of the i7-930 dropping are? Same with the GTX480. Money isn't the problem but I'd much rather save a few bucks by ordering at the end of August or first week of September.

-cbr451
#138 Jul 08 2010 at 6:51 PM Rating: Decent
24 posts
If you live close to a Micro Center the i7 930 is $200

http://www.microcenter.com/search/search_results.phtml?Ntt=intel+core+i7+930&N=0
#139 Jul 08 2010 at 6:57 PM Rating: Decent
*
89 posts
CPU: Intel® Core™2 Quad Processor Q82001 (2.33GHz, 1333MHz FSB, 4MB L2 cache)8
Operating System: Windows 7 (64-bit)
Memory: 8192MB 800MHz DDR2 Dual Channel Memory (4 x 2048MB Modules)
Hard Drive: 640GB 7200RPM SATA II hard drive with 16MB Cache4
Graphics card: BFG GeForce GTX 260 OC MAXCORE 55 Graphics adapter - 896 MB - GDDR3 SDRAM

Now if I take out the GTX 260 and put EVGA 012-P3-1475-AR GeForce GTX 470 (Fermi) SuperClocked+ 1280MB 320-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 2.0 x16 HDCP Ready SLI Support Video Card, will everything be all gravy. =P yea I already perordered for ps3 months ago but delayed so I got the CE for PC. Right now I'm only getting around 2700-2800. =(
#140 Jul 08 2010 at 7:59 PM Rating: Good
*
195 posts
Ok, i saw all the info about about if its not gtx dont use it. Now im not disagreeing that XIV wont run better on a GTX-whatever but i just bought a GTS 250 to replace my 9500GT which scored like 1000 on the low lol.

Anyway just reran the benchmark. 2625 High 3500 something low.

My other specs are:

Intel core quad Q9550 @2.83GHZ
4GB RAM DDR3
Windows Vista 64bit
750W PSU
750GB HD 7200rpm

Wish i had the dough to upgrade to the gtx4XX but just dont atm. I understand i will not be able to run everything full blast with this setup but I'm pretty sure it will be serviceable and not be running at like 5-10 FPS. Just figured i d throw that out there for the people not wanting/able to spend the money on a better card.

Now my question. I know SE hasnt said anything about SLI support yet (that i know of). But assuming they do would running 2 of these cards up the performance a lot? My buddy is going to sell me his after he upgrades for like 25 bucks. Not sure exactly how running in SLI works or the benefits. So an explanation would be great as well.
#141 Jul 08 2010 at 8:08 PM Rating: Excellent
vermillionreign wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35-mSexLFSM&feature=related Crysis game with that card
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ao_cIlHlRHU Resident Evil 5 bench with this card with fraps runing
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8iNmlB0fkZM&feature=related Batman Arkham asylum
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0iICPMSWqU&feature=relatedCall of duty MW2
i can keep going on i think if these can run on that card im **** sure XIV will also and mind you that these are made with FRAPS so the FPS (frames per second) will be lower.

And yes i know what all my video card specs mean. i dont think you really have looked into it. As Anyone can tell by watching Video of these newer Games im sure i wont have any problems at all . So go launch your rockets and talk to your mother ship because for Seven Hundren and Twenty Dollars im going to play XIV and have saved over One Thousand dollars most on my system. If you can show me that im wrong and i do mean SHOW ME. then i will rethink my card. So SHOW me Prove to me it One. Wont run. Or Two. Will Look Like Crap.
Because I dont think you can.

And by the way i drive a 2009 HHR sence i know your intrested. What i think also is your trying to make people spend more money then thay have to. Im going to guess your in Sales or Marketing. And have that Comish on your mind. But then again you could also be some no job hack thats on the PC all day. But im not going to judge you.


I was about to point you to the compliation of benchmark scores I used to refer to to try and help people out when someone else here posted their results with a GTS250. 2625 high res. Bottom bracket for "able to run at default settings". By no means the "very VERY well" you claimed it would produce. You can't point to games a year or two (or more) old like "WOW!! Look at what this card will do" because we're talking about a game that isn't out yet and one where the devs have told us you're going to need a top end rig to run with settings maxed at released. 2xx series cards are one generation from obsolete. They're not top end. They're not high end. Higher model number 2xx series cards are modest. 250/260? Budget cards for budget users happy to get a bit more performance out of their favorite 4 year old games.
#142 Jul 08 2010 at 8:43 PM Rating: Excellent
***
3,811 posts
vermillionreign wrote:
Im just saying people are saying you NEED this card or that card. And you really dont need to waste cash on something you dont really need. If you want to spend less then 1000 on a PC the one i made will do just fine. Now i will say if you want the BEST card then fine go spend 200+ on a card if that all you need is a video card. But if you want to save some money and still be able to play XIV then crossing what XIVs MIN. required card with the one im getting to save you cash is a great deal.

Not everyone has 1grand to drop **** in this econemy some dont have 200+ to upgrade. So its called being thrifty but smart.


You really don't "NEED" to build a computer or even "HAVE" to play FFXIV. Just throwing that out there...


You came seeking advice on your build and your received it. If you don't like what your hearing then try asking somewhere else. Maybe you will find someone to agree with you on your system build elsewhere.

As for this bit:
vermillionreign wrote:
ttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35-mSexLFSM&feature=related Crysis game with that card
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ao_cIlHlRHU Resident Evil 5 bench with this card with fraps runing
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8iNmlB0fkZM&feature=related Batman Arkham asylum
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0iICPMSWqU&feature=relatedCall of duty MW2
i can keep going on i think if these can run on that card im **** sure XIV will also and mind you that these are made with FRAPS so the FPS (frames per second) will be lower.


FFXIV is a far more taxing game than any of those. I can run all of those on max setting's including Crysis without breaking a sweat on my current rig. Yet FFXIV Benchmark barely netted me a low 4k score and a high in the 2300 range. Don't expect much out of a cheap build, you get what you pay for. Then again, this has been reiterated numerous times already. It seems you simply just want to prove yourself right and everyone else wrong now.
____________________________

Quote:
The Path to **** is paved with good intentions.
#143 Jul 08 2010 at 8:45 PM Rating: Good
*
195 posts
Another question i have other then the one in my previous post (how does sli work and is it super beneficial for me doing it with the gts250). Now my scores and specs were also stock with no OC'ing. If i were to OC the cpu+gpu to try and get better performance is the benchmark a good tool to use for temps we may get in the game?

Didn't check the cpu temps but my GPU temps at 60% fan speed only topped out at 60ish Celsius.

And vermillion although Aurelius might get a little um ... overzealous .... his information is usually spot on or close (along with Mikhalia's info). But with that said, according to SE's benchmark that card will work fine but it sure wont be super crisp and run super smoothly.

A reply on my 2 questions would be great though. I just built my 1st computer a year or so ago without knowing diddly about PC's and am just trying to learn. Thanks.
#144 Jul 08 2010 at 8:57 PM Rating: Excellent
***
3,811 posts
Ridder wrote:
Ok, i saw all the info about about if its not gtx dont use it. Now im not disagreeing that XIV wont run better on a GTX-whatever but i just bought a GTS 250 to replace my 9500GT which scored like 1000 on the low lol.

Anyway just reran the benchmark. 2625 High 3500 something low.

My other specs are:

Intel core quad Q9550 @2.83GHZ
4GB RAM DDR3
Windows Vista 64bit
750W PSU
750GB HD 7200rpm

Wish i had the dough to upgrade to the gtx4XX but just dont atm. I understand i will not be able to run everything full blast with this setup but I'm pretty sure it will be serviceable and not be running at like 5-10 FPS. Just figured i d throw that out there for the people not wanting/able to spend the money on a better card.

Now my question. I know SE hasnt said anything about SLI support yet (that i know of). But assuming they do would running 2 of these cards up the performance a lot? My buddy is going to sell me his after he upgrades for like 25 bucks. Not sure exactly how running in SLI works or the benefits. So an explanation would be great as well.


If your picking it up for 25 bucks go for it. Cheap enough to try it and see if your satisfied with it. Also, try your hand at O/C while your at it. You will be able to get your CPU to at least 3.2 with little trouble. I'm running the same chip with 8gig of DDR2 at 3.4Ghz. I'm running a HD4870, also o/c and your High score is a solid 300pts higher, my low is 4100's. I can see you getting your low's to at least high 4000's running SLI & a mild o/c.

____________________________

Quote:
The Path to **** is paved with good intentions.
#145 Jul 08 2010 at 9:12 PM Rating: Good
*
195 posts
Thank you Kyo for the response, very appreciated. Have been a little hesitant to OC anything since i'm still a novice and havent wanted to fry anything lol. And although my case is air cooled i took my friends advice and bought a monster of a case (Cooler Master HAF 932) with a bunch of huge fans in it lol (3-230mm fans and a 140mm).

As far as SLI i goes does it just distribute the load to each card? Never thought about doing it really until my friend yesterday told me he is upgrading in time or a little bit after launch of XIV.
#146 Jul 08 2010 at 9:47 PM Rating: Excellent
***
3,811 posts
I have yet to run crossfire but I'd wager to guess that's how it works. I'm sure someone else will better explain it. As for o/c you should be fine. I have a Cooler Master ATCS 840 with 3 x 230mm & 3 120mm fans (have a 4th but to lazy to put it in), and with my cpu ( Arctic Cooling Freezer 7 Pro), gpu, and ram all o/c my system temp runs idle 50c. Even under full load from the benchmark my cpu ranged between 58-61c. I'd venture to guess it would go up if I'd try running a clock of 3.8 or better. To much trouble and I don't have the motivation.

Over clocking isn't hard at all, just do a little light reading and see what other people have done with you chip. 3.2Ghz should be more than doable for you.
____________________________

Quote:
The Path to **** is paved with good intentions.
#147 Jul 08 2010 at 10:03 PM Rating: Decent
*
89 posts
Can I get a answer on my question? I'm kind of lost, even if I have to get a better CPU and motherboard hook me up with an answer.
#148 Jul 08 2010 at 10:07 PM Rating: Good
Cazon wrote:
Can I get a answer on my question? I'm kind of lost, even if I have to get a better CPU and motherboard hook me up with an answer.


Please refer to the sticky here.
#149 Jul 08 2010 at 10:39 PM Rating: Default
*
89 posts
Wow, that's all I get..huh? Maybe I should of stated that I have experience in building PCs and I actually read your whole blog and understood everything you were doing. I just wanted a second opinion from other peeps that build computers but hey whatever. Not everyone can fork thousands into a rig, but guess I was asking for it..right. thanks for the link.
#150 Jul 09 2010 at 3:19 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
***
2,536 posts
Pickins wrote:
Honestly, it can't be any worse than when I started FFXI with a Radeon 9000pro. That was really bad, but I still had fun with it. The jump to a 9700pro was so nice.


It's been a long time, but if I remember right, I started FFXI with a GeForce2 MX400. That scores a whopping 50 on Passmark, lmao.

Edit: Or maybe it was an MX 460? Can't quite remember, but I'm pretty sure it was one of those MXs. Still pretty bad. :)

Edited, Jul 9th 2010 4:24am by Threx
____________________________
FF11 Server: Caitsith
Kalyna (retired, 2008)
100 Goldsmith
75 Rng, Brd
Main/Acc
Exp/Hybrid
Str/Attk
Spam/Others
#151 Jul 09 2010 at 7:47 AM Rating: Decent
Guru
***
1,673 posts
Well, this is what I just purchased today. Total cost with shipping $1666 lol. Will even get $50 back from rebates.

Antec Nine Hundred Black (free shipping which saves $20 and has $20 rebate)

Asus Crosshair IV

Asus ROG Matrix 5870 ($20 rebate, $45 off with CPU combo)

AMD Phenom II X6 1090T Black Edition (combo with video card)

Corsair 750 Watt PSU ($10 rebate)

G.SKILL Ripjaws Series 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600

Western Digital 500GB SATA Hard Drive

Asus DVD Burner

Windows 7 Professional 64 bit

Arctic Silver 5

Corsair H50 CPU Water Cooler

G.SKILL Memory Fan

Newegg is even throwing in a $15 gift card for future purchases.

Edited, Jul 9th 2010 10:09am by geffe
This forum is read only
This Forum is Read Only!
Recent Visitors: 26 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (26)