Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2
This Forum is Read Only

Computer specs Confirmed Running BetaFollow

#1 Aug 11 2010 at 7:40 PM Rating: Good
*
205 posts
My experiece running beta on my machine.

Processor: Intel Core 2 Duo 3.0Ghz Wolfdale E8400 dual-core
RAM: 4GB
Video Card: Nvidia GeForce 9600GT 512MB 256-bit
OS: Windows Vista 64-bit

Benchmark Results: 2578 on 720p
- The only slowdown I get is when it rains, dust storms, and crowded areas, otherwise it runs 80% smooth. It's the equivalent of Whitegate durring a full beseiged. Fro the most part everything is set to standard.
- I've not been able to run the game on 1080p settings and have it playable.

Just thought I'd post this to ease the players out there about the specs. I built this machine about 5 years ago.
____________________________
It's not who we are, but what we do that define us. - Batman Begins

#2 Aug 11 2010 at 7:42 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
751 posts
Could be a sign that there has been a lot of worry for nothing. Looks like anyone with a "decent" system built or bought in the last few years is going to be OK on low res settings!
____________________________
FFXIV: Crafty Hallie, Ultros





#3 Aug 11 2010 at 7:46 PM Rating: Default
*
57 posts
Wow if that's all you're seriously running the game on and having no issues can't wait to see what my rig does to blow this game up.

Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit
Intel i7 920
6gb
128gb SSD (FFXIV is the first game i'm putting on it and probably the last till SW:TOR)
EVGA 285 FTW edition


Sadly the next thing i'll have to upgrade is my monitor XD

Edited, Aug 11th 2010 9:47pm by PandhaBear
#4 Aug 11 2010 at 7:47 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
320 posts
Yeah everybody has been worrying for nothing, even me.

Edit: I'm talking about people with above-average PCs. If your computer is old or not meant for studio work/gaming it still probably won't work.

Edited, Aug 11th 2010 9:48pm by Rjain
____________________________


#5 Aug 11 2010 at 9:21 PM Rating: Good
*
205 posts
Yea, the benchmark itself actually contains the in-game graphics for the start of Limsa-Lominsa region. So really, what you see is what you're going to be getting.
____________________________
It's not who we are, but what we do that define us. - Batman Begins

#6 Aug 11 2010 at 9:40 PM Rating: Decent
Sage
**
550 posts
Thing is, yes your rig can run the game, but when you're camping a specific NM and can't ever get claim cause it spawns on your system too slowly, you're going to be ********* if there are even NM's in this game, which I assume there will be
____________________________
XI - Draiden 75DRG/75COR (Sylph, Retired 08)


#7 Aug 11 2010 at 9:45 PM Rating: Good
*
205 posts
Right now with competition for small mobs being very high. I didn't see any impression that my system spawned slower than the rest. I was still able to get some mobs and compete with everyone else on some of these mobs just fine. Besides the system doesn't work like FFXI anymore realy where you push one button and attack. You must engage the mob first by going into action mode, then you have to actually phsycially PUSH the attack mob button and that's if the stupid mob stands still lol, so often times you have to chase after it.

But yea I didn't see any spawning lag on my end.
____________________________
It's not who we are, but what we do that define us. - Batman Begins

#8 Aug 11 2010 at 9:46 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
320 posts
Spawn lag would be internet-related.
____________________________


#9 Aug 11 2010 at 9:55 PM Rating: Good
Sage
**
550 posts
Oh ok cool beans.
____________________________
XI - Draiden 75DRG/75COR (Sylph, Retired 08)


#10 Aug 11 2010 at 10:12 PM Rating: Excellent
Quote:
then you have to actually phsycially PUSH the attack mob button and that's if the stupid mob stands still lol, so often times you have to chase after it.


I just had a flashback to chasing Leaping Lizzy over the hills in Gustaberg because I had no voke or missile weapon while praying no one was close enough to have seen her spawn.
#11 Aug 12 2010 at 9:57 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
*
247 posts
KayannaBigGrr wrote:
My experiece running beta on my machine.

Processor: Intel Core 2 Duo 3.0Ghz Wolfdale E8400 dual-core
RAM: 4GB
Video Card: Nvidia GeForce 9600GT 512MB 256-bit
OS: Windows Vista 64-bit

Benchmark Results: 2578 on 720p
- The only slowdown I get is when it rains, dust storms, and crowded areas, otherwise it runs 80% smooth. It's the equivalent of Whitegate durring a full beseiged. Fro the most part everything is set to standard.
- I've not been able to run the game on 1080p settings and have it playable.

Just thought I'd post this to ease the players out there about the specs. I built this machine about 5 years ago.


From what I have read, you can greatly improve your performance by disabling the 3 main resource hogs: ambient occlusion, depth of field, and weather effects.

Any chance you can try that and get back to us with how much it improves the playablilty?
#12 Aug 12 2010 at 10:29 AM Rating: Good
*
242 posts
I can confirm that I was able to run the beta client with the following:

AMD 3800+
2GB DDR1
GeForce 9800GT

Those are roughly middle of the line specs from about 5 years ago, except the card I updated maybe 3 years ago.

Not an ideal experience. I've noticed a huge difference transplanting that card into a better computer ($500 in July). I enjoy good graphical quality at 1600 x 1200 res.
____________________________


#13 Aug 12 2010 at 10:41 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,842 posts
I think it would be helpful for the community to post your benchmark scores to because that is general what everyone is basing the computer off of.
____________________________
FFXIV Dyvid (Awaiting 2.0)
FFXI Dyvid ~ Pandemonium (Retired)
SWTOR Dy'vid Legacy - Canderous Ordo
#14 Aug 12 2010 at 11:00 AM Rating: Excellent
As someone who has been on since mid-Alpha, my advice for those looking for computer setups that work is to see what the difference between your High and Low scores are.

On my previous build, which experienced Alpha, Beta 1, and half of Beta 2, I scored 2100 on High, and 2500 on Low.
Windown 7 Profession 32-bit
Core2Duo E8400 @ 3Ghz
Asus P5LD2-X (Socket LGA775) DDR2 Motherboard
2 GB Ram at (2x1GB) 800MHz
ATi Radeon HD4870

My new build is;
Windows 7 Professional 64-bit
Core i7 930 (Bloomfield) @ 2.8GHz
Asus P6X58D-E Intel X58 (Socket 1366) DDR3 Motherboard
Corsair XMS3 6GB (3x2GB) DDR3 12800C9 (1600MHz) Tri-Channel
ATi Radeon HD4870 (same as before)
Corsair H50 CPU Watercool Block
FPS in non-crowded areas is between 45-90

This puts out 2300 on High and 4400 on Low. Beta 3 has introduced a higher FPS cap, and more graphical options. I'm fairly certain I could have run on the old setup, but it would not have handled it with much grace. The new results show that a graphics card update is pretty much all I need to make this really sing. So, my short version is to compare the two scores for a more helpful guideline - the higher the low score, the more likely you are to be able to run with an older graphics card.
____________________________

Mieck of Siren // Mieck Corcoczeck of Lindblum

#15 Aug 12 2010 at 11:21 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
630 posts
Mieck, Pie Eating Champion wrote:
This puts out 2300 on High and 4400 on Low. Beta 3 has introduced a higher FPS cap, and more graphical options. I'm fairly certain I could have run on the old setup, but it would not have handled it with much grace. The new results show that a graphics card update is pretty much all I need to make this really sing. So, my short version is to compare the two scores for a more helpful guideline - the higher the low score, the more likely you are to be able to run with an older graphics card.


To expand upon this, the reason your low score jumped so much is that it is highly dependent on CPU performance, whereas the high setting really starts to utilize the GPU more. Obviously the better CPU will help out, but it can't help with graphical limitations. Your system with an upgraded GPU (GTX 480 or Radeon 5870) would be able to hit scores of 6,000 on low and 4,500 on high.
#16 Aug 12 2010 at 3:13 PM Rating: Good
Sage
**
550 posts
I can vouch for that, have a similar system with a 5870 and I get 4800 on high 6700 on low.
____________________________
XI - Draiden 75DRG/75COR (Sylph, Retired 08)


#17 Aug 12 2010 at 3:30 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
*
247 posts
There are claims that FFXIV is only using 2 CPU cores, so all those quads are only being 50% utilized. There may yet be hope for all the people that plan on trying to run the game on dual cores. You may be better off OCing a dual core than buying a slower quad.

Here is a good thread with some informative posts about GFX settings:

http://www.eorzeapedia.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5466
#18 Aug 12 2010 at 3:47 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
***
2,536 posts
Enscheff wrote:
There are claims that FFXIV is only using 2 CPU cores, so all those quads are only being 50% utilized. There may yet be hope for all the people that plan on trying to run the game on dual cores. You may be better off OCing a dual core than buying a slower quad.

Here is a good thread with some informative posts about GFX settings:

http://www.eorzeapedia.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5466


On the other hand, there are also claims that all 6 cores are being utilized on a hexacore (although core#2 is a bit more utilized than the rest).

____________________________
FF11 Server: Caitsith
Kalyna (retired, 2008)
100 Goldsmith
75 Rng, Brd
Main/Acc
Exp/Hybrid
Str/Attk
Spam/Others
#19 Aug 12 2010 at 4:17 PM Rating: Decent
**
697 posts
I can confirm that despite a 1425 low benchmark score, my game runs flawlessly (except for bugs) at 1600x900 resolution, with 2 effects turned off:
Windows 7 64 bit ultimate
AMD Phenom x4
6 Gb ddr800 RAM (Note, i ran benchmark with 2gb and got the same score)
Nvidia GT220 1GB DDR3 card.

I've been in town with like 40 people at the guildleve desk, been in parties of around 6-8 people, and had no issues or slowdown to speak of. I DID have a graphic/texture issue on distant building and rock formations (a sort of out of focue to in focus LINE), but the game runs smoothly!


____________________________
FFXI: Odin - Merylstryfe Summoner Woo Hoo!


#20 Aug 12 2010 at 4:20 PM Rating: Decent
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
MerylStryfe wrote:
I can confirm that despite a 1425 low benchmark score, my game runs flawlessly (except for bugs) at 1600x900 resolution, with 2 effects turned off:
Windows 7 64 bit ultimate
AMD Phenom x4
6 Gb ddr800 RAM (Note, i ran benchmark with 2gb and got the same score)
Nvidia GT220 1GB DDR3 card.

I've been in town with like 40 people at the guildleve desk, been in parties of around 6-8 people, and had no issues or slowdown to speak of. I DID have a graphic/texture issue on distant building and rock formations (a sort of out of focue to in focus LINE), but the game runs smoothly!
What framerate?

Crossposting mine because the other thread isn't seeing any action.



ASUS G73J Series (Laptop)

Intel Core i7 720QM (1.7Ghz - 3Ghz)
ATi Mobility Radeon HD 5870 1GB
500GB HD @ 7200 rpm
8GB DDR3 RAM

Runs about 3260 on low, 2200 on high. In-game I get anywhere between 20 and 60 fps 1280x720 with 2x AA and standard shadow settings. On average it's about 40 fps. Texture quality/filtering at max settings.
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
#21 Aug 12 2010 at 4:29 PM Rating: Decent
**
697 posts
I don't have an fps counter, if you can point one out to me (besides fraps), I will let you know. Just from rough experience from gaming, I'd say about 25-30 in town and 30-40 in zones or caves. Caves (obviously less mobs and people) run really smooth, so probably pushes 40-50 fps.
Again, just speculating numbers, but I will say it FEELS faster than FFXI ever did on my comp (which was capped at 30 fps IIRC).
____________________________
FFXI: Odin - Merylstryfe Summoner Woo Hoo!


#22 Aug 12 2010 at 4:55 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
Avatar
***
2,536 posts
MerylStryfe wrote:
I don't have an fps counter, if you can point one out to me (besides fraps), I will let you know.


MSI Afterburner. You can set it in the options section.

Edited, Aug 12th 2010 5:56pm by Threx
____________________________
FF11 Server: Caitsith
Kalyna (retired, 2008)
100 Goldsmith
75 Rng, Brd
Main/Acc
Exp/Hybrid
Str/Attk
Spam/Others
#23 Aug 12 2010 at 4:58 PM Rating: Decent
*
51 posts
Well, from the looks of things, I MIGHT be ok with this Emachine for a while. Over at Eorzeapedia, there are several saying they are running this somewhat ok on a Dual Core. Now of course I can't max everything out, but if I can at least play. Makes me happier than I was last week.
#24 Aug 12 2010 at 7:42 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
27 posts
Good news. Maybe my duo-core computer might be good enough to run this beautiful game. (given I turn off a lot of settings.)
#25 Aug 12 2010 at 7:45 PM Rating: Decent
Sage
**
770 posts
you can try, turn all settings to low. and see the result. if it dosnt though.. got a backup plan?

Edited, Aug 12th 2010 9:47pm by Puppy1
____________________________
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
#26 Aug 12 2010 at 9:32 PM Rating: Decent
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
Ethani209 wrote:
Well, from the looks of things, I MIGHT be ok with this Emachine for a while.
I'd have my doubts running an emachine. Only one I've ever seen in person was a piece of crap when it was still in the box, and proved to be even worse once I set it up (lol windows ME).
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
#27 Aug 12 2010 at 9:51 PM Rating: Decent
*
150 posts
Really hoping M11x will run it as it is cheap and I need a laptop much more than a PC.
I've searched around a little but I keep seeing mixed answers.




Edited, Aug 12th 2010 11:52pm by Osanshouo
#28 Aug 12 2010 at 9:54 PM Rating: Excellent
39 posts
I'm scoring 3200-3300 on low and 2500 on high and judging by all of the posts from people who were/are in Beta and playing on laptops I am feeling a lot better that I will be able to play with no problems.

Edited, Aug 13th 2010 12:02am by SundayMoney
#29 Aug 12 2010 at 10:01 PM Rating: Default
*
51 posts
Yes I have a back up plan. Run my White Mage *** into Windurst and murder all the little Tarus, and then rape the adult female Tarus and take the adult male tarus and sell then to a life of enslavery in San D'Oria, making sure the Prince's wishes are granted for all eternity. The ones that don't work out, make then tour guides in Jenuo!
#30 Aug 12 2010 at 10:09 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
*
151 posts
So basically your backup plan is to play FFXI instead.
____________________________
Flotsam Jetsam - Lindblum
lodestone.finalfantasyxiv.com/rc/character/status?cicuid=1570183
#31 Aug 12 2010 at 10:12 PM Rating: Decent
*
51 posts
Hadn't thought of that actually....lol

To Be honest..I tried to get back into 11 not to long ago and couldn't. So I'll play (don't throw anything) WoW if need be.
#32 Aug 13 2010 at 12:23 PM Rating: Decent
*
150 posts
Sunday Money wrote:
I'm scoring 3200-3300 on low and 2500 on high and judging by all of the posts from people who were/are in Beta and playing on laptops I am feeling a lot better that I will be able to play with no problems.

This is in response to my post on m11x?
If so, are you running refresh 1 or 2?
#33 Aug 13 2010 at 2:37 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
751 posts
My laptop (notebook) is an M11X.

I am scoring 1200 on the benchmark (on low) overclocked!

Probably not going to be playable for anything except for perhaps logging in to craft in an empty part of the world. Shame!

That said, I have seen posts from people scoring low 1000's in the benchmark who said as long as you turn all the bells and whistles off - the game runs OK!
____________________________
FFXIV: Crafty Hallie, Ultros





#34 Aug 13 2010 at 2:52 PM Rating: Decent
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
I've yet to see anyone report a fps when they're only benching 1000-1200. Other than myself, that is, and I was getting under 10 fps nearly all of the time. So it's hard for me to reconcile how they're seeing smooth gameplay on low settings, but again, there just haven't been any responses to confirm or deny.

Edited, Aug 13th 2010 3:52pm by bsphil
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
#35 Aug 13 2010 at 3:14 PM Rating: Decent
2 posts
Quote:
I've yet to see anyone report a fps when they're only benching 1000-1200. Other than myself, that is, and I was getting under 10 fps nearly all of the time. So it's hard for me to reconcile how they're seeing smooth gameplay on low settings, but again, there just haven't been any responses to confirm or deny.


I've run the beta on two pc's one of which scored a 320 on the benchmark, and while it doesn't run well it does run. With the effects turned off and the buffer set to half the game isn't much of a looker but it is playable.


The other PC is a q9550, 4gb ram, 8800gt and the game runs absolutely fine with everything on. Benchmarked right at 3,000.
#36 Aug 13 2010 at 3:16 PM Rating: Good
**
749 posts
Quote:
ASUS G73J Series (Laptop)

Intel Core i7 720QM (1.7Ghz - 3Ghz)
ATi Mobility Radeon HD 5870 1GB
500GB HD @ 7200 rpm
8GB DDR3 RAM

Runs about 3260 on low, 2200 on high. In-game I get anywhere between 20 and 60 fps 1280x720 with 2x AA and standard shadow settings. On average it's about 40 fps. Texture quality/filtering at max settings.


Smooth? Choppy? Is that MAX max settings? on a scale of 1-10, 1 being minimum and 10 being max, where does yours fall?

have you disabled hardware virtualization in BIOS?

Is it a best buy version, or the higher quality 1920 x 1080 display version sold online? [this would constitute the X1, A2, and A1 models]

I'm really REALLY curious to hear as many details about this machine as I can.
____________________________
http://www.rantmedia.ca/newsreal/
http://www.piratepartyradio.com


The Truth is a virus
#37 Aug 13 2010 at 3:41 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
***
2,536 posts
Many people are confusing "high setting" with "max setting."

High setting simply means anything above medium.

Max setting means EVERYTHING is turned to AS HIGH AS POSSIBLE.

This means max shadows, textures, X8 MS, DoV on, AO on, etc.



Edited, Aug 13th 2010 4:41pm by Threx
____________________________
FF11 Server: Caitsith
Kalyna (retired, 2008)
100 Goldsmith
75 Rng, Brd
Main/Acc
Exp/Hybrid
Str/Attk
Spam/Others
#38 Aug 13 2010 at 5:11 PM Rating: Decent
*
150 posts
I'll wait till release and see what will run it for sure then.
Really know almost nothing about the internal workings of a computer and I have a feeling if I tried to build one it wouldn't work or it wouldn't last long.
I don't suppose anyone knows where I can find some basic computer tutorials with either videos or pictures.
I've tried to read some of the guides out there but it's so much easier for me to process something when I can actually see it.

http://ffxiv.zam.com/journal.html?user=372629;mid=1281683612156537980
Nevermind, I found one!
This communtiy is awesome.

Edited, Aug 13th 2010 7:28pm by Osanshouo
#39 Aug 13 2010 at 7:10 PM Rating: Good
Sage
**
550 posts
Here is another step by step with pics

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/274745-31-step-step-guide-building

I used it and had 0 problems as a noob builder. Built mine about two weeks ago :)
____________________________
XI - Draiden 75DRG/75COR (Sylph, Retired 08)


#40 Aug 13 2010 at 7:34 PM Rating: Decent
*
150 posts
wow, awesome.
Gonna try and find one for Laptop.
It really doesn't seem so bad now.
#41 Aug 13 2010 at 7:52 PM Rating: Decent
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
seneleron wrote:
Quote:
ASUS G73J Series (Laptop)

Intel Core i7 720QM (1.7Ghz - 3Ghz)
ATi Mobility Radeon HD 5870 1GB
500GB HD @ 7200 rpm
8GB DDR3 RAM

Runs about 3260 on low, 2200 on high. In-game I get anywhere between 20 and 60 fps 1280x720 with 2x AA and standard shadow settings. On average it's about 40 fps. Texture quality/filtering at max settings.


Smooth? Choppy? Is that MAX max settings? on a scale of 1-10, 1 being minimum and 10 being max, where does yours fall?

have you disabled hardware virtualization in BIOS?

Is it a best buy version, or the higher quality 1920 x 1080 display version sold online? [this would constitute the X1, A2, and A1 models]

I'm really REALLY curious to hear as many details about this machine as I can.
It's the online version (got from newegg, but they're currently unavailable there). I actually saw it in best buy which is where I got a feel for it, but they had a smaller resolution screen and a lower quality ATi card. The only time it gets a bit choppy is when I'm at the crystal starting up a new guildleve and there are a few dozen people crowded around. When I go out to fight something, the framerate is more like 30-40, which is high enough to play smoothly. Occasionally it can jump as high as 60 but that's in empty areas. I've touched as low as 15 fps when in weather/crowded areas/windowed with Aero on. Keep in mind this is while firefox is running, AIM is running, steam is running, etc. Never disabled hardware virtualization in the BIOS, suppose I could give that a shot. Depth of field and ambient occlusion are off, but all textures are at the highest possible settings. Oh, and the buffer size is at resolution (people used to oversample the buffer size in FFXI to create a pseudo-anti aliasing effect since regular AA wasn't supported).

Running fullscreen at 1080p isn't too much harder on the laptop, but I haven't done it as much. Currently you can't alt+tab out of the fullscreen mode (it'll crash the game) so I haven't been bothering with it. If they ever do fix alt+tabbing I might turn down the textures a bit and go back to 1080p. I really hope so, because it's really aggravating that they never really fixed that original issue from FFXI (they just allowed windowing, never fixed crashing), and in FFXIV they're doing the exact same thing.



Edited, Aug 13th 2010 8:57pm by bsphil
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
#42 Aug 16 2010 at 8:08 PM Rating: Decent
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
seneleron wrote:
have you disabled hardware virtualization in BIOS?
Just to let you know I tried this out and it made the system unstable to the point where I couldn't play more than 5 mins in any 3D game. I don't know how the other poster claimed better performance, mine went down on top of everything when I tried to disable it.
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
#43 Aug 16 2010 at 8:31 PM Rating: Good
**
749 posts
Quote:
Just to let you know I tried this out and it made the system unstable to the point where I couldn't play more than 5 mins in any 3D game. I don't know how the other poster claimed better performance, mine went down on top of everything when I tried to disable it.


On The G73, the two to turn off are intel Virtualization Technology and VT-D

Straight from the G73 BIOS:

"When enabled, a VMM [virtual machine] can utilize the additional hardware capabilities provided by vanderpool technology"

That's all it does. It sits in the background and waits for your virtual machine to request use of additional hardware capabilities. This does not mean you can't run a virtual machine with it disabled. Don't know what a virtual machine is or not sure if you're running one? Then you're not. ;)

Disabling removes the load from this BIOS feature. Why your system has become unstable I have no idea. I've suggested this "tweak" over a dozen times, and this is the first time I've heard of anyone having an issue. I also have virtualization disabled in the BIOS on my desktop [AMD X6] with no ill effects.



Edited, Aug 16th 2010 10:32pm by seneleron
____________________________
http://www.rantmedia.ca/newsreal/
http://www.piratepartyradio.com


The Truth is a virus
#44 Aug 16 2010 at 8:32 PM Rating: Decent
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
seneleron wrote:
Quote:
Just to let you know I tried this out and it made the system unstable to the point where I couldn't play more than 5 mins in any 3D game. I don't know how the other poster claimed better performance, mine went down on top of everything when I tried to disable it.


On The G73, the two to turn off are intel Virtualization Technology and VT-D

Straight from the G73 BIOS:

"When enabled, a VMM [virtual machine] can utilize the additional hardware capabilities provided by vanderpool technology"

That's all it does. It sits in the background and waits for your virtual machine to request use of additional hardware capabilities.

Disabling removes the load from this BIOS feature. Why your system has become unstable I have no idea. I've suggested this "tweak" over a dozen times, and this is the first time I've heard of anyone having an issue. I also have virtualization disabled in the BIOS on my desktop [AMD X6] with no ill effects.

I'll give it another shot.
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
#45 Aug 16 2010 at 8:34 PM Rating: Good
**
749 posts
Quote:
I'll give it another shot.


If you continue to have issues, let me know or check out the asus forums @ forums.notebookreview.com [Gaming laptops section]
____________________________
http://www.rantmedia.ca/newsreal/
http://www.piratepartyradio.com


The Truth is a virus
#46 Aug 16 2010 at 9:12 PM Rating: Decent
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
Seems to be running ok now, not sure what the issue was last time. I don't think I turned off VT-D last time though. Either way, the improvement in performance doesn't seem to be that noticeable. Turning off Aero helped a lot, now I'm hitting 25+ fps pretty much everywhere, even in the busiest areas.

Edited, Aug 16th 2010 10:12pm by bsphil
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
#47 Aug 16 2010 at 9:21 PM Rating: Good
**
749 posts
it may not be a huge boost, but it takes some of the load off the processor which translates out to that much more it can dedicate to the game. It's all about scavenging every little bit of performance you can :)



____________________________
http://www.rantmedia.ca/newsreal/
http://www.piratepartyradio.com


The Truth is a virus
#48 Aug 16 2010 at 9:29 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
2,801 posts
I got 700 on the benchmark, and am getting 15-20ish FPS in game. Playable, but not exactly quality gaming. This is with all the extra stuff turned off.
____________________________
WoW -- Zaia -- Dragonmaw -- Mage 80 BABY! Alchemy 450
Also... Hunter 62, Rogue 52, Warrior 66, Warlock 43, Death Knight 70, Shaman Who Cares? ;)

FFXI -- Caia -- Retired/Deleted -- Blm 75, Alchemy 97
Pandimonium server - Rank 10 - Bastok

Zaela Rdm -- 35, Alchemy 45 -- Forced into retirement because I didn't have the right kind of credit card. Hope it was worth 18 bucks a month, SE.

#49 Aug 16 2010 at 9:37 PM Rating: Decent
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
When I'm out fighting something I'm between 50-60 fps.
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
#50 Aug 16 2010 at 10:57 PM Rating: Decent
**
281 posts
Quote:
Processor: Intel Core 2 Duo 3.0Ghz Wolfdale E8400 dual-core
RAM: 4GB
Video Card: Nvidia GeForce 9600GT 512MB 256-bit
OS: Windows Vista 64-bit

Benchmark Results: 2578 on 720p
- The only slowdown I get is when it rains, dust storms, and crowded areas, otherwise it runs 80% smooth. It's the equivalent of Whitegate durring a full beseiged. Fro the most part everything is set to standard.
- I've not been able to run the game on 1080p settings and have it playable.


I have a Processor: AMD 9600 Quad Core 2.6GHz
Ram: 4GB
Card: Nvidia XFX GeForce 9800GT 512MB 256-bit
OS: Windows Vista Ultimate

And I got a score of 2350 on 720p. I don't understand why my score is less.
____________________________
It isn't what dies that matters, it's what dies inside you while you're living that does.
#51 Aug 16 2010 at 11:04 PM Rating: Good
Sage
**
550 posts
Your processor.
____________________________
XI - Draiden 75DRG/75COR (Sylph, Retired 08)


« Previous 1 2
This forum is read only
This Forum is Read Only!
Recent Visitors: 21 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (21)