cheezy Posted February 13, 2011 Posted February 13, 2011 How well would dcs a-10c beta run on this system? Amd Athlon x2 4450e 2.3 ghz nvidia 240gt 4gb ram vista 32 bit THanks
slug88 Posted February 13, 2011 Posted February 13, 2011 Very poorly, if at all. Graphics card is below recommended spec, and CPU is way below recommended spec. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
cheezy Posted February 13, 2011 Author Posted February 13, 2011 dang, well I guess I'm gonna have to upgrade again.
Krippz Posted February 13, 2011 Posted February 13, 2011 Very poorly, if at all. Graphics card is below recommended spec, and CPU is way below recommended spec. I agree I wouldn't even bother installing it. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] 64th "Scorpions" Aggressor Squadron Discord: 64th Aggressor Squadron TS: 195.201.110.22
Spartan Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 i only get average 30-40 fps on my machine. specs in sig. -Corsair Obsidian 800D -Corsair H50 -Corsair 1600mhz 7-7-7-20 -Intel i7 930 @ 3.99ghz -EVGA X58 Classified -EVGA GTX480 @2 In SLI -EVGA GTX 285 Physx -Silverstone 1500 psu -Logitech G940 (retired) -TM Warthog HOTAS -42" Sony X-Series 1080P LCD -17" Dell Acc Monitor @2
evilnate Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 How well would dcs a-10c beta run on this system? Amd Athlon x2 4450e 2.3 ghz nvidia 240gt 4gb ram vista 32 bit THanks Just out of curiosity, do you run DCS:Black Shark on that system?
StrongHarm Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 In my opinion, the big problem is the processor. The Vidcard is just sufficient. DCS is CPU intensive. If you turn certain settings to low you should be able to run it though. I would also suggest a 64 bit operating system. If you're considering an upgrade, take a look at this thread. It's a good thing that this is Early Access and we've all volunteered to help test and enhance this work in progress... despite the frustrations inherent in the task with even the simplest of software... otherwise people might not understand that this incredibly complex unfinished module is unfinished. /light-hearted sarcasm
cheezy Posted February 14, 2011 Author Posted February 14, 2011 I'm probably switching to windows 7 soon and a processor was next on my list as I just upgraded my gpu(I was on a budget)
Pyroflash Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 (edited) I would suggest you get an AMD Phenom 2 X4 BE 965-970. It is relatively inexpensive for the performance you are getting. Also, while it is true that you can skimp on the graphics card a bit, it is still important to have a good one(GTX 2xx-5xx Nvidia or HD4xxx-6xxx for ATI/AMD) or your game might not run as well as it otherwise might. A little bit of investment on your part towards a DX11 card(4xx-5xx Nvidia or HD 5xxx-6xxx for ATI/AMD) ; they might be a bit pricey now, but with the market shifting towards DX11, getting a card that effectively "Future Proofs" your computer isn't such a bad idea. I don't want to sound mean or condescending, but when upgrading a computer it is important to do it either in large increments of performance every year or so, or by constant small increments over short periods of time. Staying so far behind the times with a 2.3 GHz processor pretty much ensures that you won't be able to play most modern games, let alone a very "VM"/Physics intensive(thereby very CPU intensive) simulator like DCS-10C. I try to upgrade my processor at the very most every year and a half unless I feel as if the cost is too much for the gained performance(Hence why when dual cores first came out I stayed with my Pentium 4 for a good three years until applications started catching up). I will also probably keep my current processor for a while due to no new triple channel chipsets coming out soon(Intel's new Sandy Bridge isn't worth it with its recent problems anyways, and AMD's triple channel solutions are nothing but hazy rumors so far). Edited February 14, 2011 by Pyroflash If you aim for the sky, you will never hit the ground.
winz Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 My experience with an old machine: INTEL Core 2 Duo E6750 - 2,67GHz Nvidia 8800GT 2GB Ram Vista 32 The game is playable (above 30fps in air, less on ground) for training in 1280x1050, mid-low settings. The biggest bottleneck is RAM, it just isn't sufficient and hdd paging kickes in immediately after mission start. The next bottleneck is GPU, CPU sits at 60% most of the time. That's for training -> very few AI units. I imagine it will be different in more complex missions. Tbh, the only thing I plan upgrading is ram. I don't see much point in spending 300 bucks for a new GPU, when the CPU would became the bottleneck instead. I'll rather keep the 300bucks and invest it during summer, when I plan to buy a new rig. The Valley A-10C Version Revanche for FC 3
Recommended Posts