Kale Wrote:YES! I-
-still cant run it.
God damn laptops.
Whats wrong with laptops?
I seem to have lost my pie cutter.
Can you run it? |
|
Re: Can you run it? |
08-31-2010, 09:13 AM
Kale Wrote:YES! I- Whats wrong with laptops? I seem to have lost my pie cutter.
|
Re: Can you run it? |
09-04-2010, 11:16 PM
Laptops just aren't fit for games like this, partly because of the whole "Sorry you can't upgrade your $1200 purchases' graphic card," setup.
WHY DIDN'T I BUY A DESKTOP!? Laugh more, Cry less. It's not like us mortals live Forever.
|
Re: Can you run it? |
09-05-2010, 01:43 AM
Kale Wrote:Laptops just aren't fit for games like this, partly because of the whole "Sorry you can't upgrade your $1200 purchases' graphic card," setup. Actually, I have an Asus gaming laptop. I can upgrade anything in it.... It even has room fro two more HDs... I seem to have lost my pie cutter.
|
Re: Can you run it? |
09-05-2010, 01:58 AM
UnbeknownstGhost Wrote:Kale Wrote:Laptops just aren't fit for games like this, partly because of the whole "Sorry you can't upgrade your $1200 purchases' graphic card," setup. Yep. Seconding the positive vibes towards Asus. My own laptop has served me quite well, and although I've yet to upgrade it (I haven't had to since I got it for Christmas in 2008), I know I can when the time arises. A friend to the end to depend on you can.
I walk through the sea, swim through the sands. To the edges of the earth, to your rescue when you hurt, Only thing I learnt is I'm not Superman. ~Giant Panda - Strings |
Re: Can you run it? |
09-05-2010, 04:27 AM
Asus does come out with great hardware for their price point, but they tend to rush production and have generally crappy customer service. I spent a couple hundred dollars extra and went with a Sagen this go around, I like their style.
|
Re: Can you run it? |
09-05-2010, 08:46 AM
CRAP! The manager never even mentioned a ASUS when I went to purchase a gaming laptop.
DAMN YOU KENNY! I WASTED $1200 BECAUSE OF YOU! I swear, I'm going to suffer a concussion if I keep doing this. Laugh more, Cry less. It's not like us mortals live Forever.
|
Re: Can you run it? |
09-05-2010, 02:40 PM
Halfway between the two, and I still have to run it at half resolution, with all goodies turned off. Blows chunks, particularly with my 6mo old alienware laptop.
I appreciate that they wanted to make the graphics future proof, but good god. |
Re: Can you run it? |
09-05-2010, 02:50 PM
falcolas Wrote:Halfway between the two, and I still have to run it at half resolution, with all goodies turned off. Blows chunks, particularly with my 6mo old alienware laptop. It really seems to be a CPU limitation, and not a GPU limitation. My i5 at work and Intel Quad at home are slammed pretty hard while the video card seems mildly indifferent. |
Re: Can you run it? |
09-05-2010, 02:54 PM
That... really makes me scratch my head in wonder. What could they be calculating that can't be done in the GPU?
|
Re: Can you run it? |
09-05-2010, 03:12 PM
falcolas Wrote:That... really makes me scratch my head in wonder. What could they be calculating that can't be done in the GPU? Maybe because the client was designed for console architectures? I was also surprised when I saw that FFXIV only seemed to take up maybe 1GB of RAM. |
Re: Can you run it? |
09-06-2010, 01:51 AM
Beyond the fact that console games, by virtue of their comparatively less impressive GPUs, have to offload more to the CPU, a lot of optimization can be done during the beta phase. Shaders can be moved out of software and onto hardware, shader programs that work better for specific video card series can be developed, debugging telemetry can be disabled, and compiler optimization can be turned on. All of this can produce marked improvements in performance.
That said, the performance is surprisingly poor compared to games of similar graphic quality (I'm thinking Assassin's Creed II and EQ2 at maximum settings, just off the top of my head), which is troubling. Hopefully it'll improve as the beta progresses, though. I know CoH had major netcode issues in beta, and CO ran like a dog on nVidia cards for a while until they got some render path fixes in. The Freelance Wizard
Quality RP at low, low prices! ((about me | about L'yhta Mahre | L'yhta's desk | about Mysterium, the Ivory Tower: a heavy RP society of mages)) |
Re: Can you run it? |
09-06-2010, 09:08 AM
FreelanceWizard Wrote:That said, the performance is surprisingly poor compared to games of similar graphic quality (I'm thinking Assassin's Creed II and EQ2 at maximum settings, just off the top of my head), which is troubling.EQ2? Really? EQ2 runs like a dehydrated dog on my system at maximum settings, whereas Final Fantasy XIV runs smooth as butter... except in Limsa Lominsa, for some reason unbeknownst to me. Well, I do have to turn off Ambient Occlusion, but I imagine the grand majority of players do as well. It's just a terribly poorly optimized feature, especially when considering how many other games have it and run just fine with it enabled... |
Re: Can you run it? |
09-06-2010, 02:19 PM
I've actually found ambient occlusion is a terrible drain on any card. It seems to be about a 20-50% performance hit in many games for a very modest improvement in graphics quality. For me, that puts it squarely in the "people with SLI setups get to use this to justify their expense" category. Admittedly, I've not put a lot of effort into playing with ambient occlusion settings across multiple games, but the experiences I have had have not been positive.
For me, EQ2 runs quite well on high graphics settings with Shader 3 on and a fast CPU. Because of how SOE built the game, it's highly CPU-bound and uses very few cores. SOE bet on the wrong horse in the hardware development race, and it shows. That said, my performance in EQ2 easily bests that of FFXIV on equally high settings. Now, given your anecdotal evidence and my anecdotal evidence, I wonder if the issue is driver or rendering path related. Champions, for instance, is known to perform better on ATI than nVidia hardware (especially with shadows enabled), and for a while after release, it suffered serious performance issues on 200 and 400 series GPUs. Even now, it suffers from graphical artifacts on 400 series cards. If SE hasn't gotten to optimizing for different cards yet, that could explain the differences in performance and gives me hope we'll see them fixed. The Freelance Wizard
Quality RP at low, low prices! ((about me | about L'yhta Mahre | L'yhta's desk | about Mysterium, the Ivory Tower: a heavy RP society of mages)) |
Re: Can you run it? |
09-06-2010, 02:54 PM
I, personally, will run Ambient Occlusion on pretty much any game that supports it... with the only exception, thus far, of Final Fantasy XIV, simply because the performance with it is abysmal.
It's rather perplexing. I have an Nvidia GTX 260, and I have no problems running Crysis, Aion, Champions Online, APB, any Source Engine game, Mass Effect 2, UT3... all with ambient occlusion enabled with the settings cranked. It's only FFXIV where it causes the game to devolve into a literal slideshow. Whoever programmed that feature really, really needs to go look at how the other game developers do it, or even just steal Nvidia's version, which runs in pretty much any game with a minimal performance impact (and looks nice, too). Meanwhile, EQ2 just... I don't understand it. It really runs just terribly on my system. I mean, I even have a nifty quad core (Q8300 clocked at 3GHz each core) and it just ran like dirt on dirt. Mind, I kept the game in SM 3.0 when I tried it, and never tried using the regular (primitive) shading model with CPU shadows instead, but considering how old the game is I have a hard time wrapping my head around the idea that it's GPU bottlenecked. Hrm. |
Re: Can you run it? |
09-06-2010, 03:49 PM
That is weird. EQ2 is definitely CPU bound on anything in the 200 series, and the general rule of thumb is that it needs the highest possible clocks because it brute-forces a lot of the rendering. I didn't get the performance I have in it now until I moved to my i7 -- but it's at 2.8, not 3.0. Curious.
I also need to retract my statement that FFXIV is running terribly on my system. While it definitely could use some optimization and needs to offload more to the GPU (as well as needing to cache more data by using more RAM), once I undid something stupid I set globally in the nVidia Control Panel for another game (HL2), performance improved significantly. I also needed to turn down the texture quality to Standard to get VSync to run well, but I personally don't see much difference between Standard and High with FSAA turned on. The only times I start going into slideshow mode now are on the lifts and in areas where there's a lot of people around -- and even then, performance improves the longer I stay in the area. The interface lag is definitely directly related to this, which tells me that the issue may very well be related to the netcode or texture loading. Both of those can be fixed, and really, things aren't so bad when you get away from the crowds. I would even go so far to say that the game is actually pretty snappy when you're by yourself. The Freelance Wizard
Quality RP at low, low prices! ((about me | about L'yhta Mahre | L'yhta's desk | about Mysterium, the Ivory Tower: a heavy RP society of mages)) |
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
|
|
|