Computer/apology
#1
Posted 09 June 2013 - 04:40 PM
#2
Posted 09 June 2013 - 05:09 PM
#3
Posted 09 June 2013 - 05:14 PM
Also you might want to put this in the hardware section (Mod)
Edited by kevin roshak, 09 June 2013 - 05:14 PM.
#4
Posted 09 June 2013 - 05:17 PM
#5
Posted 09 June 2013 - 05:21 PM
#6
Posted 09 June 2013 - 05:25 PM
#7
Posted 09 June 2013 - 05:29 PM
#8
Posted 09 June 2013 - 05:35 PM
Here's an example budget PC build that would run Mechwarrior just fine.
http://www.tomshardw...ndation-54.html
It's about $660 if you build it yourself.
Edited by Uncle Ted, 09 June 2013 - 05:36 PM.
#9
Posted 09 June 2013 - 05:36 PM
Oh, it would be nice if you started by buying a keyboard with the following keys (make sure it has 'em, looks like your current keyboard is missing those):
.
,
[ENTER]
?
!
:
;
-
Edited by Phaesphoros, 09 June 2013 - 05:39 PM.
#10
Posted 09 June 2013 - 05:39 PM
Phaesphoros, on 09 June 2013 - 05:36 PM, said:
Did you want to say "If you want to play MechWarrior and other modern games at high resolution and with high details / high settings, you're going to need to save up at least $500."???
#11
Posted 09 June 2013 - 05:47 PM
Uncle Ted, on 09 June 2013 - 05:39 PM, said:
Sorry, I misread the OP, found his/her dxdiag and thought she'd already have an i3 (and want to upgrade). But it's a mobile CPU, therefore a notebook. Removed that passage from my post.
#12
Posted 09 June 2013 - 06:08 PM
Here's the hardware build thread. Every once in a while Vulpes updates some recommended builds including one right around $500, OP may find that helpful someday.
http://mwomercs.com/...he-week-reborn/Gremlich: I'm guessing Xbox or hyperbole.
Edited by Uncle Ted, 09 June 2013 - 06:10 PM.
#13
Posted 09 June 2013 - 06:09 PM
Gremlich Johns, on 09 June 2013 - 05:56 PM, said:
My guess is an xbox player jumping from CoD. There's a number of things in the OP's chat history suggesting a young age. Aiming for around 150 dollars for a computer also suggests high experience (and expectations) with consoles. Claiming to read a guide that took me 13 minutes to skim within 2 minutes of being told about it... let's just say any help we do provide will need to be overly simplified and/or with detailed explanation for someone with little to no knowledge of computers and a very small budget.
My computer was 1,277 at the time I bought it. It's considered to be outdated the moment I got it, and now might run about 900 for the same stuff. Even then it required post-purchase enhancements (mainly ram since 4 gigs of RAM is NOT enough to run a decent graphics card let alone two of them).
Edited by Koniving, 09 June 2013 - 06:11 PM.
#14
Posted 09 June 2013 - 06:47 PM
Koniving, on 09 June 2013 - 06:09 PM, said:
My guess is an xbox player jumping from CoD. There's a number of things in the OP's chat history suggesting a young age. Aiming for around 150 dollars for a computer also suggests high experience (and expectations) with consoles. Claiming to read a guide that took me 13 minutes to skim within 2 minutes of being told about it... let's just say any help we do provide will need to be overly simplified and/or with detailed explanation for someone with little to no knowledge of computers and a very small budget.
My computer was 1,277 at the time I bought it. It's considered to be outdated the moment I got it, and now might run about 900 for the same stuff. Even then it required post-purchase enhancements (mainly ram since 4 gigs of RAM is NOT enough to run a decent graphics card let alone two of them).
System ram has little to do with what video cards you're running, discrete cards have their own RAM for a reason.
You could run MWO just fine with 4gb. I still wouldn't recommend it, of course - ram is dirty cheap, may as well rock 8.
My system cost me $500 to build 5 years ago. Since then, I've replaced the GPU and installed another 4 gb ram and an SSD as a system drive, but otherwise it's the same. It runs everything at maxed settings at 45+fps (and only below 60fps for really high end games with modded settings, such as Skyrim with all manner of ENB post processing love.)
People spend more than they need in a lot of places, because they often don't really realise what is and isn't needed.
Of course, it depends if you've got an existing machine or not, so you've already got a keyboard, mouse, monitor, etc. That can tack a lot on to the price. But seriously, $500-600 will get you a gaming rig capable to playing any current game at the best detail without trouble if you've got a donor PC for peripherals and such.
With all that said... You're absolutely right that none of this is really going to help the OP: (S)he lacks the knowledge to build a PC, and thus also what's needed to pick a good deal on a used machine - and will need a pre-built system.
#15
Posted 09 June 2013 - 07:19 PM
Wintersdark, on 09 June 2013 - 06:47 PM, said:
Normally I would agree. However when I first tried to run BF3 on ultra settings with the new cards, I'd fall through the map and crash. Every time. Single player worked fine, but MP would do that every time. Getting upgraded to 16 gigs of ram fixed the issue (essentially with 4 gigs of ram + two video cards with 1 gig vram each leave my computer without enough ram to stay connected to the game with ultra settings; after the upgrade to 16 gigs and no other changes I was able to play fine).
#16
Posted 09 June 2013 - 07:25 PM
Koniving, on 09 June 2013 - 07:19 PM, said:
Normally I would agree. However when I first tried to run BF3 on ultra settings with the new cards, I'd fall through the map and crash. Every time. Single player worked fine, but MP would do that every time. Getting upgraded to 16 gigs of ram fixed the issue (essentially with 4 gigs of ram + two video cards with 1 gig vram each leave my computer without enough ram to stay connected to the game with ultra settings; after the upgrade to 16 gigs and no other changes I was able to play fine).
Could have to do with BF3 having a funky Crossfire/SLI implementation. That's really not normal behaviour, and indicates the game is doing something really strange. In fact, in most cases your in game settings shouldn't significantly impact system ram usage at all.
MWO, for example, never even reaches 2gb of ram in use for me, with one or two cards - I was running an SLI setup with a pair of 460's before upgrading. It's a 32 bit app, so it's going to be unable to use more than 4gb anyways(yes, there are exceptions and ways around that, but they are irrelevant here).
#17
Posted 10 June 2013 - 12:44 PM
Wintersdark, on 09 June 2013 - 07:25 PM, said:
MWO, for example, never even reaches 2gb of ram in use for me, with one or two cards - I was running an SLI setup with a pair of 460's before upgrading. It's a 32 bit app, so it's going to be unable to use more than 4gb anyways(yes, there are exceptions and ways around that, but they are irrelevant here).
In fact the limit is even stricter than that. 32-bit applications are limited to 2GB, not 4. Windows imposes that limit on any 32-bit application that isn't large-address-aware. So MWO and BF3 not only don't utilize more than 2GB, they can't. They would crash if they tried because the OS would refuse to allocate it.
4GB is ample for gaming. New systems should get 8 because it's cheap future proofing, but it's not needed yet. I run MWO on an old 4GB kit in my current machine; the 7970 and 3570k still breeze through it on very high
#18
Posted 10 June 2013 - 02:54 PM
#19
Posted 11 June 2013 - 11:30 AM
It's only 6 years old.
#20
Posted 11 June 2013 - 01:51 PM
Edited by ICUBurn, 11 June 2013 - 01:51 PM.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users





















