It don't? I thought it was standard and then PCI-e was the future. oh well no big thing...
Specifications Megathread (Video cards, game speed etc)
- Thread starter unmerged(117416)
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
It don't? I thought it was standard and then PCI-e was the future. oh well no big thing...
You've evidently fallen behind in the last couple of years, which equates to centuries in PC years.
You've evidently fallen behind in the last couple of years, which equates to centuries in PC years.
Why do you think Im asking you guys!?! because I'm not up to date on computers maybe?
I believe I was thinking about my old mainboard and all the problems I had upgrading my video card then.
Why do you think Im asking you guys!?! because I'm not up to date on computers maybe?
Why do you think I haven't been answering? I've been up to my eyeballs in administrating email and don't have time to keep up with hardware anymore.
The good news is that you have pci-e
Some graphic cards.
ATI 5450 600 skr
ati 5550 1 gb 700 skr
ATI 5670 1050 skr
All three will run V2 without any problems.
Would this laptop run Victoria 2?
Hi there,
I'm going to buy a new laptop on saturday, and I want it to be able to run Vic2. But I'm not going to buy a high-end machine, because I also want it for work (and that means it must be light and have a long battery run time)
This is my favorite so far:
Samsung Q330 with Windows 7
CPU: Intel Core i3 350M 2x2.26 GHz
Graphics card: nVidia GeForce G310M
RAM: 4 GB DDR3 SDRAM 1066MHz
The CPU speed is a bit slower that what they suggested in the last tech thread (2.4 GHz) but for weight & battery reasons I am very tempted to take this one instead of one that has 2.54 GHz.
As for graphics I have no idea how this one compares!! The specs page recommended a GT220 card and I suppose a G310 one is better?
Would it run the game well?
Hi there,
I'm going to buy a new laptop on saturday, and I want it to be able to run Vic2. But I'm not going to buy a high-end machine, because I also want it for work (and that means it must be light and have a long battery run time)
This is my favorite so far:
Samsung Q330 with Windows 7
CPU: Intel Core i3 350M 2x2.26 GHz
Graphics card: nVidia GeForce G310M
RAM: 4 GB DDR3 SDRAM 1066MHz
The CPU speed is a bit slower that what they suggested in the last tech thread (2.4 GHz) but for weight & battery reasons I am very tempted to take this one instead of one that has 2.54 GHz.
As for graphics I have no idea how this one compares!! The specs page recommended a GT220 card and I suppose a G310 one is better?
Would it run the game well?
The graphic card looks weak. I'm not much into hardware, but I use this site
Here you can see your card on place 115. I used to have 7600go (136) and I had to f.e. switch advanced water off in HoI3.
Now I have 240m (66) and it goes well. So assuming that the ranking is done well and the cards are more or less evenly spaced, you should be able to run it, but maybe not well...
Here you can see your card on place 115. I used to have 7600go (136) and I had to f.e. switch advanced water off in HoI3.
Now I have 240m (66) and it goes well. So assuming that the ranking is done well and the cards are more or less evenly spaced, you should be able to run it, but maybe not well...
Yeah, problem with the 3xx series is they are effectively a rebrand of the 2xx series. Pretty much every other generation from Nvidia is simply a rebrand.
Well, the recommendation is for a 2.4 GHz Pentium IV; modern dual/quad-core CPUs are much more efficient and the lower clock speed really isn't a good indicator of their performance vs. older models.
What I don't understand is why game companies still use Pentium IVs and Athlons in their system requirements. PC gaming has moved on.
Hardware has moved much faster than software though virtually across the board. Intel has had to slow down to allow software to catch up really, although they have hinted they will speed up again later this year with the next gen.
Pentium 4/Athlons are still widespread, but I expect this Christmas to see them wiped out in favor of newer CPU's by game companies.
Which is frankly much better then fast developing hardware accelerating software development, no?
Hmm, so the graphics unit is the weakest link?
oI found the notebook very tempting because it's compactly designed, has the extras I want, and most importantly offers up to 7 hours of battery time according to specs. (Yeah I know it's not that good in reality but it's better than the other designs).
I'm so torn now... the other designs either have much lower max battery life time (3-3.5 h) or they have unacceptably bad graphics cards, that don't even show up in the rankings.
Can anyone recommend a laptop that has
- a good CPU
- graphics card good enough for Vic2
- smallish display (~13.3")
- VGA & HDMI links so I can hook it up to a monitor
- more than 5 hours battery life time
o
It usually is.Hmm, so the graphics unit is the weakest link?
Laptops with small displays tend to have the weakest graphics chips. Most 12-13" laptops will probably have Intel graphics. You'll probably need to go to at least 14" to get a good dedicated GPU. You basically have to choose between compact with good battery life or larger with good graphics (even 12" laptops can have very good CPUs though).
Oh that's so frustrating! I want to hook my monitor to the laptop to play, so I want a small display *AND* a good graphics card.
Are laptop graphics cards easy to replace? I might just go and buy a 12-13" one and replace the GPU...
In that class it is generally not possible at all. Only the more powerful graphics chips are designed to be upgradable (and not always even then).
Plus, you most probably would lose the warranty if you replaced any hardware.