Curse

kirbykrazy · Apr 06, 2007, 03:54 AM // 03:54

First, let me say i searched the forum. Im not sure if i missed any topics though.

I'm planning to buy a new pc, probably with a duo core 6400(2.13 GH) with a nVidia Geforce 7300 256mb VRAM video card with 2GB RAM. I know this satisfies the recommended requirements for GW, but im not sure if its really good.

Second, it's going to come with vista. I know that Vista had a few driver problems when it was being upgraded to, but if a PC starts with vista, will i be able to play GW with no problems?

Thanks.

scrinner · Apr 06, 2007, 03:59 AM // 03:59

You should be fine as long as nvidia has working drivers for that card (Which it should)

kirbykrazy · Apr 06, 2007, 04:05 AM // 04:05

Thanks, that's good. Are my PC specs good enough though? Cause when i look at other topics i see that the 8800 GTS video card is good, but its like 700 bucks.

Im also on a budget. Im trying not to go to far above 1000 USD.

calderstrake · Apr 06, 2007, 05:41 AM // 05:41

Those specs are good enough to play GW on WinXP, but I don't know about Vista.

Bowman Artemis · Apr 06, 2007, 07:35 AM // 07:35

I'm playing GW on the following:

Vista Home Premium
8800GTS
1GB DDR2 RAM
3.2Ghz P4 Prescott processor

Runs like water.

Played it with the following:

Vista Ultimate Beta 2
6600GT
1GB DDR1 RAM
3.4Ghz P4 Prescott Processor

Ran well, maybe a bit like heated honey. Not really fast, but not slow, either, very much playable, but not all eye candy on.

So yeah. Should run fine on that rig.

kirbykrazy · Apr 06, 2007, 03:01 PM // 15:01

Alright, thanks.

Now i have a question about video cards. Im trying to decide between a nVidia 7300, nVidia 7900, or ATI 1300. Yea i know they're not so great.

A lot of people have been saying the 7600 is decent, but is the 7900 better?

Thanks, and im on a budget.

Dex · Apr 06, 2007, 03:15 PM // 15:15

The GeForce 7300 is not great. It will run Guild Wars ok, but it you won't be able to crank up all the eye candy. Same story with the Radeon x1300.

The 7600GT is a good GPU for the price (excellent budget card), and the 7900GT is even better (similar to the 7600GT, but faster). However, for the price of the 7900GT the Radeon x1950xt (and even the x1950 Pro) is a much better GPU. Personally, I don't think the 7900-series is worth the money because it's weak on pixel shader power for future games. Also, current nVidia cards (even the 8800) can't run High Dynamic Range effects (like pretty lighting) and AA (antialiasing...removes jagged edges) at the same time in some games while the ATI cards can.

It all depends on how much you want to spend. Overall, these are my picks in order depending on how much you want to spend:

1. GeForce 8800 GTS
2. Radeon x1950xt
3. Radeon x1950 Pro
4. GeForce 7600GT

Like I said, the nVidia GeForce 7900-series is good (I own two 7900GTs), but at the end of the day they're just not as strong a contender as ATI's Radeon x19X0-series (I also own a x1900xtx). This is not only due to the pixel shader and HDR+AA issues, but also the superior image quality displayed by the x19X0's. However, nVidia does quite well at the high-end (8800GTS) and the low-end (7600GT).

Anything below the 7600GT or the x1600/x1650 are not really made for gaming. The 7300 and the x1300 will run Guild Wars all right, but not well. Guild Wars is not a demanding game by today's standards...if your hardware can't keep decent framerates in GW at fairly high settings it's surely not going to do well with more demanding games.

Ludicro · Apr 06, 2007, 03:39 PM // 15:39

If you are on a budget I highly recommend the Radeon x1600/1650 series. Theyre excellent cards and arent very expensive.
Im running Vista (Business), and to be honest, its mostly the memory that affects your performance. It can be improved by turning off Aero and other pretty effects, but it doesnt look half as good

kirbykrazy · Apr 06, 2007, 04:11 PM // 16:11

I guess ill go with the 7900 then. GW is prob going to be my most demanding (graphics wise) game for a while. Lol i play counter strike a lot, and 32 mb graphics card can play it fine.

2 GB of memory is enough and the processor is good enough right?

Mushroom · Apr 06, 2007, 08:26 PM // 20:26

The specs you listed are plenty good enough for Guild Wars.

And the "driver issue" for Vista is largely a non-issue, unless you are trying to work with old or odd-ball hardware. ATI, NVidia, and Creative Labs for example all have stable drivers. But some companies are either phasing out old hardware by refusing to update drivers (NVidia), or are simply refusing to create new drivers (Kensington).

And if GW is your main game, there really is no reason to get a "high ended" video card. I got an ATI Radeon X1550 512 MB for my new system ($110), and it works perfectly fine with max settings. And I use a dual monitor array (19" LCD 1280x1024, 20" CRT 1600x1200).

Honor · Apr 06, 2007, 08:34 PM // 20:34

Currently I am running:
Dual core 6400
2g of Ram
Geforce 7600GS
and Windows Vista

No prob running, GW(on high), BF2(on high), DOD Source (on high). No problems with eye candy or anything except for servers(but who doesnt).

Make sure you have enough cooling for the Case. The processor comes with a good stock cooler. Havent even overclocked yet playing anything Even had BF2 adn GW open and running at the same time with no probs, but not going to push it

Dex · Apr 06, 2007, 09:30 PM // 21:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by kirbykrazy

I guess ill go with the 7900 then. GW is prob going to be my most demanding (graphics wise) game for a while. Lol i play counter strike a lot, and 32 mb graphics card can play it fine.

2 GB of memory is enough and the processor is good enough right?

Honestly, I'd urge you to avoid the 7900-series. They're fine, but if you're spending the money the x1950's are much better cards. Their pixel shader power and superior overall features make them much more future-proof. I own both nVidia and ATI hardware, and while my 7900GTs are fine, they pale in comparison to my x1900 by a wide margin and in many ways.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mushroom

And if GW is your main game, there really is no reason to get a "high ended" video card. I got an ATI Radeon X1550 512 MB for my new system ($110), and it works perfectly fine with max settings. And I use a dual monitor array (19" LCD 1280x1024, 20" CRT 1600x1200).

What if one should decide to play another game (fairly likely)? What about future games (like GW2)? As long as it's cost-effective it's foolish not to buy for the future within reason. Running the "buy for now and re-buy again in 6 months" routine can get expensive. Honestly, why would you buy a x1550 for $110 when you can get a superior 7600GT for $100? That said, why not spend $75 more (if you can afford it) and get a card (like the x1950 Pro) that will last you a while. An x1550, while fine for Guild Wars (although not as good as a 7600GT), is not really all that cost-effective if you think another game you might want to play could come out within the next year.

If you buy your hardware for one game, rather than buying a video card for gaming and a $50 game you've just purchased a $150 game. That doesn't make sense to me.

therangereminem · Apr 06, 2007, 09:47 PM // 21:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by kirbykrazy

First, let me say i searched the forum. Im not sure if i missed any topics though.

I'm planning to buy a new pc, probably with a duo core 6400(2.13 GH) with a nVidia Geforce 7300 256mb VRAM video card with 2GB RAM. I know this satisfies the recommended requirements for GW, but im not sure if its really good.

Second, it's going to come with vista. I know that Vista had a few driver problems when it was being upgraded to, but if a PC starts with vista, will i be able to play GW with no problems?

Thanks.

that setup wroks well i have the same spec on the computer i have i get 100 fps to 120 fps running in windowed mode for gw i get 60 to 70 fps

one thing vista comes with direct x 10 when you load guildwars on the computer install the direct x guildwars comes with first ....becuz guildwars does not detect direct x 10 at all but you should be fine i have all the settings turned up and it works well

Mushroom · Apr 06, 2007, 10:19 PM // 22:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dex

What if one should decide to play another game (fairly likely)? What about future games (like GW2)? As long as it's cost-effective it's foolish not to buy for the future within reason. Running the "buy for now and re-buy again in 6 months" routine can get expensive. Honestly, why would you buy a x1550 for $110 when you can get a superior 7600GT for $100? That said, why not spend $75 more (if you can afford it) and get a card (like the x1950 Pro) that will last you a while. An x1550, while fine for Guild Wars (although not as good as a 7600GT), is not really all that cost-effective if you think another game you might want to play could come out within the next year.

The main reason why I settled on the X1550 is the price. And I am waiting for the X2900 to hit the street.

In addition to GW, one of the main uses for my computer is video and sound editing. Now the video card makes no difference for audio, but the Avivo capability of the X1000 series makes it far superior to any compatible card by NVidia.

And the X1550 falls within my "budget range", while not breaking me when I upgrade to the X2900. I know that I can recover probably 75% of my purchase price when I resell it, as opposed to recouping maybe 50% if I had gotten the X1950.

I plan on upgrading my video card within 6 months. By then, the "price war" between the X2900 and NVidia will have brought the prices of both cards to reasonable levels. It will also give the makers time to develop stable drivers.

kirbykrazy · Apr 06, 2007, 10:26 PM // 22:26

Honor, when you say high, do you mean max?

Also, i think im going to get a the 8800 GTS.

And im not buying it just for one game, i was just saying GW is the game ill be playing for quite a while.

My new system specs may be the following:

Processor: Either E6400 or E6600, im deciding.
Memory: 2 GB DDR2
Vid Card: either ATI 1700, 7900 GS or 8800 GTS. (im going GTS rather than GTX do to budget restrictions)

I think this will be sufficient, im just trying to decide on the video card and processor now.

Dex · Apr 06, 2007, 10:30 PM // 22:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mushroom

In addition to GW, one of the main uses for my computer is video and sound editing. Now the video card makes no difference for audio, but the Avivo capability of the X1000 series makes it far superior to any compatible card by NVidia.

What video processing software actually utilizes AVIVO? I do video editing as well (mostly mastering recordings to DVD), and so far the only software I've found that actually uses my x1900xtx is ATI's lousy conversion utility, which isn't robust enough to be useful.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mushroom

And the X1550 falls within my "budget range", while not breaking me when I upgrade to the X2900. I know that I can recover probably 75% of my purchase price when I resell it, as opposed to recouping maybe 50% if I had gotten the X1950.

Maybe, maybe not. By the time you sell it there aren't going to be very many "newer" games that it will run well...depending on when you sell it. So far, the x1900 has held its value better than most other lesser (and equivalent) GPUs on the market...if you go by eBay. It's certainly held its value better than any of the "budget" GPUs, which makes me think you may be wrong about that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mushroom

I plan on upgrading my video card within 6 months. By then, the "price war" between the X2900 and NVidia will have brought the prices of both cards to reasonable levels. It will also give the makers time to develop stable drivers.

Perhaps the OP is looking for something that he won't need to upgrade in 6 months...perhaps not. At any rate, not everyone looking to buy a video card right now is in the same position as you are. I think a lot of people just want to buy something that they can get right now that will still run games well a year from now.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kirbykrazy

Processor: Either E6400 or E6600, im deciding.
Memory: 2 GB DDR2
Vid Card: either ATI 1700, 7900 GS or 8800 GTS. (im going GTS rather than GTX do to budget restrictions)

Between those three I would definitely recommend the 8800 GTS. The x1700 is decent if you can get it for a good price. It's a little bit faster than the 7600...only problem is that it's usually significantly more expensive. As I said, if you're going to hit the 7900 price range I would highly recommend going the x1950xt or x1950 Pro route instead. The 8800 GTS is obviously the best of the three if you're in that price range.

On the processor, the E6600 is more desirable because it has twice as much L2 cache. Historically Intel CPUs scale very well with more L2 cache. AMD CPUs don't seem to rely on L2 as much because of their on-die memory controller (minimizes the penalty for L2 cache misses). Also, the Intel CPU's longer pipeline makes the penalty for a L2 cache miss pretty hefty.