Star Wars: Battlefront

[Grand_Admiral_Thrawn]

Mad, if it is going to take you until Christmas to get the game, I'll personally buy and ship it to you . We cannot be incomplete at the [sPAM] Corps!

 

 

EDIT:Just remembered that it was your computer that was the problem. There for I'll buy the needed parts and ship them to you!

[NIIIC]

You shouldn’t invest so much, all we need is that Mad stops buying 25 thousand CDs, computer and PS2 and X box and Game cube games and puts a bit more money towards sparring, he will get his computer in no time. And the game with it.

 

PS Think on economising on petrol Mad.

[mawshiye]

CPU

Required: Intel P3 1.0 GHz or AMD Athlon 1000 MHz

Recommended: Intel P4 2.0 GHz or AMD Athlon XP 2400+

 

I only have a 900 MHz Duron proccessor. Do you think that will be enough to run this? Nothing else is a problem, but I hope this isn't, cause that'll mean I cant play this game

[Grand_Admiral_Thrawn]

It's hard to tell. I know that the game may be demanding on resources. The surroundings are very high-poly. That said, if you can run Battlefield Vietnam, I'm pretty sure you'll be able to run this, even if some of the graphic settings are reduced.

[mawshiye]

I've never played Battlefield Vietnam. I wouldn't know if it would run. I do have a 128MB video card, 300 some MB of RAM. Would that counter my lack of a good CPU?

[Grand_Admiral_Thrawn]

Your rocessor is only 100MhZ slower than the recomended speed, so it may not make any difference at all. RAM plays a big role one's ability to play games, both video RAM and mainboard RAM. 300 meg of ram is pretty good, though 512 is probalby ideal.

I'd say you should be fine. If my Dad can play Unreal Tournament 2004 on 128 meg of PC2100 RAM with a 64 meg video card anda AMD 1400 processor, you should be abl to play htis with your specs .

[Barkoa]

Very true. RAM is often the limiting factor. My brother upgraded his RAM and the computer went 60% faster at least.

[Guest JediIgor]

Perhaps the ISD will be like like the ships in BF 1942. You can board shuttles from it or bombard the planet. Hehe.

Remember. [spam] in front of the name and [OSF]May the Force be with you is our server.

 

Hmm, I highly doubt ISD is in there. Or any capital ships at all.. I mean I certainly haven't seen it mentioned anywhere or any screenshots with it (but I sure hope I get proved wrong).

 

Very true. RAM is often the limiting factor. My brother upgraded his RAM and the computer went 60% faster at least.

 

True, but in this case, his CPU may be the limiting factor. A 128 MB video card is very good, but a 900 MHz card is very bad. I upgraded from an Athlon 1.2 GHz to a 64 3000+ and while I kept the same card (R9700 Pro), my performance in a game such as UT2004 jumped up to about 60+ FPS from a less than 30.

 

My recommendation? Get a 64 3000+ .

[Grand_Admiral_Thrawn]

Your jump in performance may be because you had an Athlon 1200 (I'm assuming this because AMD doesn't name their processors according to speed, but rather a designation number), which doesn't even perform at 1.2 Ghz. A jump from that to the 3000+, which runs at roughly 2.3 Ghz, is a big jump. The difference between 900 MHz and 1000 Mhz is not nearly as large. Also, the 3000+ 64 has two downsides:

 

1. It doesn't actually perform that much faster than the models just below it (the 2700+ to the standard 3000+) compared to theexorbitant price you pay for it.

2. You have to have XP 64 to take full advantage of it, which will set you back another $200.

 

As for the ISD, you can see it in the Tatooine video on the LA Battlefront offical site.

 

 

EDIT:A correction to my ascerted speed forthe 64-bit processors for AMD. The AMD Athlon XP 64 3000+ runs at 2000 Mhz (if you're not overclocking), which is the same speed as both models of the standard AMD Athlon XP 2400+. There for, if you're looking to upgrade folks, but don't want to spend a ton of money for little extra performance, go forthe high-end Athlon XP processors, the top model (the 3200+) of which runs at the same Mhz as the bottom model of the 64 FX processors (top of the line).

[Guest JediIgor]

Sorry, I said I have a 1.2 GHz and I'm not talking about the 1200+ (there isn't even a 1200+). In fact, back during the Thunderbirds they were using the actual clock speed for their names. Thunderbird 1.1, 1.2, etc.

 

AMD 64-bit CPUs don't just have "the same clockspeed", they have a bigger memory bandwidth, a longer pipeline, faster/slower cache, a different bus (which goes at like 1600 MHz which is a lot faster than the usual 333 MHz multiplier).

 

I did a lot of research before I finally came to the conclusion the 3000+ is the best buy. The 3200+ is exactly the same as the 3000+ although the old core (Clawhammer) did have a 1 MB cache (the new core, Newcastle, has a 512 KB as far as I can tell). Regardless, the extra 512 KB in cache only gave it a small performance increase, and at that, only in memory tests -- thus no real performance increase in a real world situation.

 

To top it off, the 3200+ is routinely $60+ more expensive than the 3000+ (I bought around $200, probably went down now). This is a retail comparison BTW, I don't buy OEM junk (nor should you, they have a very little warranty).

 

However, my performance increase may have been also associated with my memory, I now have a gigabyte of DDR PC2700 RAM and I had a 2100 512 MB before.

 

and while it may be more expensive than the 32-bit CPUs AMD is offering, I do believe they have a much bigger longetivity. Once XP 64 finally comes out, people will be getting HUGE performance increases.

 

But, hey, if you wanted a short-term CPU you'd probably buy a P4 EE .

[NIIIC]

You all seem very informed on computer products, so maybe you can help me. I want to upgrade my computer's RAM, is there no limit until where you can upgrade it, and what would be an average price for a Giga of RAM?

[Mad78]

The limit is the amount of slots on your motherboard. Check this site out for prices.

http://www.prodimex.ch

[Grand_Admiral_Thrawn]

The limint is not only ascribed by the number of slots on your mainboard. Some motherboards can only handle RAM of a certain PC speed. I had to get a new motherboard when I bought new RAM because my old one didn't support PC 32oo RAM. I suggest you get PC2700, as Igor has, since it is the most balanced for speed. If yo have a 3000+ plus processor, though, you'll need PC3200 to take full advantage of it (otherwise you'll be under]/i]-clocking it). Also, if your RAM is too fast for your processor (like mine is) you'll have to st it's power settings down. When I run my RAM at 200Mhz my computer will eventually restart, due to the fact that my 2800+ only requires (and can really only handle) 166Mhz.

That said, for a 1500+ "Palomino", though to a 2600+ "Thoroughbred" AMD processor, you'll only need PC2100 ram, though there is one 2600 model (the AXDA2600DKV3D, rather than the KV3C listed above) that requires PC2700, as does the 2700+ of the same model.

All of AMD's "Thorton" processors use PC2100 RAM, though they are faster than the model below them.

All but two of the "Barton" models (which range from a 2500+ model up to the 3200+) use PC2700. Only the 3200+ and the slower of the 3000+ models use PC3200 RAM.

If you didn't get all that, here is a listing of AMD's processors, speeds, as well as RAM voltage. For reference, 266 is PC2100, 333 is 2700, and 400 is 3200.

 

AMD doesn't list hte RAM voltage for their 64-bit processors, so you'd have to research that. Another advantage of the 64-bits over the 32s is that they run signifigantly cooler, all at 70 degrees C.

[NIIIC]

Yes, but how am I suppose to know which ism my Motherboard. All I know is that I have a Dell 8300, 3.2Ghz Intel Pentium 4, 500 RAM that I want to boost to 1000 at least, but 2000 or even 3000 would be welcome.

[Guest JediIgor]

Dell likes to save money, you probably have 2 DIMMs of 256x2 and only 2 DIMM slots, so you'll have to buy 2 sticks of 512 if you want to upgrade or 1 stick of 1024.

 

Either way, since you have a Dell, I'd check their website for possible upgrades and then after you see what speeds and RAM is supported, buy the RAM from a 3rd party site (I recommend using Froogle, Pricewatch, or Yahoo! Shopping).

 

By the way, to sum up Thrawn's long post which may be hard to understand for some..

 

Some CPUs don't support the newest RAMs, and likewise some motherboards don't support the newest RAMs. Make sure both the motherboard and the CPU supports your RAM (check their respective websites) before you buy it.

[Mad78]

All this talking has got me doubting about what mother card, RAM and Processor to get.

is this a good config:

Motherboard: GIGABYTE GA-7VT600-P-L ( KT600 - Socket A )

RAM: 2x DDR 512MB DDR333 ( PC2700) Corsair Opteron CL2.5

Processor: AMD Athlon 64 3000+ [ Socket 754 - 512KB - 2GHz ] + Ventilateur

 

this okay?

[mawshiye]

I think the easiest way to determine what kind of RAM you need is to open up your computer (make sure to unplug it!!) and look at your current card. Usually it is printed on the card what kind of RAM you have. For example my card has pc-133 written beneath the card name.

[BadSamaritan]

Motherboard: GIGABYTE GA-7VT600-P-L ( KT600 - Socket A )

RAM: 2x DDR 512MB DDR333 ( PC2700) Corsair Opteron CL2.5

Processor: AMD Athlon 64 3000+ [ Socket 754 - 512KB - 2GHz ] + Ventilateur

 

this okay?

 

 

If that wont run battlefronts, than we all may be in for some serious upgrading soon.

[Mad78]

All i want to know is if it will work all otgether don't want to be like GAT and have to buy another motherboard.

[BadSamaritan]

Yah, it should all work. SO well that htere sint a game on this planet you shouldnt be able to run.

[Grand_Admiral_Thrawn]

I would like to warn you about another piece of equipment, though. As much as I am a fan of ATI, there have been a lot of problems running games on thier cards as of late, and that includes the new X800 and X600. ATI customers have been suffering from a VPU recovery error that pops up every now and then (like every time you play for 30 min +). I found that not overclocking and allowing programs to take charge of settings has eliminated the problem, bu if I could trade in my new 9800 Pro (I recently broke my old one ) for a NVidia 6800, I would.

 

EDIT:BTW, only five more days until Battlefront is released! Alas, my playing will be postponed due to a semenar on that day, but it will only heighten my enthusiasm when I get at it!

[BadSamaritan]

And here I am running an old GForce II. My comp sucks.

 

Luckily, zipzoomfly is dirt cheap, so a 256 MB vid card is only going to run me about 150.

[Grand_Admiral_Thrawn]

Just remember, there are old 256 video cards out there too, so watch what you buy. The Radeon 9600 has a 256 meg version, but it doesn't perform as well as my 9800, which only has 128 meg. The only 256 that's worth your money is one of the next generation cards, like the X800 or 6800, but you'll never get one for $150.

[Guest JediIgor]

Yes, that looks pretty good, though I personally prefer Kingston (cheaper ) or Crucial.

 

You might also need a new video card unless you have an ATI 9600+ or GeForce 5+ if you want to take full advantage of your new setup .

[Mad78]

I had my eyes on a Radeon 9800