"Regard your soldiers as your children, and they will follow you into the deepest valleys. Look on them as your own beloved sons, and they will stand by you even unto death!" - Sun Tzu, the Art of War
Very cool info, thanks. Looks like my machine is medium as long as I stay slow rez.
Ken Fisher - Semi retired old fart Network Administrator, now working in Network Security. I don't Forum PVP. If you feel I've attacked you, it was probably by accident. When I don't understand, I ask. Such is not intended as criticism.
I have a 5770, and play 1900x1200, my gf has an 8800GTS 640 playing 1024x786...based on the settings we used the performance we got, that seems about right.
Its somebodies educated guess but given they have taken the time to rank video cards next to each other it looks about right - it is a guess for final release after optimization but I think its a fair starting point.
IMO I think its a bit generous to some of the older cards versus heavy populations in GW2 cities and sieges where they'll be lots of players either side of a keep wall etc, but its a starting point...
I have a gigabyte 580gtx 3gb so I'll be fine anyway. But I work a lot with video cards doing 3D renders using CUDA so IMO people should think about upgrading to something good to enjoy this game. How good? well it comes down to budget.
Also consider that a few years ago Nvidia did a big push on quality and low price with CUDA cores with their 8800GT, which has been a bench mark for Devs ever since -meaning that the game should look good on this. of course its only a matter of time till that benchmark becomes too outdated. But their are lots of computers out there with 8800gt's in them. So if your higher than 8800gt you should be ok to play this game on low to medium settings and still look pretty good.
Does this account for nVidia x ATi driver and compatibility differences? Some games work much better with one than with the other. From what I've seen, nVidia will be the premium GPUs for GW2.
Well, as of right now my rig(w/ 8600 GT) played it on the highest settings I could with no lag at all... That being said, it is mostly using CPU right now...
How about posting your source, since that "graph" looks like it is something you made in excel...
Well, as of right now my rig(w/ 8600 GT) played it on the highest settings I could with no lag at all... That being said, it is mostly using CPU right now...
How about posting your source, since that "graph" looks like it is something you made in excel...
google it - which is how I found it..
8600gt no FPS lag on highest settings including highest AA, triple sync buffering etc etc , really ?
With that said, what CPU was used on the tests? That could have a very significant change in results, considering those with a lesser card probably have a dated CPU.
With that said, what CPU was used on the tests? That could have a very significant change in results, considering those with a lesser card probably have a dated CPU.
Just ranking the GPU is only half the story.
This game is CPU based heavily, but with certain issues. As far as I know, the game runs well on intel CPU(due to architechture and optimization) and I believe that they were ran on Intel CPUs in all the demos. During the beta I ran my AMD 8150 O.C. at 4.5 Ghz. Turns out, you can't OC your processor due to client issues and it's currently single core/threaded. Although my rig kicks ass, just like windows, the limitations hold it back. But I do think it will be fully optimized and DX11(DX10 atleast) by launch.
Well, as of right now my rig(w/ 8600 GT) played it on the highest settings I could with no lag at all... That being said, it is mostly using CPU right now...
How about posting your source, since that "graph" looks like it is something you made in excel...
google it - which is how I found it..
8600gt no FPS lag on highest settings including highest AA, triple sync buffering etc etc , really ?
Yeah I think he has a different understanding of what "no lag at all" is compared to the rest of us.
Well, as of right now my rig(w/ 8600 GT) played it on the highest settings I could with no lag at all... That being said, it is mostly using CPU right now...
How about posting your source, since that "graph" looks like it is something you made in excel...
it's on the gw2guru tech forums. and the thread it's in clearly states that they are estimates, seeing as the game hasn't launched.
This chart has been around for months and I've reposted it a few times myself.
I have a friend who's laptop GPU was rated LOW and he was able to get playable frame rates with most settings on low. I have a GTX 570 and I was able to play with solid frame rates on Ultra, even though the client still needs a lot of optimizations.
I'm not sure if this leaked from Arenanet, or was extrapolated from the minumum system requirements, but the relative rankings of the cards are accurate and the chart itself seems to be of some value for GW2.
This chart has been around for months and I've reposted it a few times myself.
I have a friend who's laptop GPU was rated LOW and he was able to get playable frame rates with most settings on low. I have a GTX 570 and I was able to play with solid frame rates on Ultra, even though the client still needs a lot of optimizations.
I'm not sure if this leaked from Arenanet, or was extrapolated from the minumum system requirements, but the relative rankings of the cards are accurate and the chart itself seems to be of some value for GW2.
Yeah - its the relative rankings of the video cards that made me take this more seriously, somebody has taken their time with this.
Comments
I'm afraid nothing has been posted in the OP?
M
"Regard your soldiers as your children, and they will follow you into the deepest valleys. Look on them as your own beloved sons, and they will stand by you even unto death!"
- Sun Tzu, the Art of War
Support the Indie Developers - Kickstarter
done now.
neat.
i would imagine this is hopeful for release and not intended to be accurate for the beta client we had last month?
Very cool info, thanks. Looks like my machine is medium as long as I stay slow rez.
Love that my 9800GTX is still kickin butt
Thanks for the chart!
BOYCOTTING EA / ORIGIN going forward.
Oh cool, mine is just into the high zone. Thanks OP.
I have a 5770, and play 1900x1200, my gf has an 8800GTS 640 playing 1024x786...based on the settings we used the performance we got, that seems about right.
Its somebodies educated guess but given they have taken the time to rank video cards next to each other it looks about right - it is a guess for final release after optimization but I think its a fair starting point.
IMO I think its a bit generous to some of the older cards versus heavy populations in GW2 cities and sieges where they'll be lots of players either side of a keep wall etc, but its a starting point...
I have a gigabyte 580gtx 3gb so I'll be fine anyway. But I work a lot with video cards doing 3D renders using CUDA so IMO people should think about upgrading to something good to enjoy this game. How good? well it comes down to budget.
Also consider that a few years ago Nvidia did a big push on quality and low price with CUDA cores with their 8800GT, which has been a bench mark for Devs ever since -meaning that the game should look good on this. of course its only a matter of time till that benchmark becomes too outdated. But their are lots of computers out there with 8800gt's in them. So if your higher than 8800gt you should be ok to play this game on low to medium settings and still look pretty good.
Osiris bless my 560 Ti
Does this account for nVidia x ATi driver and compatibility differences? Some games work much better with one than with the other. From what I've seen, nVidia will be the premium GPUs for GW2.
i have a hd6850 OC (aka hd6870) so think im fine xD
HAH! There I was thinking I'd need like a Radeon 7950 or something to play it on ultra. Still going to pretend GW2 needs it though . Thanks OP
**Crap Double post** Sorry
Maybe once they optimize the game. Right now a graph wouldn't be possible, because some Ultra cards stutter on standard.
How accurate can this be if the gaming client does not utilize the gpu to its full extent as stated by Anet?
Unless this graph of course was created Anet.
Well, as of right now my rig(w/ 8600 GT) played it on the highest settings I could with no lag at all... That being said, it is mostly using CPU right now...
How about posting your source, since that "graph" looks like it is something you made in excel...
google it - which is how I found it..
8600gt no FPS lag on highest settings including highest AA, triple sync buffering etc etc , really ?
So does this game not use your CPU?
With that said, what CPU was used on the tests? That could have a very significant change in results, considering those with a lesser card probably have a dated CPU.
Just ranking the GPU is only half the story.
The game is currently CPU heavy, it still uses the GPU-graphics card but this has not been optimized yet. - this is what was stated by Arena Net Dev.
The game is also - from what I have heard - single threaded, so its not using more than one core IE dual core or more.
Essentially the final build at launch should have a noticeable improvement for most people.
This game is CPU based heavily, but with certain issues. As far as I know, the game runs well on intel CPU(due to architechture and optimization) and I believe that they were ran on Intel CPUs in all the demos. During the beta I ran my AMD 8150 O.C. at 4.5 Ghz. Turns out, you can't OC your processor due to client issues and it's currently single core/threaded. Although my rig kicks ass, just like windows, the limitations hold it back. But I do think it will be fully optimized and DX11(DX10 atleast) by launch.
Yeah I think he has a different understanding of what "no lag at all" is compared to the rest of us.
it's on the gw2guru tech forums. and the thread it's in clearly states that they are estimates, seeing as the game hasn't launched.
Ah good. The Sapphire Radeon HD 7770 GHz Ed. 1GB GDDR5 PCie 3.0 I ordered will be just fine.
This chart has been around for months and I've reposted it a few times myself.
I have a friend who's laptop GPU was rated LOW and he was able to get playable frame rates with most settings on low. I have a GTX 570 and I was able to play with solid frame rates on Ultra, even though the client still needs a lot of optimizations.
I'm not sure if this leaked from Arenanet, or was extrapolated from the minumum system requirements, but the relative rankings of the cards are accurate and the chart itself seems to be of some value for GW2.
Want to know more about GW2 and why there is so much buzz? Start here: Guild Wars 2 Mass Info for the Uninitiated
Yeah - its the relative rankings of the video cards that made me take this more seriously, somebody has taken their time with this.
This is a very old card based on a lot of information gained pre beta.
But obviously its updated with beta data and newly released cards...
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)