Game Ideas

Okay, so a couple days ago my dad ordered me a great end of summer present that will be here in 2 or 3 weeks...a new laptop!

Dell Studio 15 15.6 in HD (720p) LED Display with TrueLife and Camera

Intel Core 2 Dou T6600 (2.2ghz) processor

3GB RAM

Windows Vista Home Premium SP1

256mb ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4570 grapics card

6X slot load blu ray combo drive

I was wondering with these kinds of specs what kinds of games would I be able to play and on what settings. I can't narrow it down much because neither me or my dad know a lot about graphics cards. All games are accepted and I would love to see one or two shooters that run smooth with great free online play. And to save you the trouble now, I despise WoW so don't try to suggest it LOL. Thanks in advance

Dan

 

Well, you will be able to play all the latest games, I just wouldn't expect to max out anything though.

 

Your joking right? I was under the impression that since my dad ordered it it would probably play solitaire and thats it...you mean I will actually be able to play new games? God this day keeps getting better and better LOL. I mean I think something like arkham assylum would be out seeing as it needs a 3.0 processor though, right?

 

^ yep, mostly medium settings, possibly some high ones, but you should be able to run everything out now.

The Call of Duty series has great online, also I would consider the Orange Box, comes with Half-Life Episode 2, Team Fortress2, Portal, and a couple other things, good deal though!

No this is actually a pretty decent mid-range card, and considering how low your native resolution is, I would not be surprised if you could attain high settings on some recent games.

 

Counter Strike: Source, my friend. That is the only game you need.

 

Man I love the good news I am getting so far. Finally I can play computer games... Time to go dust off KotOR 2 again. Maybe this time the game will play more than 30 seconds lol.

On an unrelated note I love the Chewbacca/Cookie Monster Avitar

 

Ahhh good call, thats a great game, should max it easily.

I used to have a dancing wookie avatar that was animated, soemppl didnt like it though

 

With any luck I'll be able to also pull something in the family of Star Wars....I always forget the name. Emire at war or something. I like LotR: Battle for Middle Earth II (and I hate LotR) so I figure a simmilar concept with Star Wars is good.

 

3.0 SINGLE core processor lol. Your processor would rip that requirement apart.

 

Most nowdays games are GPU demanding.. so CPU is no problem... And you can always overclock it =)

 

What does that mean exactly lol in regards to insanechinamans comment

and what is GPU

 

GPU - Graphical Processing Unit ( Or something like that ), its your Video Card =)

Its good, I think you will be able to play Crysis at Medium/Low ... and if your computer can run Crysis, you can run anything xD

 

LOL. Never tried crissis. The comp I am on now is . Probably because it has a Ati Radeon Xpress 200 in it. lol

 

Yea, that video card should do you just fine, like I said you will be able to play all the latest games to some extent.

 

Well then I can chalk this card up as a win lol

 

In layman's terms, two lumberjacks chop wood faster than one. Two processors are faster than one

 

So what you are saying is that arkaham asylum MAY stand a chance?

 

Your dual core being at 2.2 GHz means that any program that supports dual core will be running at 4.4 GHz because you have 2 CPUs, each 2.2 Ghz.That smokes a single core 3.2 GHz.

 

Have a look at the following games:
- Mass Effect (RPG)
- Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory and Double Agent (Action/Tactical/Stealth)
- Command & Conquer 3 (RTS)
- Company of Heroes plus the Opposing Fronts expansion (RTS)
- Half-Life 2 and all the episodic content (FPS)
- Bioshock (FPS)
- Call of Duty 2 and 4
- Rainbow Six: Vegas (tactical shooter)
- Age of Empires 3 (RTS)
- Crysis and Crysis: Warhead (FPS)
- Brothers in Arms - Hell's Highway (WWII tactical shooter)
- The Witcher: Enhanced Edition (RPG)
- Assassin's Creed

These are all the games I can think of off the top of my head. They're not all recent, and they don't all have the same system requirements, but they should all run fine on your machine. Perhaps others will list some worthwhile games.

 

You have officially said somethig that confuses me lol.

 

Argh, ok.

A Duo Core means the processor has ''two'' cores.

EACH core is at 2.2 GHz(A measurement of Processor speed)

So if EACH core is at 2.2 GHz and you have TWO cores, then add it up....2.2+2.2=4.4

The minimum specs in that game are a SINGLE CORE 3.2 Ghz.Both your cores added up= 4.4 GHz

3.2 Ghz<4.4 Ghz

So there for, overall you have a FASTER processor.

 

This is not true simply because a dual-core processor is not the same as two processors. Two cores must not only share the same bus for incoming and outgoing information, but they must also share the same L2 cache.

Furthermore, this is not true is because of how multi-core CPUs do work on a given task. A dual-core processor doesn't execute a given task twice as fast relative to an otherwise identical single-core CPU; it does, however have greatly improved multi-tasking performance and the ability to execute more threads at a time.

This ability to handle more threads can result in considerable performance gains (but nowhere near double) if and only if the application is designed by the programmer to be multi-threaded.

 

^^So what does that say for the theory of playing Arkham?

 

lol that made me look like a dumba$$, thank you. ^_^

So basicly dual cores and quad cores are pointless.It would be better for intel and AMD to just make a single core procssor that's clocked at 8 GHz.

 

http://news.bigdownload.com/2009/04/29/batman-arkham-asylum-pc-system-requirements-revealed/

When listing system requirements, developers often use Intel's Pentium 4 or AMD's Athlon 64 as a reference CPU. In the case above, they recommend any CPUs that are equal in performance to a Pentium D at 3GHz.

The Pentium D is essentially two Pentium 4 cores on one die. Almost any Core 2 Duo CPU can offer performance equivalent to such a CPU, so your computer's processor easily meets the recommended requirements.

Your computer will probably run the game at medium settings, with some demanding graphics features like AA or shadows turned down for steady FPS.

 

So basically the laptop should be able to run Arkam Asylum when it comes out on Medium? When I get the laptop I will dl the demo to check it out..if it plays I am gonna be so happy as i lack a ps3 to play it on. Thi is gonna rock if it does.

Whats more is it looks like this laptop is abillion times better than the one my mom was gonna get me at christmas gaming wise. By next year I hope to be hunting some of you out on multiplayer shooters, which I am being led to believe this laptop can do. YAY! lol

 

Not sure if anyone's already mentioned it, but Left 4 Dead would be a must-play game (and since it's the Source engine, it'll look fantastic on your PC).

 

Yes it can play all the current shooters at least on low-med. It can also play Arkam Asylum on medium (maybe some settings at high).

 

I also believe it was called Empire(s) at war. Sounds like you need some good RTS (real-time strategy) games, and you're lucky because I happen to be logged in:

Age of empires II or mythology (III was garbage)
StarCraft (Starcraft II sometime 2010, but you should still be able to run it)
Warcraft III
Total Annihilation
Warhammer Dawn of War (and Dawn of War II)
Rome/medieval/empire Total war (might have some trouble running empire because it requires a massive processor).
Supreme Commander (I actually dislike this game very much, but lots of people like it. Involves huge battles and lots of resource management, but the unit control is very bad and don't expect your fighting skills to have any impact on the fight at all).
Sins of a Solar Empire (My favorite space RTS, an amazing game, but no storyline).

I'm sure I've left off a few, but those were my favorite.

 

Would it be advisable to try the demo of asylum first and how should this run something in the guitar hero family?

 

I had an impression (or at least I read up on something that made me think this) that having a dual-core CPU running at say 2.0ghz would be equivalent to something 1.5x the clock speed of a single-core processor equivalent..that's neglecting the L2 size, and all. Anyway, something like that, at least

Hmm..is Guitar Hero that demanding graphics-wise? I think actually the card would be overkill for the Guitar hero series, or maybe I just underestimate the game too much.

 

Yes clock for clock the new lines of processors are faster at the same speeds, but because there are two cores at 2Ghz doesnt mean that 4Ghz is being directed at one thread.

As Bog said the multi-tasking is greatly improved because the Core and Core2 lines as well as i7 are much more efficient.

 

LOL it's like this. A dual core CPU will easily smoke even a single core cpu. For example i read somewhere on the forum recently that a 3.8 pentium 4 desktop processor got beaten by a 1.8 core 2 duo desktop processor in 3D mark 06. You don't really need to worry about the requirements. I play cod 4 , 5 brothers in arms hell's highway easily with my laptop with mid-to max settings.

 

nah thats not how cpu's work, instead its a manner of preference. Cpu's work like this, they do only one calculation at a time, the faster clocks the faster it can complete the calculation. A dual core allows 2 calculations to be done at the same time, a single does the same thing, it allows only 1 calculations to be done. You do not add the two processors together.

 

I recommend Mount&Blade!!! Download the BattleSizer mod and this game rocks!! You should be able to max it out but if use battlesizer mod to increase the size of the battle, you might have to lower some settings.

And btw is this normal? In systemrequirements lab, it says that my AMD athlon II x2 245 2.9 Ghz is rated 7.43 Ghz..

You Have: 2.91 GHz Performance Rated at 7.43 GHz

 

On the contrary, you're not anything of the sort. Understanding how and why multiple cores trump single cores at high clock speeds is difficult and very easily misunderstood. Marketing that is broadcast by the manufacturers hardly help people in knowing the truth.

Multiple cores aren't pointless; they were the next logical evolution in CPU trends.

When the Pentium 4 came out, the model suffered from overheating and consumed massive amounts of power as Intel kept increasing the clock frequency in order to keep up with AMD in the performance arena. While Intel's marketing team trumpeted the high clock speed of the P4, designers in the industry understood that silicone microprocessors have limits in terms of their clock speed; after a certain clock speed, they start to break down in terms of power consumption and heat output.

The solution to this problem is to combine multiple cores on the same silicone die and to change the way you write software. Multiple cores perform better overall only with changes in software.

For example, quad core CPU is pointless if the software you're running isn't multi-threaded. When a CPU is running multi-threaded software, all it's doing is multi-tasking on the same task; it's completing multiple pieces at the same time, but it sometimes has to wait for piece A of the task to complete before another core can work on piece B of the software. The interdependencies of code mean that multiple cores and multi-tasking don't ensure 2 times the performance, or X number of cores you have.

I hope this explanation makes some kind of sense. If anyone wants to correct me if I've made a mistake, feel free to point it out.

 

Okay i got toally confused a few posts up. What are the verdicts on GH and AA