World in conflict and C90s

Ok I just ordered a C90s!!!!!!!!!With Conroe E6600 2.4ghz, 2gig of RAM, 8600gt 512mg and 7200rpm drive....

Will I be able to run World in Conflict smoothly?

Thx

 

Medium settings with particle effects on low/medium: yes.

 

cool thx a lot

 

I've been play WIC in my desktop and it benchmarks right around where your c90 will, and I have mostly high settings, it runs around 25-30fps solid, I play at 1280x1024 though, so if you want to play at native you'll surely have to shut down some options.

Have fun with it, its a great game, I've been having a blast, I cant wait till I get my new lappie so I can play at work =p

 

You can test out the demo first if you'd like. I noticed a huge improvement when the system switched from DX10 to DX9. It looks really good on any setting too, in my opinion.

The multiplayer is fun. The demo only gives one map, but even that one map has a lot of life to it haha.

And if you want to be cheap, just play the demo

 

I'm not sure about what you're saying. The C90S will probably run it at least at high with soft shadows turned off at 50-60 FPS at 1680x1050. My laptop with a 2 generation old Geforce Go 6600 runs it at over 30 FPS most of the time at 1680x1050 using medium settings, but with a few more tweaks such as texture terrian quality set to medium, texture quality to high, water reflection size to 1024, post effects disabled, high quality terrain disabled. Do take note though that I get only 13-14 average FPS when I run the benchmark test. It's A LOT faster when playing campaign though. But things like tactical nukes (like in the mission where Bannon accepts the suicide mission) still slow down the game to like 10-15 FPS.

BTW, I noticed that there's very little difference in FPS when playing in 1024x768, 1280x800, 1440x900 and 1680x1050. So I just settled for 1680x1050. Even when playing at 1280x800 and only medium settings without extra tweaking, the game still looks beautiful.

 

Dude, what drivers are you using. I cant even get 15 fps with my specs at 1680 x 1050, help me out here man would def love to know how you get such good scores in games

 

You can't get past 15 FPS in the campaign? ROFL. There must be something REALLY wrong if you're running that at medium image quality, with a little tweaking of some graphic options to high. If you're getting 15 FPS in the benchmark test... it can happen, but it's still odd. My friend with an ASUS S96J gets 17-18 FPS average in the benchmark when running at 1680x1050 (hooked to a 22" WSXGA+ LCD monitor) and using the same settings as me. He also gets 30-60 FPS in the campaign with the usual 'below 15 FPS drop' when using tactical nukes. Seriously, there must be something wrong with your laptop if you get below 15 FPS in campaign mode using medium, or even high image quality settings. I wouldn't be surprised if you get those scores if you set it to very high image quality settings. I already tried it and I got 4 FPS average in the benchmark running at 1680x1050. LOL.

I'm using 163.67 Forceware drivers BTW.

 

I am using the 163.67 Forceware drivers with Vista Ultimate 32bit

Could I ask you excactly what settings you are using for each option, I would like to try them out and post my scores. Also what are you using to measure the score, FRAPS?, and where ingame are you measuring, I only have the demo.

Thanks in advance

 

I'm using Windows XP Professional SP2. I have the full version of the game BTW. It's a very good buy IMO.

Here are my settings in World in Conflict:

Resolution: 1680x1050

- Pixel Shaders: High
- Refresh Rate: 60 Hz
- Physics Quality: High
- Texture Quality: High
- Terrain Texture Quality: Medium
- UI Texture Quality: Compressed
- Water Quality: High
- Shadows: Off (I get a lot of black lines on textures when up close/zoomed if this is turned ON. Not much of a performance decrease when turned ON though.)
- World Distance Detail: Low
- Animation Quality: High
- Unit Track Distance: Short
- Water Reflection Size: 1024
- Fullscreen Antialias: None
- Anisotropic Filtering: None
- Framerate Cap: None
- Vsync: Off
- Full Object Geometry: On
- Windows on building: On
- Extra Object Details: On
- Destruction FX: On
- Unit Tracks: On
- Ground Scorch Marks: Off
- Flowers and Bushes: On
- Grasses: On
- High Quality Terrain: Off
- Craters: Off (automatically disabled when 'High Quality Terrain' is disabled)
- Water Reflects Clouds: Off
- Water Reflects Units: On
- Water Reflects Props: On
- Water Reflects Effects: On
- Water Trails: On
- Roads: On
- Clouds: On
- Z-Feather: Off
- Post Effects: Off (Bloom, Soft Shadows, and Heat Haze are automatically disabled if this is turned off)
- Soft Shadows: Off (still doesn't fix the "black lines on textures" problem and can noticably decrease performance, just like it does on other games...)
- Bloom: Off (I tried turning it on. Small visual difference to me. Doesn't kill performance by much, but the decrease is noticable. How does shaving another 3-4 FPS in campaign sound?)
- Heat Haze: Off (doesn't kill performance... but I hate this effect)
- Tree Shadows: Off
- HQ Tree Shaders: Off
- Transparency Antialiasing: Off
- Debris Physics: Off
- Use DX10 Rendering: Off (Duh...)
- Shadows from clouds: Off (It's automatically disabled, at least on my laptop)

Other settings/tweaks outside of the game:
- I'm using NVTray to set my Image Settings to 'High Quality'
- I'm forcing 2xQ anti-aliasing through my drivers by using NVTray
- I'm again using NVTray to set DirectX games to run with Trilinear Filtering, Aniso Mip Filter, Aniso Sampling, and Negative LOD Clamping.
- And of course, last but definitely not the least -- I'm running D3D Overrider 1.3 in the background. It enables triple buffering in DirectX games. I makes a lot of difference in performance in many of my games.

BTW, I also forgot to update my sig. I upgrade to 2 GB of RAM a week ago.

 

Thanks, I tried the demo with your settings on Vista Ultimate 32bit on the laptop in my sig

I changed a few values though,

water reflection size - 512
world distant detail - high
high quality terrain - on
craters - on
ground scorch marks - on
flowers - off
heat haze -on
debris physics -on

and I get 18 fps in game according to fraps




and if I use exact same settings as you I get 30 fps according to fraps...this sucks

 

I have to full version too.

I get 10-15 fps when starting the game (when there isnt alot of **** happening)
I run it at 1200x800 on VERY HIGH. i mean i have everything maxed out. expect for world distance and water reflection.

I have a question: What does Water reflection size do? does more = better quality or better prefrormance

 

how does it perform on those settings?! i assume when the battles, etc start it is not playable...?

 

Its very playable. Its just when some noob decides to place 3 nukes in the same place and they start to act on one another it becomes unplayable.

heres a link to a youtube vid: http://youtube.com/watch?v=-aS9uBiq7SU

remember this is with fraps on so its much slower than usual. and yes this is my comp

 

does world distance make a huge difference?!

 

ya, its how far everything looks sharper. so if distance is low then everything looks more blury farther away. it lessens the load on the gpu

 

i know what the definition is. what i want to know, if i turn it to, say med or hi, how does that affect the performance?

 

2-3 fps on low going from high

 

thanx, man

 

Just set your Water Reflection Size to 1024. I find absolutely no performance difference between 256 and 1024.

World Distance Detail is the same as 'Draw Distance' in other games.

@ revoletion

I hate nukes... Crazy lag. And the nuke in World in Conflict should look as good as the nuke in CnC3.