Im below rec specs, but...

05-06-07, 04:16 AM

I loved SHII and even more so SHIII. Now im looking at SHIV, and despite all the moaning about bugs etc, i am very tempted. Problem is, ive got a 3 gighz cpu, 512 ram (increased virtual ram by 3 gig) and a 128mb ati Radeon card. This is just below minimum specs for the game.

How would you people who have it reckon my machine would handle it, given the fact that i play FS X on my machine (lowest settings). Im not really after the beautiful graphics but rather the simulation aspect.

Chock · 05-06-07, 04:35 AM

I'd personally take a guess that it would run just about adequately on the lowest settings (don't hold me to that, it's a guess, and if not, you'll have bought a 30-quid drinks coaster), although it would probably need a low screen resolution and all the graphics whistles and bells turned off*

* this is also providing your graphics card supports the pixel shader requirements - which are not something that affects FSX, being that FS still basically uses the same old graphics engine of earlier FS versions and doesn't require a pixel-shader 2.0-capable graphics card.

If your graphics card cannot support pixel shader 2.0, forget it, it just isn't going to run the 3D.

I can't imagine what a pain in the ass it must be waiting for FSX to load up on 512 meg of RAM though, you must have the patience of a saint

You might find that if SH4 does run on your rig, it will take a long time to load, and it will probably be very choppy on accelerated time, as even machines with a lot of RAM are having issues with that.

I'd seriously consider sticking some more RAM in

joea · 05-06-07, 04:44 AM

Sorry don't bother, at least you need a s@#$load of ram, 2 gigs would be ideal. Card probably too...it's not just about pretty graphics you won't have good gameplay with that setup either.

05-06-07, 04:58 AM

Thanks, i appreciate the repsonses. Im fairly sure my card wont do pixelshader 2.0
I know i need a need pc to keep up but i guess ill have to wait a while to play shIV.

joea · 05-06-07, 05:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Swede

Thanks, i appreciate the repsonses. Im fairly sure my card wont do pixelshader 2.0
I know i need a need pc to keep up but i guess ill have to wait a while to play shIV.

no worries mate, I'm in the same boat. Got it, tried it, now have to wait.

CaptainHaplo · 05-06-07, 09:38 AM

I have to disagree on the ram issue. I am running SH4 on a machine WAY below the minimum specs - and I run it fine. Although I don't know it 512 would be enough.

My machine is a 1.5Ghz AMD (below minimum spec of 2GHz), 768Megs of Ram (below minimum of 1Gig) and a ATI 9800 Pro (that meets recommended specs). My rig runs fine - on mid level detail at that. Only time I have performance issues is when I go above 2k time compression or when a torp hits - then I get a couple of seconds pause. Granted - OS tweaking helps a bit also.

With the specs you gave - the question is what is the chip on your ATI card? If its 9600 or above - you should be set with it. I dont know how it would run on half a gig of memory - expect long load times (which I have as well) - but if its able to swap enough info it should work. You may see some performance issues - but it would likely run.

Good hunting - in either pond!
Captain Haplo

banjo · 05-06-07, 11:07 AM

5 year old Dell 2.8 gig w/ 2 gigs of ram, readion 9800 pro, audigy 2z. Game runs fine at medium setting with enviro and fog off.

orangenee · 05-06-07, 11:41 AM

I had a RAM module fail on me last night which takes me back down to 512, but I'm not going to even bother trying myself until I get it replaced. Mine otherwise met the min spec and exceeded it with regards to the processor and framerates were somewhat stunted when close to Pearl Harbour, so like people said get at least 1.5 gigs of ram or more for a comfortable experience, it's worth it though, it's a cracking game.

U-Bones · 05-06-07, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo

I have to disagree on the ram issue. I am running SH4 on a machine WAY below the minimum specs - and I run it fine. Although I don't know it 512 would be enough.

My machine is a 1.5Ghz AMD (below minimum spec of 2GHz), 768Megs of Ram (below minimum of 1Gig) and a ATI 9800 Pro (that meets recommended specs). My rig runs fine - on mid level detail at that. Only time I have performance issues is when I go above 2k time compression or when a torp hits - then I get a couple of seconds pause. Granted - OS tweaking helps a bit also.

With the specs you gave - the question is what is the chip on your ATI card? If its 9600 or above - you should be set with it. I dont know how it would run on half a gig of memory - expect long load times (which I have as well) - but if its able to swap enough info it should work. You may see some performance issues - but it would likely run.

Good hunting - in either pond!
Captain Haplo

Well, the only time I see sh4.exe using less than 1gb is when it is loading and slowly building up to that point. In translation, that means your 768 is not sufficient to hold the game in ram, much less the OS, tuned or not. This means you will swap to disk.

That you are stable with low ram simply means your machine is in good shape.

Stability aside, I think performance is a different story, and that you would be astonished how much better it would run on your system with your ram doubled to 1.5g.

Hartmann · 05-06-07, 02:20 PM

i´m below specs :hmm:

AMD 2400+ nvidia 6600GT 128+ 1gb of ram

the main problem are the huge task forces or convoys, more ships less FPS
in navigation school the performance is good with 15-20 fps outside but only 10 with big TF

klh · 05-06-07, 07:24 PM

For what it's worth, I ran SH4 on my 3.06GHz with 1 GB RAM and an ATI Radeon 9700 128MB, and it ran on the lowest settings (long lag between view changes, low framerates when other ships in the area). I upgraded to a GeForce 7600GT and now I've got great framerates with all except post processing and fog enabled.

Fearless · 05-06-07, 07:35 PM

Well, I'm running it on an AMD XP 2400+,512Mb RAM with GeForce 6200 252Mb graphics card and have given it 4 Gb virtual RAM with quite satisfactory results.

05-07-07, 12:36 AM

So theres hope after all... Well as i stated above, i set my virtual ram to 3000, its helped with alot of other games:hmm:

05-06-07, 04:16 AM	#1
Swede Stowaway Posts: n/a Downloads: Uploads:	Im below rec specs, but... I loved SHII and even more so SHIII. Now im looking at SHIV, and despite all the moaning about bugs etc, i am very tempted. Problem is, ive got a 3 gighz cpu, 512 ram (increased virtual ram by 3 gig) and a 128mb ati Radeon card. This is just below minimum specs for the game. How would you people who have it reckon my machine would handle it, given the fact that i play FS X on my machine (lowest settings). Im not really after the beautiful graphics but rather the simulation aspect.

05-06-07, 02:20 PM	#10
Hartmann Sea Lord Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Grid CH 26, Spain ,Barcelona Posts: 1,857 Downloads: 204 Uploads: 0	i´m below specs :hmm: AMD 2400+ nvidia 6600GT 128+ 1gb of ram the main problem are the huge task forces or convoys, more ships less FPS in navigation school the performance is good with 15-20 fps outside but only 10 with big TF __________________ But this ship can't sink!... She is made of iron, sir. I assure you, she can. and she will. It is a mathematical certainty. Strength and honor

05-06-07, 04:35 AM	#2
Chock Sea Lord Join Date: May 2005 Location: Under a thermal layer in chilly Olde England Posts: 1,842 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	I'd personally take a guess that it would run just about adequately on the lowest settings (don't hold me to that, it's a guess, and if not, you'll have bought a 30-quid drinks coaster), although it would probably need a low screen resolution and all the graphics whistles and bells turned off* * this is also providing your graphics card supports the pixel shader requirements - which are not something that affects FSX, being that FS still basically uses the same old graphics engine of earlier FS versions and doesn't require a pixel-shader 2.0-capable graphics card. If your graphics card cannot support pixel shader 2.0, forget it, it just isn't going to run the 3D. I can't imagine what a pain in the ass it must be waiting for FSX to load up on 512 meg of RAM though, you must have the patience of a saint You might find that if SH4 does run on your rig, it will take a long time to load, and it will probably be very choppy on accelerated time, as even machines with a lot of RAM are having issues with that. I'd seriously consider sticking some more RAM in

05-06-07, 04:44 AM	#3
joea Silent Hunter Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: At periscope depth in Lake Geneva Posts: 3,512 Downloads: 25 Uploads: 0	Sorry don't bother, at least you need a s@#$load of ram, 2 gigs would be ideal. Card probably too...it's not just about pretty graphics you won't have good gameplay with that setup either.

05-06-07, 04:58 AM	#4
Swede Stowaway Posts: n/a Downloads: Uploads:	Thanks, i appreciate the repsonses. Im fairly sure my card wont do pixelshader 2.0 I know i need a need pc to keep up but i guess ill have to wait a while to play shIV.

05-06-07, 09:38 AM	#6
CaptainHaplo Silent Hunter Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 4,404 Downloads: 29 Uploads: 0	I have to disagree on the ram issue. I am running SH4 on a machine WAY below the minimum specs - and I run it fine. Although I don't know it 512 would be enough. My machine is a 1.5Ghz AMD (below minimum spec of 2GHz), 768Megs of Ram (below minimum of 1Gig) and a ATI 9800 Pro (that meets recommended specs). My rig runs fine - on mid level detail at that. Only time I have performance issues is when I go above 2k time compression or when a torp hits - then I get a couple of seconds pause. Granted - OS tweaking helps a bit also. With the specs you gave - the question is what is the chip on your ATI card? If its 9600 or above - you should be set with it. I dont know how it would run on half a gig of memory - expect long load times (which I have as well) - but if its able to swap enough info it should work. You may see some performance issues - but it would likely run. Good hunting - in either pond! Captain Haplo

05-06-07, 11:07 AM	#7
banjo Grey Wolf Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 762 Downloads: 55 Uploads: 0	5 year old Dell 2.8 gig w/ 2 gigs of ram, readion 9800 pro, audigy 2z. Game runs fine at medium setting with enviro and fog off.

05-06-07, 11:41 AM	#8
orangenee Engineer Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 211 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	I had a RAM module fail on me last night which takes me back down to 512, but I'm not going to even bother trying myself until I get it replaced. Mine otherwise met the min spec and exceeded it with regards to the processor and framerates were somewhat stunted when close to Pearl Harbour, so like people said get at least 1.5 gigs of ram or more for a comfortable experience, it's worth it though, it's a cracking game.

05-06-07, 07:24 PM	#11
klh Der Alte Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Indiana, USA Posts: 227 Downloads: 200 Uploads: 0	For what it's worth, I ran SH4 on my 3.06GHz with 1 GB RAM and an ATI Radeon 9700 128MB, and it ran on the lowest settings (long lag between view changes, low framerates when other ships in the area). I upgraded to a GeForce 7600GT and now I've got great framerates with all except post processing and fog enabled.

05-06-07, 07:35 PM	#12
Fearless Ace of the Deep Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Adelaide, Australia Posts: 1,047 Downloads: 340 Uploads: 1	Well, I'm running it on an AMD XP 2400+,512Mb RAM with GeForce 6200 252Mb graphics card and have given it 4 Gb virtual RAM with quite satisfactory results.

05-07-07, 12:36 AM	#13
Swede Stowaway Posts: n/a Downloads: Uploads:	So theres hope after all... Well as i stated above, i set my virtual ram to 3000, its helped with alot of other games:hmm: