PlanetSide 2 ran on an GTX 670 at E3 [Archive]

basti

2012-06-08, 10:01 AM

What CPU are you running Basti?

Full Specs:

Board: EP45-ds3r (Gigabyte)
GFX: Gainward GTX 570
Mem: 4 GB DDR2
CPU: Q4Quad Q9550

Its pretty much the end of the line for me, cant go any higher with the current board. And getting a new board + CPU and Memory is quite expensive. Gonna wait and see how PS2 runs on this machine. If i need more memory, i just grab it, its cheap. If the CPU isnt powerful enough, then im pretty much out of luck. :D

Thing is, competitive players always turn everything off and usualy don't have super high resolutions so their targets are bigger... so?

No, they dont. Only idiots do that.

Turning down your res actually puts you at a disadvantage, as you have less Pixels to display stuff. Turning down everything else just makes things look ugly, but give you a nice frame boost. If you need that frame boost, then your a bad player anyway.
I always play my games at the highest possible settings that ensure me at least 30 FPS, and i am a good player, usually being top or near top on the scoreboard of whatever FPS i play. :>

Landtank

2012-06-08, 10:05 AM

Ahem my 540M will do just fine then, huzzah. 8gigs of RAM never hurt either.

TheDrone

2012-06-08, 10:06 AM

I have a GTX 460, so I'm probably screwed. :(

Although if I am also a huge portion of the gaming populus is. I would say it's in SOE's best interest to make sure I can run the game at 60fps. :p

MrBloodworth

2012-06-08, 10:08 AM

I think another large consideration is going to be hard drive read speed. The original PS front loaded all assets. This version, with its customization options, looks to use disk streaming.

That through put is going to impact frame rate. Not to mention, on players and such, batching is going to be very hard to manage, unless all customization is post.

xSCORPIONx

2012-06-08, 10:09 AM

Steam Survey for Primary Display Resolution.
0.18% use 2560 x 1600
Not many use a single 30" PC Monitor.

Most common is
25.15% use 1920 x 1080

Link: http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey
So it should run pretty good for most.

Sabrak

2012-06-08, 10:09 AM

Ooooh...

In high resolution and not completly optimized, it's quite a performance to have such great graphics and performances (I think I heard it was at 60fps?).

Pretty awesome !

And I have a GTX670, so I'm happy :)

LZachariah

2012-06-08, 10:10 AM

The Devs have been reminding us that the game is being optimized to run on older systems, and reviewers are already talking about how smooth the gameplay is. Even if you are two, three, or four rungs down the "GTX 670" ladder, I think that the game will look beautiful on whatever your rigs are.

~Zachariah

james

2012-06-08, 10:12 AM

Thats amazing looks like my two 460's will max it out at 1080p.

Lorgarn

2012-06-08, 10:12 AM

Interesting.

My good ol' 560Ti should be close enough to run on mid/high. If not, I'll buy a second one and go SLI. (Have been planning to someday anyways)

megamold

2012-06-08, 10:13 AM

Steam Survey for Primary Display Resolution.
0.18% use 2560 x 1600
Not many use a single 30" PC Monitor...

Most common is
25.15% use 1920 x 1080

Link: http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey

i use that resolution, dont see the need to go any higher than that

i am gonna upgrade my pc soon ( yes for ps2 ofcourse ^^ ) and i was thinking about getting a asus HD7850 2GB direct CUII
i'm geussing this should also be enough to run ps2 on the highest settings at a steady 30 fps, once the game is optimized a little more.
demo booths usually tend to have overkill hardware anyway.
not so worried about my cpu since most games run gpu heavy not cpu heavy

Shade Millith

2012-06-08, 10:23 AM

Got myself a GTX 590, so should be set.

Hmr85

2012-06-08, 10:24 AM

hmm, I hope my GTX 550ti 1gb works. Otherwise I am gonna be upgrading to that 670.

Xyntech

2012-06-08, 10:26 AM

Just remember that the game still isn't fully optimized, and they were also running it with the settings turned up and the resolution cranked higher than most peoples tv's/monitors support.

Once they got the optimization finished, a lower end system will presumably be able to run it at somewhat lower resolutions with some of the graphical bells and whistles toned down. Not talking about weather or vegetation, that shit should always be on, but stuff like texture and shadow quality can be lowered somewhat without affecting game balance.

megamold

2012-06-08, 10:28 AM

whats up with all the Nvidia love in here? last time i checked, if you wanted the most bang for your buck you went to ATI.

*runs for cover*

Sabot

2012-06-08, 10:28 AM

running the same card as Basti, no over clocking. Never had any probs with any game at 1920x1080... with an i7 2600k, 8gb memory. Only problem for me is... the SSD-drive I used to install and store things broke down, so I'm running all games from a external USB drive atm xD

Also, I do believe your system memory will be more important than gpu if you have problems with performance... so be sure to check that out before you go spend hundreds of dollars on a new card, when all you really only might need is an extra 2gb memory.

Nasher

2012-06-08, 10:30 AM

I can remember PS1 being quite hard on the disk. Even today it's textures are quite high resolution and on PCs back then few had enough memory to handle them.

But now we have SSDs, so slowness/stuttering due to the disk are a thing of the past. Also now that most graphics cards come with a lot of ram, they are able to handle all the work that used to be dumped on system memory/disk.

Oryon22

2012-06-08, 10:32 AM

I'm fiddling with my Windforce 670 at the moment :p

FastAndFree

2012-06-08, 10:33 AM

Only have a 580 with 1080 TV :(

Well, I only have a 8800GT...

Rbstr

2012-06-08, 10:33 AM

560x1600 is a lot of pixels to push and if the 670 was running it well, I think, for nVidia, if you're in the last 3 generations with a GTX x60 (x=4,5,or6) or better you're probably going to be good to go for 1080p at some reasonable detail level.

Coming in with a 540 or a 640 is probably asking for trouble (especially with an 'm' in there) at 1080p except at low details, depending on how well the engine scales.

Well, I only have a 8800GT...
Yeah, that's a bit long in the tooth.

Alderego

2012-06-08, 10:44 AM

geforce gtx 470, 4gb ram
with i7 [email protected] and 12gb ram

any idea if I'll manage a decent quality? :p

stargazer093

2012-06-08, 11:01 AM

arrrgh..don`t know if my 9800GTX+ can run it with medium quality at 1280*1024

willaguy

2012-06-08, 11:08 AM

Do you think that this could run it at max settings using a 1920x1080 resolution?

Intel core i7 2600- CPU @ 3.40 GHz 3.40 GHz

8GB RAM

64 bit

GTX 550 Ti

Fafnir

2012-06-08, 11:36 AM

Heh, it's funny how you all are comparing high-end hardware, while I still have my trusty Phenom II X4, HD 6870, 4GB RAM and I run everything at 1600x900 :D I doubt that I have anything to worry about.

Goku

2012-06-08, 11:40 AM

Do you think that this could run it at max settings using a 1920x1080 resolution?

Intel core i7 2600- CPU @ 3.40 GHz 3.40 GHz

8GB RAM

64 bit

GTX 550 Ti

Doubt it. Probably GTX 460 minimum.

Inverness

2012-06-08, 11:40 AM

I've been using a GTX 260 Core 216 for quite some time. We'll see if PlanetSide 2 marks the time to upgrade, because I haven't needed to because of stagnation due to consoles.

Bine

2012-06-08, 11:56 AM

Heres to hoping my ATI Radeon 6900 runs this quite well! I will be broadcasting my game i believe alongside it (i have a beefy CPU. 8 cores at 3.1ghz each should be enough ;) ) so hopefully I wont have issues on max with both of those running :P

Duddy

2012-06-08, 11:57 AM

Well according to Marine54, via his Reddit post (http://www.reddit.com/r/Planetside/comments/unhph/updatefollow_upyour_questions_answered_i_am/c4x5hhe?context=3), the game should run on a dual core rig with a 9800 (and supposedly, XP).

Seeing a 670 run it at that resolution, flawlessly, without being optimised is promising though.

Verruna

2012-06-08, 12:10 PM

I panicked for a second but my gtx460se should be able to handle this game decently at 1980x1080, dont really care if i can't get everything ultra'd out, mostly high is fine by me ;) I can always overclock it too i guess, cards about a year and a half old or so now. (from purchase)

kertvon

2012-06-08, 12:15 PM

Hopefully crossfire scaling is good. I have dual 6870s, but on BF3 the cpu was bottlenecking like a n00b because of the additional processing required to feed both cards. I only run dual 20in monitors at 1680x1050 though, so I think my rig will handle it well if multi-gpu is optimized.

Duddy

2012-06-08, 12:17 PM

It's absolutely going to need to in order to survive. However, don't you see quite a gap between that setup and a modern day machine? If they allow the 670+ guys a huge amount of tunables to improve gameplay while the lower end guys can turn everything off just to get 20 fps. How long do you think the lower end spectrum guys are gonna play when they are getting rolled by the "rich boys"?

It is quite a sizeable gap isn't it.

I would hope it means that the graphic options are just highly scalable rather than disable-able. I think a good comparison to draw would be Starcraft 2, the engine appears to be highly scalable from top to bottom, though I can't speak for features being disabled at the low end.

Alas this is another one of those things we can't verify till we get our darned hands on the game!

**EDIT**

Just to add, if people choose to play at the minimum requirements there's not much that can be done to stop them. It's their own choice and really you can only hope people don't expect the game to fly on hardware that barely meets specification.

maradine

2012-06-08, 12:20 PM

How will this run on my Rendition Verite?

kaffis

2012-06-08, 12:21 PM

Only have a 580 with 1080 TV :(
And a 1080p resolution is less than half the pixel-count of what they're running. Sounds like you'll likely be fine.

KTNApollo

2012-06-08, 12:23 PM

GTX 580 1920x1080...I have no doubts I'll be running this game at max settings once it's optimized.

Eyeklops

2012-06-08, 12:24 PM

Word has it they are developing on GTX580 SLI systems. I really hope they are working to minimize multi-gpu microstutter. I am about ready to pull the trigger on a new PC just for PS2, but need to take care of some things IRL before I can commit to that. Ideally a factory watercooled GTX690 is my first pick, but if EVGA doesn't make a GTX690 Hydrocopper, the plan will be to SLI a pair of GTX680 Hydrocoppers.

For my new build I am thinking i5-3570K(OC'd), 8GB ddr3@2400+, WC GTX690, 24~27" 120hz monitor (not sure if Benq or Asus yet), Z77 Motherboard (haven't picked one yet, will be Asus), and finally a Mushkin Chronos Deluxe 240GB SSD. Think this will play PS2 ok?

My only concern is running out of texture memory on the GTX690 (only 2GB per GPU, what was Nvidia thinking!!). I think PS2 may play fine initially with only 2GB, but what about 3 years from now when they have added a ton of new textures (for $1200 I would really like my GFX Card to be more future proof).

basti

2012-06-08, 12:26 PM

Doubt it. Probably GTX 460 minimum.

Nope. GTX 260 Minimum.

Remember, 5 year olds PCs are ment to run the game. :)

erunion

2012-06-08, 12:28 PM

Good to hear. I'm planning on replacing my 6870 with a 670 GTX to run my new 5760x1080 setup.

This title looks to be squarely in the nVidia camp. Good thing Kepler now supports 3 monitors.

wraithverge

2012-06-08, 12:39 PM

How long do you think the lower end spectrum guys are gonna play when they are getting rolled by the "rich boys"?

When PS came out I did it for about 4 years.

TerminatorUK

2012-06-08, 12:40 PM

MrBloodworth

2012-06-08, 12:41 PM

Unless you are lagging or studering around. There is no such thing as being rolled by the "Rich boys".

SztEltviz

2012-06-08, 12:53 PM

Nope. GTX 260 Minimum.

Remember, 5 year olds PCs are ment to run the game. :)

Five years ago, there was only Geforce 8 line, I know i bought a 8800GTS 640MB then, it was the second fastest thing. And i still got it, i hope it will run at 1024*768 min. graph, well :D

SixShooter

2012-06-08, 12:56 PM

hmm, I hope my GTX 550ti 1gb works. Otherwise I am gonna be upgrading to that 670.

Running 2 of those (550ti) in SLI and hope it works well enough until next tax season to upgrade.

Bokkaveli

2012-06-08, 01:05 PM

I currently run Tribes Ascend on Max settings with my Geforce GTS 250 1024 mb card with 4GB's of RAM...so hopefully it can handle PS2.

Anybody think I'll have issues running it?

MrBloodworth

2012-06-08, 01:07 PM

I think its to early to know what will run it. Typically, they scrape data during the beta, when they can profile lots of configurations.

Hmr85

2012-06-08, 02:51 PM

Running 2 of those (550ti) in SLI and hope it works well enough until next tax season to upgrade.

I hear ya, I betting if ya can run BF3 on max settings. I can with just my 1 card you should be able to run PS2 with out any issues.

Goku

2012-06-08, 02:53 PM

Nope. GTX 260 Minimum.

Remember, 5 year olds PCs are ment to run the game. :)

Maybe normal settings, but I'm talking high end settings.

MrBloodworth

2012-06-08, 02:57 PM

Most minimal requirements are: "Hay, it booted up...."

Raymac

2012-06-08, 02:58 PM

Well now I know what I need to save up for.

Hippie

2012-06-08, 03:03 PM

Hmmm..

Time to upgrade me thinks

Serpent

2012-06-08, 03:07 PM

Nvidia GTX 675 here, It should work well with the Processor (3rd Gen. i7)

Gonefshn

2012-06-08, 03:12 PM

I don't know that much truly about computers but I do know I'm running on an AMD Phenom 6 core processor with 8GB memory and an AMD Radeon HD series 6870 graphics card. I can run BF3 on max easily.

What do you guys think?

GTGD

2012-06-08, 03:29 PM

Ahh sweet music to my ears.

I knew switching out my Radeon HD 5970 for a GeForce GTX 680 for Planetside 2 was a good idea :)

With NVIDIA PhysX being in the game (albeit the software/ CPU version) the game was bound to draw in some NVIDIA driver optimisation / smoothness.

I feel quietly smug about my decision :)

Yeah, when I built my PC 2 years ago I had hoped for a new PS and wanted to avoid all the issues with ATI drivers, so I went Nvidia. The GTX 460 was comparable to the 6850 in price and performance, but there is no way I was gonna miss out on the drivers.

Heavygain

2012-06-08, 03:37 PM

I wonder if I will be able to boot it on my macbook pro (in windows 7, of course) if I am unable to build my new rig in time. I had to overclock but I got diablo 3 running at 30fps in 800x600 and 24 in 1024x768 lolol. Uses a 9400m chipset.

Razicator

2012-06-08, 03:41 PM

I'm more curious what CPU they used to run it. Seems like this game will be more CPU intensive, not GPU/

RedKnights

2012-06-08, 03:42 PM

That's not an inexpensive card they were running on.

However, they are also running at a rather high resolution.

Yea, at 1080p you're literally only requiring your card to render half the pixels, so we might not need to be running two 600 series in SLI.

Though I was looking to pick up a 600 series this summer.

erunion

2012-06-08, 03:43 PM

I'm more curious what CPU they used to run it. Seems like this game will be more CPU intensive, not GPU/

I'd guess they used an LGA 2011 system.

Ieyasu

2012-06-08, 03:48 PM

I'm fiddling with my Windforce 670 at the moment :p

Im waiting for UPS to show up any minute with my Windforce 680

won that and a couple motherboards last month and its out for delivery as I type this.

OutlawDr

2012-06-08, 03:49 PM

I'm more curious what CPU they used to run it. Seems like this game will be more CPU intensive, not GPU/

Thats what I'm thinking.
I have a 6950 2g unlocked to 6970, and an i52500k OC'd to 4.5ghz, plus 8g ram.
That better be enough :evil:

Ieyasu

2012-06-08, 03:55 PM

Thats what I'm thinking.
I have a 6950 2g unlocked to 6970, and an i52500k OC'd to 4.5ghz, plus 8g ram.
That better be enough :evil:

Im sure you wont have any troubles. I have almost identical rig setup for friends and family to game on when they come over now and it still chews through games just fine.

CrystalViolet

2012-06-08, 03:58 PM

670 is my next upgrade, it's the only missing puzzle piece in my rig other than a nice monitor.

Bags

2012-06-08, 04:05 PM

Sweet, might need to OC my CPU but if it can run unoptimized at a higher resolution than I run at I should be set.

Rbstr

2012-06-08, 04:05 PM

Nvidia GTX 675 here, It should work well with the Processor (3rd Gen. i7)

Careful. That's a mobile GPU (and thus processor? maybe not), it's not near as powerful as a desktop 670 (In fact, it's a Fermi chip, not kepler).

But I imagine it'll do alright.

erunion

2012-06-08, 04:09 PM

Sweet, might need to OC my CPU but if it can run unoptimized at a higher resolution than I run at I should be set.

You probably won't need to, but if you have an aftermarket heatsink you might as well. 2500ks love to be overclocked. I have a mild 4.4ghz at 1.24v here. :D

Bags

2012-06-08, 04:13 PM

You probably won't need to, but if you have an aftermarket heatsink you might as well. 2500ks love to be overclocked. I have a mild 4.4ghz at 1.24v here. :D

Eh, I haven't found anything that needs it to be OC'd for. I run everything I want maxed at 60 fps.

But yeah, I have a $30 aftermarket heatsink, it idles at like 30 and goes to 50 in games without an overclock.

demonicale

2012-06-08, 04:40 PM

Good job i have that card, which i must say, i run BF3 on ultra settings perfectly well too with it :)

lawnmower

2012-06-08, 05:24 PM

No, they dont. Only idiots do that.
yes they do

If you need that frame boost, then your a bad player anyway.
huh

GTGD

2012-06-08, 05:30 PM

i5-750 here @ 3.6Ghz. I think it will be salvageable, I really really REALLY don't want to upgrade to a new, expensive motherboard as well.

Zulthus

2012-06-08, 05:33 PM

Will my ATI 3D RAGE run PS2?

NePaS

2012-06-08, 05:35 PM

You probably won't need to, but if you have an aftermarket heatsink you might as well. 2500ks love to be overclocked. I have a mild 4.4ghz at 1.24v here. :D

hate you! I seem to have a bad 2500k, am at 4.6 at the mo,but I need 1.352v for that.bah!!!!:mad:

Vetto

2012-06-08, 05:43 PM

Sadly only have a GTX 560... blah looks like I will have to turn down some things.

Whalenator

2012-06-08, 05:51 PM

GTX 570 here, looks like im all set to run the game on High. :D

GTX 570 Brofive!

Knightwyvern

2012-06-08, 05:57 PM

I'm still in my GTX 465 2-way SLI setup with an i5-2500k OC'd @ 4.6GHz, 8GB G-Skill RAM @ 1600; I'll probably make room on my corsair 120GB SSD for PS2. I can do a moderate OC on my 465's, but I prefer to keep them pretty stock if I can as they tend to run pretty hot.

I'll say I'm a bit envious of you guys with the sweet 6xx series GTX cards, but I run at a 1680x1050 resolution so I'll be pretty good. I would like to get a slightly better monitor though; love my Samsung, but I want 1080p methinks. More than that seems a bit overboard IMO, and my eyesight isn't THAT good. :P

Toppopia

2012-06-08, 06:12 PM

Intel Core i7 CPU q720 @ 1.60GHz, 4 cores, 8 logic processors.
RAM 4GB
NVIDIA GeForce GT 230M

How would this handle then? Bad? Very bad? or average?

Goku

2012-06-08, 06:17 PM

Intel Core i7 CPU q720 @ 1.60GHz, 4 cores, 8 logic processors.
RAM 4GB
NVIDIA GeForce GT 230M

How would this handle then? Bad? Very bad? or average?

That is a really low end graphics card plus its mobile. I don't see it being any kind of good experience at all.

Vetto

2012-06-08, 06:31 PM

The GTX 560 should run it on normal right >..>?

TheDrone

2012-06-08, 06:32 PM

I honestly don't mind having to turn down some thing, as long a it still looks halfway decent and of course has a great framerate.

Hmr85

2012-06-08, 06:33 PM

The 560 should run it on normal right >..>?

Nobody really knows outside of the 670 and few versions below whats gonna really run the game right now. My guess is yeah you should be fine. But will just have to wait for beta and see.

Arokel

2012-06-08, 06:37 PM

All I have is a Lenovo ThinkPad. Its surprisingly good at running games but I am still a bit worried... :(

Vetto

2012-06-08, 06:43 PM

Nobody really knows outside of the 670 and few versions below whats gonna really run the game right now. My guess is yeah you should be fine. But will just have to wait for beta and see.

Ehh I should be fine I can play Skyrim a Few points off of ultra.

Bokkaveli

2012-06-08, 07:28 PM

Don't know how legit this is but it's info that I've found on the net...take it for what it's worth :)

http://www.game-debate.com/games/index.php?g_id=2252&canMyGpuRunIt=Planetside%202

Shott

2012-06-08, 07:31 PM

My desktop is a premade Gateway that I bought in 2010. Last year I put in the only graphics card that I could find that would fit (It's a slim mini-PC).

Any chance my 5570 will run PS2 at all?

(http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102874)

Duddy

2012-06-08, 07:35 PM

Don't know how legit this is but it's info that I've found on the net...take it for what it's worth :)

http://www.game-debate.com/games/index.php?g_id=2252&canMyGpuRunIt=Planetside%202

Based on what we know so far, I made my own speculative "chart" (See attached).

Chart was taken from Tom's Hardware (http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/gaming-graphics-card-review,review-32442-7.html) and adapted for my purposes.

Shade Millith

2012-06-08, 07:38 PM

Turning down your res actually puts you at a disadvantage, as you have less Pixels to display stuff. Turning down everything else just makes things look ugly, but give you a nice frame boost. If you need that frame boost, then your a bad player anyway.
I always play my games at the highest possible settings that ensure me at least 30 FPS, and i am a good player, usually being top or near top on the scoreboard of whatever FPS i play. :>

It's called being 'Competitive', public players need not apply. Turning off distracting graphical options like Bloom, AA, Blur clear up the screen to see what you need to see. Lowering texture detail tend to make enemies easier to differentiate from the background.

The frame boost is a bonus.

Kashis

2012-06-08, 08:43 PM

Do you think

Intel core I7 920 @ 2.67 GHz

6 Gig DDR3 1333

GeForce GTX 260
GeForce GTX 260 is a high-end-class GPU part of the 200 Series released by NVIDIA in 2009.
It only supports DirectX up to 10 so DirectX 11 games aren't supported.

Would make the cut? Since planetside 2 runs off of directx 11.

Kashis

2012-06-08, 09:52 PM

can someone tell me if ASUS P6T WS Professional Workstation Motherboard will support GeForce GTX 670?

Bags

2012-06-08, 09:57 PM

can someone tell me if ASUS P6T WS Professional Workstation Motherboard will support GeForce GTX 670?

Yes. Two would fit if you were so inclined.

Expansion slots:
2 x PCIe 2.0 x16 (dual x16)
1 x PCIe x1
1 x PCI
2 x PCI-X

The 670 gtx is a PCIe 3.0 slotted card which is PCIe 2.0 backwards compatible.

http://www.asus.com/Motherboards/Intel_Socket_1366/P6T_WS_Professional/

Goku

2012-06-08, 09:57 PM

can someone tell me if ASUS P6T WS Professional Workstation Motherboard will support GeForce GTX 670?

I answered your question your thread. No reason to ask twice.

Anyway it does.

@ Bags I still beat you

Bags

2012-06-08, 10:01 PM

I answered your question your thread. No reason to ask twice.

Anyway it does.

@ Bags I still beat you

Yeah well I cited my sources!

Goku

2012-06-08, 10:03 PM

Yeah well I cited my sources!

I am my own source ;).

Though I am curious if these were the maximum graphic settings being used in game. Who knows if they still planning on adding more.

Rbstr

2012-06-08, 10:39 PM

The 260 is mid-high end and...several years old. It'll probably run, who knows how well. I was getting by OK with a gtx275 @1080p until BF3 came out.
Your CPU will likely be OK.

Toppopia

2012-06-08, 10:42 PM

That is a really low end graphics card plus its mobile. I don't see it being any kind of good experience at all.

So your saying i won't have a good experience on lowest graphic settings? I could always try 800x600 resolution :lol:

Goku

2012-06-08, 10:44 PM

Low graphics + bad fps doesn't sound good to me. 800x600 my god. Never mention that again.

Bags

2012-06-08, 11:36 PM

Probably not maxed, in Global Agenda's alpha the high end settings weren't added until the end of alpha.

Anyhow, as long as this runs better than GW2 I'm stoked. Getting like 30 fps on low with my pc in that game's BETA.

Talented Maori

2012-06-08, 11:53 PM

People have to remember that was a "Special build for E3". They used GTX670's because that would have shown off the game the best for the price of multiple demo PC's. I still believe it will be optimised to run on a five year old machine, as stated on many occasions by the Devs, in other words, stop guessing, have patience and we will see when the game or official specs are released!

kaffis

2012-06-09, 12:36 AM

Anyhow, as long as this runs better than GW2 I'm stoked. Getting like 30 fps on low with my pc in that game's BETA.
Interesting. I'm getting 40-45ish on max settings at 1920x1200 with an i7 2600k and SLI'd 560's. If I turn SLI off, though, I'm getting low 30's, which seems odd.

If I just had the single-560 low 30's framerate to go off of, I'd compare our CPUs and guess the game was CPU bound (and could thus benefit from either of us overclocking), but SLI-ing up clearly helped me, so I'm not sure why your 670 is getting LOWER than my single-560 framerate if more GPU is helping.

Drivers, perhaps? Are you running the 301's?

Bags

2012-06-09, 12:43 AM

Interesting. I'm getting 40-45ish on max settings at 1920x1200 with an i7 2600k and SLI'd 560's. If I turn SLI off, though, I'm getting low 30's, which seems odd.

If I just had the single-560 low 30's framerate to go off of, I'd compare our CPUs and guess the game was CPU bound (and could thus benefit from either of us overclocking), but SLI-ing up clearly helped me, so I'm not sure why your 670 is getting LOWER than my single-560 framerate if more GPU is helping.

Drivers, perhaps? Are you running the 301's?

301.34. Game only stresses my gpu to about 70%. CPU total with steam/skype/firefox/GW2 running is about 59% load at peak.

It runs about how well my 460gtx did...

BF3 runs at 1900 x 1080p 60fps flawless.

DirtyBird

2012-06-09, 12:48 AM

I'm hoping Crossfire/SLI is good to go from launch, 2x 6970's dying to get used.

Bags

2012-06-09, 01:06 AM

I'm hoping Crossfire/SLI is good to go from launch, 2x 6970's dying to get used.

I would hope $700 work of GPU could run this game well on launch!:rolleyes:

Razicator

2012-06-09, 03:21 AM

I just boughta 73 inch DLP TV that supports 2050x1080 for this and I am running crossfired 6950's; It better run this game on max.... If NOT... I'll buy more hardware...... :)

24x supersampling and 64x tesselation is... beautfiul.

Jesus christ what rig are you running. I swear half the computers in this thread can render Avatar! Well, maybe after a few weeks/months/years :p

DirtyBird

2012-06-09, 04:04 AM

I would hope $700 work of GPU could run this game well on launch!:rolleyes:

Well its disappointing when you have the 2 cards and games will only use one. I have no doubts even one will run it np's.
Must have got mine cheap last year at under 600 the pair, or perhaps it was the piss poor $US I took advantage of :D

Stew

2012-06-15, 02:11 AM

Its seams from whats higby said they have scales the MAX out setting around the GTX670 so who gonna get one ? anyones want to run this game max out ?

E3 2012: Planetside 2 Powered By The GeForce GTX 670 - YouTube

NCLynx

2012-06-15, 02:16 AM

http://www.planetside-universe.com/showthread.php?t=42337&highlight=670

Already being discussed here.

EDIT: I'll probably wait until the generation after the 670 to upgrade.

RedKnights

2012-06-15, 02:18 AM

I don't think it was running at max settings during the demo, I noticed a lot of lower rez textures particularly on building roofs.

SKYeXile

2012-06-15, 02:21 AM

Spare me your nvidia mumbo jumbo, say it in ATI.

Stew

2012-06-15, 02:26 AM

Spare me your nvidia mumbo jumbo, say it in ATI.
7950 overclock !

Bags

2012-06-15, 02:27 AM

That was at 2500x1600, so I would imagine they have them SLId, yeah?

Still promising for an alpha build at that resolution tho.

Roidster

2012-06-15, 02:27 AM

i dont think so

Stew

2012-06-15, 02:28 AM

I don't think it was running at max settings during the demo, I noticed a lot of lower rez textures particularly on building roofs.

i think the lower resolution texture are part of the overall build engine its like some low rez texture here and their but the client isnt optimised yet and i will wait for the beta to see if i will upgrade my gtx580 dcuII

captainkapautz

2012-06-15, 02:31 AM

Spare me your nvidia mumbo jumbo, say it in ATI.

Will I be able to play MAX with a Radeon?

Envenom

2012-06-15, 02:56 AM

BS. My 580 will eat this game alive.

GTGD

2012-06-15, 02:59 AM

As long as it runs fine on my GTX 460 I'll be ok. Medium with a few effects at 1080p? Sounds good to me if it runs a stable 60fps

Sabot

2012-06-15, 03:03 AM

30 fps is what I'd consider "running fine"... 30 fps with decent ping and you'll be grand.

WNxThentar

2012-06-15, 03:04 AM

I've got 2 GTX 480s in SLI...I'll be fine with that. I don't have the desk space for a 30"+ monitor to run 2560x1600.

So I'll be running it on my 23" Alienware 3D monitor. IF I don't like the performance of my 2x480s then I'll have to flip $1,300 for 2x GTX 680s

But I don't use the 3D on my Alienware hardly ever so I'll be running PS2 at 1920x1080.

Also he didn't say that it will require 670s. He says it can push the 670. But that isn't a surprise. I bet all the options on will grind even a 3xGTX 680 to a crawl. Its like EQ2 at 1920x1080 with all options on pushes my SLI setup and that engine is 7 years old.

Khorneholio

2012-06-15, 03:05 AM

That is exactly the problem. I would wager 90% of the potential players will be disadvantaged because of lack of funds to upgrade. Not a good thing.

LOL. So anyone who can't run it at the highest resolution is "Disadvantaged"?

Lorgarn

2012-06-15, 03:10 AM

30 fps is what I'd consider "running fine"... 30 fps with decent ping and you'll be grand.

And boom, a few large explosions, vechicles crashing and bullets flying - you're down to -20fps. Running at a minimum total of 30? Maybe OK. For that to happen you most likely need to hang around 45-50, maybe even more so.

Canaris

2012-06-15, 03:10 AM

I'm biting the bullet and going to splurge on one of the new 690gtx cards and let's see how it kicks PS2 graphics :D

ThirtyK

2012-06-15, 03:22 AM

Do you think my GTX590 will be good enough for high/ultra settings?

Stew

2012-06-15, 03:29 AM

Do you think my GTX590 will be good enough for high/ultra settings?

high certainly ultra i do not know yet since higby said based on the new kepler tech they are trying to push the limite of the hardware so it mean trying to push the limite of the gtx670 gtx680

but look at battlefield 3 even on low or medium the game look better than many others games lol

if its the same with planetside you will have gorgeous graphics even with medium and high setting !

Stew

2012-06-15, 03:30 AM

I'm biting the bullet and going to splurge on one of the new 690gtx cards and let's see how it kicks PS2 graphics :D

GTX690 is a damned beast dude but its 1000 $ + also lol

but it push almost the double of a gtx670

Bags

2012-06-15, 03:47 AM

Higby said they were running it in house on 2x580s a month ago, and a 590 is 2x580s.

sumo

2012-06-15, 03:50 AM

i hope my GTX285 can run the game satisfyingly.

CTheRain

2012-06-15, 03:54 AM

Good thing I have a 570.

So guys I just got $2,000 from a lawsuit. Give me a list of computer parts to buy. I need everything but a video card. Also keep it under $1300.

Symmenix

2012-06-15, 04:05 AM

Going to buy a 670, going to run it on a 1280x720 TV. Fuck yea.

Mechzz

2012-06-15, 04:05 AM

Good thing I have a 570.

So guys I just got $2,000 from a lawsuit. Give me a list of computer parts to buy. I need everything but a video card. Also keep it under $1300.

Congrats on the win.

Is the spare $700 for beer supplies to see you through the first 72 hours of PS2?

Bags

2012-06-15, 04:07 AM

Good thing I have a 570.

So guys I just got $2,000 from a lawsuit. Give me a list of computer parts to buy. I need everything but a video card. Also keep it under $1300.

post in the tech forum: http://www.planetside-universe.com/showthread.php?t=37183

EVILoHOMER

2012-06-15, 04:08 AM

Glad I just bought two 670s then.

Stew

2012-06-15, 04:16 AM

Good thing I have a 570.

So guys I just got $2,000 from a lawsuit. Give me a list of computer parts to buy. I need everything but a video card. Also keep it under $1300.

Intel Core i52500k
NZXT Havik 140 Six Heatpipe Tower CPU Cooler with dual 140mm Fans for Intel
Asus P8P67 Deluxe
8G Gskill ripjaws ddr3 1600
Cooler Master HAF 932 Full Tower ATX Case ( best air flow )
Corsair Enthusiast Series Modular TX850M ( power suplies )
Western Digital Caviar Black (WD1002FAEX) 1000GB (1TB) SATA3 7200RPM 64MB Cache
Crucial (CT128M4SSD2) 128GB SSD m4 2.5" SATA 3 6Gb/s Solid State Drive Read: 415MB/s , Write: 175MB/s

This will give you a pretty good build u can also remoove the ssd hard drive but this will give you a better boot time and loading time but its not 100 % necessary

EVILoHOMER

2012-06-15, 04:28 AM

Always go SSD it's the best upgrade you can make to your PC. Battlefield 3 loads in seconds now and everything like web browsing is instant.

Find it funny how people upgrade their Laptops to something that will never be faster, the only reason it seems faster at first is cause they've clogged their HDDs up wit loads of crap. Told my Mother not to get a new laptop and put in an SSD from work for her and it saved so much money, her Laptop is faster now than anything she could have gotten for £1000 simply because they still use HDDs.

ausrivo

2012-06-15, 04:53 AM

will GTX 580's in sli be more than enough? I plan to play at 1080p

Bags

2012-06-15, 05:01 AM

will GTX 580's in sli be more than enough? I plan to play at 1080p

They were running it inhouse on old alpha builds with 2 of them, so I'd assume when it's optimized those will be completely fine, lol. More than, even.

Always go SSD it's the best upgrade you can make to your PC.

Not for gaming. If you have load times out the wazoo like Oblivion, maybe. Doubt PS2 will have many load times.

Arturo

2012-06-15, 05:04 AM

What about a GeForce GTS 240 GDDR5? I'm beginning to suspect this card won't be good enough from what I'm reading (being that it comes behind a GeForce 9800) but I'm not as tech savvy as I'd like, so...

Symmenix

2012-06-15, 05:05 AM

Probably on minimum-medium settings.

Bags

2012-06-15, 05:07 AM

Madlaps

2012-06-15, 05:12 AM

will GTX 580's in sli be more than enough? I plan to play at 1080p

They'll be enough dude...

I have a GTX570 and am pretty sure i'll be able to run 1080p. Thinking about upgrading monitor to 2560x1440 though (don't think PS2 is fast enough for the input lag to matter much).

Arturo

2012-06-15, 05:21 AM

Maybe lowest with like 1024x768?

I was figuring as much, although in my sleepy state (it's 5 AM) I mistook the GTS 240 for the GT 240 (which is the OEM version of the 9800 GT), and when I ran it through hwcompare.com, the GTS 250 (which is the retail version of the GTS 240) blows the GT 240 outta the water.

So, on second thought the card at least meets the projected minimum requirements. Ah well, shadows and anti-aliasing are overrated :P

edit: I meant to say I have a GTS 240, not a GT 240. aaaaaaaaa i should go sleep

CTheRain

2012-06-15, 05:32 AM

Congrats on the win.

Is the spare $700 for beer supplies to see you through the first 72 hours of PS2?

Nah its to drink my life away at the hotel before I get shipped off to basic.

CTheRain

2012-06-15, 05:33 AM

Intel Core i52500k
NZXT Havik 140 Six Heatpipe Tower CPU Cooler with dual 140mm Fans for Intel
Asus P8P67 Deluxe
8G Gskill ripjaws ddr3 1600
Cooler Master HAF 932 Full Tower ATX Case ( best air flow )
Corsair Enthusiast Series Modular TX850M ( power suplies )
Western Digital Caviar Black (WD1002FAEX) 1000GB (1TB) SATA3 7200RPM 64MB Cache
Crucial (CT128M4SSD2) 128GB SSD m4 2.5" SATA 3 6Gb/s Solid State Drive Read: 415MB/s , Write: 175MB/s

This will give you a pretty good build u can also remoove the ssd hard drive but this will give you a better boot time and loading time but its not 100 % necessary

Funny thing about the case... I already have it. Got my micro motherboard in that thing.

Stew

2012-06-15, 06:07 AM

Funny thing about the case... I already have it. Got my micro motherboard in that thing.

This is the best gaming case best airflow its mine as well :)

So if you really have this case you should keep it then

Bags

2012-06-15, 06:21 AM

This is the best gaming case best airflow its mine as well :)

So if you really have this case you should keep it then

Looks to have the same airflow as my corsair 500r

Trafalgar

2012-06-15, 07:00 AM

[Normally, I wouldn't delete a post, but hey, when you're wrong, there's no point in leaving incorrect information for someone to read and be mislead by.]

LillRutger

2012-06-15, 07:02 AM

This is the best gaming case best airflow its mine as well :)

So if you really have this case you should keep it then

Best gaming case is a VERY bold statement considering having the best airflow isn't a basis for it. You need to have enough airflow to cool your components sufficiently any more is just gravy(and noisy).

Got a case I'm really happy with, amazing cooling althogh it is somewhat noisy with fans at max(3*180mm at the bottom of the case).

I love the looks and function of it, it's amazing to build in. But it is not the best gaming chassi period.

Stew

2012-06-15, 07:15 AM

I just order a GTX680 :D so ill max this shit out babyyyyyyyyyy ! 569$ less in my pockets ;)

Stew

2012-06-15, 07:16 AM

Best gaming case is a VERY bold statement considering having the best airflow isn't a basis for it. You need to have enough airflow to cool your components sufficiently any more is just gravy(and noisy).

Got a case I'm really happy with, amazing cooling althogh it is somewhat noisy with fans at max(3*180mm at the bottom of the case).

I love the looks and function of it, it's amazing to build in. But it is not the best gaming chassi period.

the HAF have 200 mm fans one on front one on top one on side and 1 120 mm on back and this is very quiet due to the 200 mm fans

CTheRain

2012-06-15, 07:19 AM

the HAF have 200 mm fans one on front one on top one on side and 1 120 mm on back and this is very quiet due to the 200 mm fans

Yeah it is very quiet. The only thing that's loud is my refrigerator unit of a CPU fan.

I also broke the LED lights on the case.

Nasher

2012-06-15, 07:24 AM

460gtx 2gb here on a watercooled system. Never had any trouble running anything on it so far :D

Stew

2012-06-15, 07:29 AM

A word of warning: LGA1155 (which is what that motherboard is) doesn't support PCI Express 3.0 (which the GeForce 600 series cards require), and doesn't work well with SLI (it can't run both channels at 16x - different MBs run the two channels at different speeds, but that one can only do 8x/8x SLI (or, it says, 16x/0x, but that doesn't make any sense)).

(I built mine with a LGA1155 motherboard, but it was a couple years ago, and PCI Express 3.0 didn't exist. I have a GTX 460 1 GB, which was quite good at the time, and I think is still quite good.)

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Intel/Ivy_Bridge_PCI-Express_Scaling/

It will not do much difference iwht a gtx680 but the guys already have agraphics card and seams to not want to change it 1 or 2 frames per second you wont notice a huge difference !

Stew

2012-06-15, 07:40 AM

Yeah it is very quiet. The only thing that's loud is my refrigerator unit of a CPU fan.

I also broke the LED lights on the case.

maybe is just the conector did you plug it with a psu conector or directly on the motherboard ?

Deadeye

2012-06-15, 08:45 AM

I have a 560ti 2gb and it plays the current generation of games just fine. I would suggest holding off on a 600 series card until PS2 is about to release. They're likely to be cheaper by then since I doubt this game is coming out before November and, probably, it's not coming out till next year. So unless you're running something truly old, it might best to hold off a while.

kaffis

2012-06-15, 09:20 AM

A word of warning: LGA1155 (which is what that motherboard is) doesn't support PCI Express 3.0 (which the GeForce 600 series cards require), and doesn't work well with SLI (it can't run both channels at 16x - different MBs run the two channels at different speeds, but that one can only do 8x/8x SLI (or, it says, 16x/0x, but that doesn't make any sense)).

(I built mine with a LGA1155 motherboard, but it was a couple years ago, and PCI Express 3.0 didn't exist. I have a GTX 460 1 GB, which was quite good at the time, and I think is still quite good.)
Just to point out, LGA1155 refers to the CPU socket type. Which has nothing to do with PCI buses.

What you need to look at is the chipset, which interfaces with both the CPU and the expansion buses. So a newer chipset may still use the LGA1155 CPU format (and thus the same CPUs), while adding support for PCI Express 3.0.

Deadeye

2012-06-15, 09:49 AM

Just to point out, LGA1155 refers to the CPU socket type. Which has nothing to do with PCI buses.

What you need to look at is the chipset, which interfaces with both the CPU and the expansion buses. So a newer chipset may still use the LGA1155 CPU format (and thus the same CPUs), while adding support for PCI Express 3.0.

Yeah. I have an ASUS P8Z68 and it is an LGA1155 (Since it's a core I7; 4.4ghz to brag a bit), has SLI, and it does support PCIe 3.0. Even has bluetooth in it. :groovy:

Trafalgar

2012-06-15, 09:54 AM

Ah, my mistake. I confused it with LGA 1156. (I did search for the motherboard which was recommended first, and noted that it only had PCI Express 2.0 and 8x/8x SLI, and didn't realize it wasn't the same as what I had because that was the same and the number was almost identical to what I remembered. :V)

Stew

2012-06-15, 09:55 AM

Yeah. I have an ASUS P8Z68 and it is an LGA1155 (Since it's a core I7; 4.4ghz to brag a bit), has SLI, and it does support PCIe 3.0. Even has bluetooth in it. :groovy:

PCI 3.0 dosent change a lots for the kepler graphics card generation but maybe it willl for the next also i have a ASrock z68 etreme 4 gen 3 with pci 3.0 but thos MB are a pain in the ass for overclocking the processor

Oryon22

2012-06-15, 10:09 AM

PCI 3 is not a deal breaker.

Xale

2012-06-15, 10:19 AM

A word of warning: That motherboard doesn't support PCI Express 3.0 (which the GeForce 600 series cards require), and only does 8x/8x SLI, according to http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131701
PCI-E is cross version compatible, just like SATA and USB. You can run a PCI-E 3.0 device just fine on any PCI-E 2, or even PCI-E 1 motherboard.

In addition, PCI-E 2 16x bandwidth is more than what current GPUs require. The 600 series performance benefit is essentially unmeasurable in games when running PCI-E 3 over PCI-E 2. There are slight benefits in compute operations, but then the 500 series or HD7000 series would've been better to begin with.

There is a small (1-3% if I recall) performance loss when going from 16x to 8x on PCI-E 2 in games. Thats really the only bandwidth related performance loss PCI-E 3 will eliminate (Since 8x PCI-E 3 is basically identical to 16x PCI-E 2). Not exactly a significant one. It helps a bit more if running quad GPU setups (e.g. 2x 690 cards), but thats its only really outstanding use.

But as it is, PCI-E 3 on graphics cards is generally irrelevant. Supported motherboards may help more in 2-3 years, but not in 2012.

Trafalgar

2012-06-15, 11:57 AM

You would think that wikipedia's PCI Express article would have mentioned any of that, but no. :P

Always good to correct an error in knowledge, in any case, so thank you for that.

DarkChiron

2012-06-15, 02:18 PM

My poor self is going to have to settle for a GT 430 2GB 128-bit card. No fancy 6000 series for me. Still, I imagine it will be more than adequate.

Bags

2012-06-15, 02:23 PM

[Edited to correct a mistake]
A word of warning: That motherboard doesn't support PCI Express 3.0 (which the GeForce 600 series cards require), and only does 8x/8x SLI, according to http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131701

3.0 cards are backwards compatable, the drivers don't even run at those speeds yet.

Also, iirc x8 isn't a bottle neck yet.

I SandRock

2012-06-15, 02:40 PM

GTS/X/whatever 460 HAWK here, hope it will run at medium-high with 1920x1080

Electrofreak

2012-06-15, 09:34 PM

When I started playing the original PlanetSide, I was a college kid with disposable income to spend on a pimped out gaming rig (http://www.planetside-universe.com/showthread.php?t=25759).

Now I have a family of my own, bills to pay... and while I make a decent living as a tech professional, I cannot justify $400 for a video card. Hell, I can hardly justify a hundred bucks to get my current desktop running after a motherboard failure last month.

I'm buying a house and I've got a long list of bills and expenses. I don't even know if I'm going to be able to PLAY the beta when it comes out.
:cry:

MrMorton

2012-06-15, 09:39 PM

again, they have a deal with nvidia, so of course they are going to use the highest end nvidia GPU

this tells us nothing about the system specs for the game.

Electrofreak

2012-06-15, 09:41 PM

again, they have a deal with nvidia, so of course they are going to use the highest end nvidia GPU

this tells us nothing about the system specs for the game.

Well, a SOE sales pitch from last year on the Youtubes praises ForgeLight for being extremely scaleable.

If you think about it, a game that you're marking as Free to Play needs to be designed to run on low-end equipment, as the people looking for a F2P tend to be the ones with less disposeable income to spend on a high-end PC.

MonsterBone

2012-06-15, 09:42 PM

What a bunch of crying and whining over nothing. Most good players will turn the res way down. Turning the res down will put the bottleneck squarely on the CPU. So its not a video card that you need in the first place....

Nax

2012-06-15, 09:45 PM

Yea this game better support crossfire, I have x2 6870's. Partnering with nvidia is bad enough, if it doesn't support crossfire ill be chapped.

Stew

2012-06-15, 09:45 PM

again, they have a deal with nvidia, so of course they are going to use the highest end nvidia GPU

this tells us nothing about the system specs for the game.

higby as state they work close with nvidia to push as far as possible the hardware possibility wich the hardware they want to push at is limmite is the GTX670 thats mean almost 2xgtx570 so yeah

you must expect the game to be scalable but if you want to max it out youll have to have a new gtx670 680 or 690 ULTRA setting

but the game will have personal setting or Low medium high etc.. so yeah

but everything max out its gtx670

thats why i just bough a gtx680 so yeah ill be ready to unleash the graphics of planetside 2

Pyreal

2012-06-15, 10:05 PM

I have a GTX 570 that runs BF3 just fine for my taste, I don't see any problems with PS2.

Electrofreak

2012-06-15, 10:08 PM

higby as state they work close with nvidia to push as far as possible the hardware possibility wich the hardware they want to push at is limmite is the GTX670 thats mean almost 2xgtx570 so yeah

you must expect the game to be scalable but if you want to max it out youll have to have a new gtx670 680 or 690 ULTRA setting

but the game will have personal setting or Low medium high etc.. so yeah

but everything max out its gtx670

thats why i just bough a gtx680 so yeah ill be ready to unleash the graphics of planetside 2

If you believe the marketing hype, sure.

Fact is that any decent AMD / NVIDIA video card will play PS2 at max graphics without issues. "Optimization" is mostly a ploy to get people like you to buy a product because you will believe it will perform better to any significant degree. NVIDIA paid SOE good money for that.

Bags

2012-06-15, 10:08 PM

Electrofreak

2012-06-15, 10:16 PM

Top Sgt

2012-06-15, 11:26 PM

wow some of you sold the farm for a new video card.

myself I am a deal shopper. Found a guy online in need of money got a like new xfx 6950 2gb card for $140.00 60fps and 1920 x 1080 is all i need.. i'm good with that.

Wow $600.00 plus for a video card.. some of you must be rich.

Madlaps

2012-06-15, 11:43 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stew View Post
higby as state they work close with nvidia to push as far as possible the hardware possibility wich the hardware they want to push at is limmite is the GTX670 thats mean almost 2xgtx570 so yeah

you must expect the game to be scalable but if you want to max it out youll have to have a new gtx670 680 or 690 ULTRA setting

but the game will have personal setting or Low medium high etc.. so yeah

but everything max out its gtx670

thats why i just bough a gtx680 so yeah ill be ready to unleash the graphics of planetside 2
If you believe the marketing hype, sure.

Fact is that any decent AMD / NVIDIA video card will play PS2 at max graphics without issues. "Optimization" is mostly a ploy to get people like you to buy a product because you will believe it will perform better to any significant degree. NVIDIA paid SOE good money for that.

True story. Funny seeing everyone here upgrading their graphics cards from propaganda, lol. Hardware is way above gaming software capabilities at the moment - the only time you may need a 670 is if you are running 2560x1600 and at that point you've already spent $1200 on a monitor (if you haven't, you've got a horrible one).

Bags

2012-06-15, 11:51 PM

Dairian

2012-06-15, 11:58 PM

As of right now I am running.

Intel Core i7-960 4.2 GHz
ASUS Rampage III Formula
G.SKILL Ripjaws Series 12GB (3 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 2000
COOLER MASTER HAF X
CORSAIR H80 High Performance Liquid CPU Cooler
OCZ RevoDrive 3 Max IOPS RVD3MI-FHPX4-240G PCI-E 240GB 1000 MB/s
1000W PSU

But I am using 2 GIGABYTE Ultra Durable VGA Series Radeon HD 6850 1GB in crossfire. That I pulled out of my older PC. I hope i do not need to buy 2 new GPUs to pull max settings for PS2

I am waiting for Haswell socket before building another PC.

Top Sgt

2012-06-16, 12:56 AM

670 is $400.

guess what?

i was referring to this post by Stew when I typed what I typed

"
I just order a GTX680 so ill max this shit out babyyyyyyyyyy ! 569$ less in my pockets "

400 or 600 either way that's still alot of money.

Bags

2012-06-16, 01:05 AM

guess what?

i was referring to this post by Stew when I typed what I typed

"
I just order a GTX680 so ill max this shit out babyyyyyyyyyy ! 569$ less in my pockets "

400 or 600 either way that's still alot of money.

Guess what? you should have quoted or somehow indicated you were referring to him.

Top Sgt

2012-06-16, 01:09 AM

Guess what? you should have quoted or somehow indicated you were referring to him.

guess what i didn't need to I never said one particular card costs 600 i said people are paying 600 bucks for cards ( in general) your the one who ASSUMED i mean't the one YOU listed. thanks for playing

MonsterBone

2012-06-16, 02:30 AM

Having a high resolution is a HUGE advantage in any FPS.
No ..... having perfectly a smooth game is a huge advantage. High resolution not so much.

DarknessOne

2012-06-16, 04:57 AM

Forgive me for being ignorant! I am thinking of buying a gtx 670. I currently have a 19 inch monitor, is that a big deal?

indirect

2012-06-16, 05:00 AM

I doubt I'll be able to run it past 1600x900 on all low with no shadows, :(

Forgive me for being ignorant! I am thinking of buying a gtx 670. I currently have a 19 inch monitor, is that a big deal?

I'll talk to you about it on TS later

kaffis

2012-06-16, 12:17 PM

Forgive me for being ignorant! I am thinking of buying a gtx 670. I currently have a 19 inch monitor, is that a big deal?
19" is likely a 1680x1050 or perhaps a 1920x1080 resolution. Considering that those resolutions have less than half the pixel-count of the monitors they were running at E3 (2560x1600) with 670's, and they were running that rig and resolution at an alpha level of engine optimisation, and I predict a 670 for your setup will be massive overkill. Buy a cheaper card to save some cash; you'll probably be just fine with a 570 or 560Ti.

UNLESS you plan on upgrading your monitor soon, too.

indirect

2012-06-16, 01:29 PM

19" is likely a 1680x1050 or perhaps a 1920x1080 resolution. Considering that those resolutions have less than half the pixel-count of the monitors they were running at E3 (2560x1600) with 670's, and they were running that rig and resolution at an alpha level of engine optimisation, and I predict a 670 for your setup will be massive overkill. Buy a cheaper card to save some cash; you'll probably be just fine with a 570 or 560Ti.

UNLESS you plan on upgrading your monitor soon, too.

I doubt there is a single 19" out there that can correctly display @ 1920x1080.

BuzzCutPsycho

2012-06-16, 03:33 PM

Bags

2012-06-16, 03:57 PM

Prob. not if you don't go over 1920x1080.

This. Though it's definitely better to wait until the game comes out, maybe the 670 won't be enough, who knows~

Electrofreak

2012-06-16, 06:33 PM

No ..... having perfectly a smooth game is a huge advantage. High resolution not so much.

You said reduce resolution until the game becomes CPU-dependent... you'll have a smooth game long before that. As for resolution, it IS a huge advantage assuming you aren't running it on a tiny screen. Field of view and ability to see detail are great advantages.

Stew

2012-06-16, 06:47 PM

I doubt I'll be able to run it past 1600x900 on all low with no shadows, :(

I'll talk to you about it on TS later

I doubt they will integrate a 0 shadow in this game this time around i think its the time to upgrade

No shadow do not existe anymore in games

u can choose between high quality shadow or regular but no shadow i dont think it existe anymore 386 and 486 pc is past time to ugrade

Stew

2012-06-16, 06:51 PM

Far cry 2 | Intel HD Graphics | Intel Core i5 2500K - YouTube

My build in i52500k hd graphics processor can run farcry 2 whiout even using my gtx570 card lol if anyones here have a pc weaker than thats its really the time to upgrade ! personally iam going to have my brand new gtx680 in a few days anyones want to buy a gtx570 directcuII ? ;)

Grapes

2012-06-16, 07:15 PM

Reading Stew's twitterfeed is hilarious

Haro

2012-06-16, 08:09 PM

Think the 680 would be a worthy purchase over the 670 in regards to PS2? I don't want a major tech debate here as I know it's the incorrect forum but I do feel the urge to ask as upgrade time is coming soon.

In terms of price efficiency? Almost certainly not. 670 mostly keeps up with 680 very well, at $100 less. You'll get a nominal performance increase, (most benchmarks I've seen have around 5% difference) but that comes at kind of a steep price. If you want that extra bit, go for it, but people love the 670s, they seem to get any job done.

I'm upgrading my old 470 to a 670 superclocked this week. I still have a 1920x1080 monitor, and I'm not sure if I'll upgrade that, but even if I don't, I think I'll enjoy the frame rates I'll get.

Top Sgt

2012-06-16, 10:48 PM

My build in i52500k hd graphics processor can run farcry 2 whiout even using my gtx570 card lol if anyones here have a pc weaker than thats its really the time to upgrade ! personally iam going to have my brand new gtx680 in a few days anyones want to buy a gtx570 directcuII ? ;)

I will say tho great choice on CPU tho I also run an I5 2500K and it's a beast at a great price and OC's so easily.

PeteHMB

2012-06-17, 12:18 AM

In terms of price efficiency? Almost certainly not. 670 mostly keeps up with 680 very well, at $100 less. You'll get a nominal performance increase, (most benchmarks I've seen have around 5% difference) but that comes at kind of a steep price. If you want that extra bit, go for it, but people love the 670s, they seem to get any job done.

I'm upgrading my old 470 to a 670 superclocked this week. I still have a 1920x1080 monitor, and I'm not sure if I'll upgrade that, but even if I don't, I think I'll enjoy the frame rates I'll get.

My GTX670 superclocked from EVGA just arrived. Waiting on CPU and motherboard but I'll be sure to post up in the tech forum when it's all up and running. FYI - I haven't owned a PC in about 5-6 years. If you have a 5xx right now and aren't going past 1920x1080, I agree that you probably don't need to upgrade. If you're like me and are building a whole new setup, then I'd say it's worth it to get the 670 and be able to max everything out for the next couple years.

kaffis

2012-06-17, 10:30 PM

You said reduce resolution until the game becomes CPU-dependent... you'll have a smooth game long before that. As for resolution, it IS a huge advantage assuming you aren't running it on a tiny screen. Field of view and ability to see detail are great advantages.
Field of view isn't a benefit of high resolution -- it's a matter of wide aspect ratios. You could create a wide FOV with 3 640x480 screens side by side -- that's 12:3, which is only 20% narrower than 48:9... but a standard ratio 1080p display will have over twice the pixel-count, allowing you to see more detail. ;)

So, yes, while most multi-monitor setups will yield high resolution (because nobody bothers to make a multi-monitor setup with ancient, crappy resolution monitors), FOV and resolution are two entirely separate axes of advantage and should be discussed separately, as they're two different types of advantage.

ChipMHazard

2012-06-18, 06:20 AM

A GTX 580 should be more then enough I suppose :p

Indeed it will be. :)

Stew

2012-06-18, 06:38 AM

My GTX670 superclocked from EVGA just arrived. Waiting on CPU and motherboard but I'll be sure to post up in the tech forum when it's all up and running. FYI - I haven't owned a PC in about 5-6 years. If you have a 5xx right now and aren't going past 1920x1080, I agree that you probably don't need to upgrade. If you're like me and are building a whole new setup, then I'd say it's worth it to get the 670 and be able to max everything out for the next couple years.

Iam still waiting for my Asus GTX680 DCUII cant wait to see how it goes with it iam already running BF3 at ultra and crysis 2 max out DX11 but i want to see if iam going to get the 70 fps with 4x aa on BF3 with 2x AA iam runing it at 60 and some dips at 52 with my gtx570 dcuII overclock

so yeah cant wait to figure it out !

Stew

2012-06-18, 06:43 AM

Indeed it will be. :)

it will be enough to run everything on High mix with ultra with 2x aa ! But i bet the Ultra setting with 4x aa will make you dips under 35 or 30 fps thats pretty much sure !

it will depend on Nvidia drivers suport and on How the client will be optimised

But since they have tried to push the graphics as far as possible basing their Specs on the new GTX670 kepler GPU I doubt the gtx580 will run the ULtra setting for Ps2 but it will be very beautiful at very high !

kaffis

2012-06-18, 12:08 PM

But since they have tried to push the graphics as far as possible basing their Specs on the new GTX670 kepler GPU I doubt the gtx580 will run the ULtra setting for Ps2 but it will be very beautiful at very high !
In other games, 580's run around 80% of the performance of 670's, by the benchmarks I've seen.

Considering we know that a single 670 was pushing the game at the (quite awesome) quality levels we saw in the E3 livestream with a 2560x1600 resolution; it seems to me that a 580 will have zero problems running the game gorgeously at 1920x1200, the upper end of what the majority of gamers run, and roughly 55% of the pixel-count of a 2560x1600 resolution.

And that's before we get more graphics engine optimizations in beta running up to release.

And, well, I'll just say this: you can bet that SOE chose hardware specs and display levels that would run at flawless framerates for their E3 floor demo. To do anything less would be shooting their awesome publicity in the foot as press and other attendees noticed hitches and stutters.

So, yeah. Unless you're running 30" or multi-monitor setups, a single 580 looks to be set to kick this game's ass on a resolution around 1080p. By the time beta's done with, I'd fully expect the same to be said for 570's and probably even 560Ti's.

Of course, all that said... waiting to get confirmation of this stuff for either beta or, even better, release will only get you both more confidence in the performance levels given hardware will provide (or, conversely, what kind of hardware expenditure it'll take to reach your target level of performance) AND cheaper prices for that hardware.

Stew

2012-06-19, 07:31 PM

In other games, 580's run around 80% of the performance of 670's, by the benchmarks I've seen.

Considering we know that a single 670 was pushing the game at the (quite awesome) quality levels we saw in the E3 livestream with a 2560x1600 resolution; it seems to me that a 580 will have zero problems running the game gorgeously at 1920x1200, the upper end of what the majority of gamers run, and roughly 55% of the pixel-count of a 2560x1600 resolution.

And that's before we get more graphics engine optimizations in beta running up to release.

And, well, I'll just say this: you can bet that SOE chose hardware specs and display levels that would run at flawless framerates for their E3 floor demo. To do anything less would be shooting their awesome publicity in the foot as press and other attendees noticed hitches and stutters.

So, yeah. Unless you're running 30" or multi-monitor setups, a single 580 looks to be set to kick this game's ass on a resolution around 1080p. By the time beta's done with, I'd fully expect the same to be said for 570's and probably even 560Ti's.

Of course, all that said... waiting to get confirmation of this stuff for either beta or, even better, release will only get you both more confidence in the performance levels given hardware will provide (or, conversely, what kind of hardware expenditure it'll take to reach your target level of performance) AND cheaper prices for that hardware.

http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae76/stew360/gtx580vs670.png

Here is Gtx580 vs 670 as you can see the perforcmance of the 670 is quiet better but the 580 will run planetside high setting for sure

Iam glad ive choose the gtx680 instead of the HD7950 http://www.canadacomputers.com/product_info.php?cPath=43_557_559&item_id=048689 thats my card i will have it very soon :D cant wait

http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae76/stew360/gtx680vshd7950.png

bjorntju1

2012-06-21, 04:17 PM

it will be enough to run everything on High mix with ultra with 2x aa ! But i bet the Ultra setting with 4x aa will make you dips under 35 or 30 fps thats pretty much sure !

it will depend on Nvidia drivers suport and on How the client will be optimised

But since they have tried to push the graphics as far as possible basing their Specs on the new GTX670 kepler GPU I doubt the gtx580 will run the ULtra setting for Ps2 but it will be very beautiful at very high !

How is that pretty much sure? If a GTX 670 can run PS2 on its highest settings, on an unoptimized build and on a 2560x1600 resolution, I can't see how a GTX 580 can't run the game on ultra at 1080p or even 2560x1600 in an optimized build at 60fps. Since the 670 is only about 20/25% faster in most games, and the 680 30/35% (http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/517?vs=555/) And they are not ''basing their specs'' on the 670, thats even for the fact that I know Higby was running an SLI 580 setup at work.

This PC is rocking SLI GTX 580s which is serious overkill for PS2, but I run at 2560x1600 most of the time... And I have to be able to play the game when there is no optimization done. (http://www.planetside-universe.com/showpost.php?p=645932&postcount=12/)

So I suppose a single 580 can defenitely run the game on it's highest settings in the optimized build. It's not like the 670 and 680 are massive improvements over the previous generation imo.

bjorntju1

2012-06-21, 04:20 PM

whoops, quote instead of edit.

TheDAWinz

2012-06-21, 04:28 PM

what about a 5870 hd radeon?

bjorntju1

2012-06-21, 04:33 PM

what about a 5870 hd radeon?

I think that will be a little bit tougher, but I think you will be able to set most options on high. Depending on how good the game is optimized.

Bags

2012-06-21, 04:35 PM

what about a 5870 hd radeon?

Probably on high @ 1900x1080.

In case this isn't obvious, this is a guess. Hence probably.

Solidblock

2012-06-21, 04:37 PM

Hey guys, how will a Sapphire 6870 run this game?

Bags

2012-06-21, 05:03 PM

Hey guys, how will a Sapphire 6870 run this game?

Med/high @ 1900x1080p.

In case this isn't obvious, this is a guess.

Russ

2012-06-21, 05:07 PM

Luieburger

2012-06-21, 11:27 PM

XFX Radeon HD 5830... and my wife is running an EVGA 550Ti.

We'll probably have to turn our settings down a bit.

Toppopia

2012-06-21, 11:35 PM

I will find some way to get my laptop with its bad GeForce GT 230M to run this game, even if i have to go 800x600. And don't think i'm bluffing, i will do it. I must play this!

Edit: Plus it can run Crysis, so it should be able to run this, even if its on nearly lowest settings, i don't care about graphics.

Top Sgt

2012-06-21, 11:52 PM

XFX Radeon HD 5830... and my wife is running an EVGA 550Ti.

We'll probably have to turn our settings down a bit.

I am willing to almost guarantee you'll both be just fine on medium with a solid frame rate.. this game will be designed to run on mid range PC's SOE needs the money.

Don't be fooled by this thread in thinking you need a monster super expensive card to run this game well. SOE is not dumb they would not make much money that way.

Azovyr

2012-06-22, 12:19 AM

Ive never ran FPS games on high, even if i could. Shadows on high setting usually are a bit too dark and can mask players at a distance. So i usually have all the visual eye candy low to med but LOD maxed. So dont feel bummed out if you cant run a game maxed out.

But damn, the game looks gorgeous.

Same here. In FPS games a solid frame rate is everything. It's far more important than eye candy sadly and many effects actual reduce visual clarity.

What people often fail to take into account is framerate dips. It's all very well to have a high fps cruising around the landscape on max settings but how is your fps during an intensive firefight? I expect there will be a very small percentage of systems out there that can maintain a solid fps above 60 when there's lots of players on the screen and explosions going off all around.

I have a decent system but I'll most likely be playing on minimum settings.

Stew

2012-06-22, 04:34 AM

Bags

2012-06-22, 04:43 AM

I just receive my gtx680 and its just amasing :P Run bf3 everything on ultra 4Xmsaa at 60 fps 0 dips 100 % 60 fps !

But in run into a weird bug with crysis 2 instead of 60 fps the fps seams to be lock at 50 but never drop below it no matter whats so its pretty fluid anyway but kinda weird !

The GTX680 really worth it ;)

My 670 does the same for BF3. I think the lowest I saw was 58 with 83 highest before I put vsync on.

No idea with the crysis thing, I've only played the first and warhead on my new PC. Runs them both flawlessly maxed.

LegioX

2012-06-22, 09:00 AM

My GTX 580 3gb better run this thing on highest graphic setting.

Coreldan

2012-06-22, 09:07 AM

A HD5770 1gb :/

Stew

2012-06-23, 07:13 AM

GTX 680 DcuII For planetside 2 Ultra setting here i come - YouTube

Yeah have my card on video :D

Stew

2012-06-23, 07:15 AM

My GTX 580 3gb better run this thing on highest graphic setting.

http://www.hwcompare.com/12523/geforce-gtx-580-vs-geforce-gtx-670/

On high or very high certainly Ultra everything max out i doubt it with a single 500 series card exept if its a 590 maybe !

bjorntju1

2012-06-23, 07:26 AM

http://www.hwcompare.com/12523/geforce-gtx-580-vs-geforce-gtx-670/

On high or very high certainly Ultra everything max out i doubt it with a single 500 series card exept if its a 590 maybe !

lolol at that site. They are only comparing the specs to each other and not even a single benchmark. Use this:http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/517?vs=555

The 680 is only about 35 % at average faster than an 580. With I don't find alot. If a GTX 670 can run this game on it's highest settings, on 2560x1600 and on a unpotimized build. A GTX 580 can definitely run the game on 1080P and even 2560x1600 on it's highest settings in an optimized build, at 60 FPS.

And how is a GTX590 ''maybe''? That card is stronger than an GTX 680.

EVILoHOMER

2012-06-23, 07:33 AM

The 670 is barely any less powerful than the 680, was like 4fps difference in most games, so it's a good benchmark to how the 680 will handle the game.

bjorntju1

2012-06-23, 07:37 AM

The 670 is barely any less powerful than the 680, was like 4fps difference in most games, so it's a good benchmark to how the 680 will handle the game.

I even read that factory overclocked GTX 670's are as fast or faster than a stock GTX 680.

Stew

2012-06-23, 07:42 AM

lolol at that site. They are only comparing the specs to each other and not even a single benchmark. Use this:http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/517?vs=555

The 680 is only about 35 % at average faster than an 580. With I don't find alot. If a GTX 670 can run this game on it's highest settings, on 2560x1600 and on a unpotimized build. A GTX 580 can definitely run the game on 1080P and even 2560x1600 on it's highest settings in an optimized build, at 60 FPS.

And how is a GTX590 ''maybe''? That card is stronger than an GTX 680.

Its not totally true the GTx590 have less texel rate than the gtx680 and the 590 is not base on the new kepler tech
texel rate :
The better this number, the better the video card will be at texture filtering (anisotropic filtering - AF). It is measured in millions of texels in a second.

but also the Gtx590 is not a single video card its a sli in one card its 2 gtx580 in sli !

And the performance of the new kepler gpu shine in few games but planetside 2 will be one of them

http://www.hardwareheaven.com/reviews/1452/pg14/nvidia-geforce-gtx-680-kepler-graphics-card-review-gtx-680-vs-gtx-590.html

Look here in Batman AC the gtx590 is quiet better but in bf3 at ultra high resolution the Gtx680 just Own in everyway the gtx590 ;)

BF3 5760 x 1080 4xmsaa 16x AF
In this test the strength of the GTX 680 is clear. At ultra-high resolutions and detail the core configuration along with the extra memory available to the GPU and speed of the memory bus allow it to outperform the GTX 590 which also relies on profiles to get the most from its dual GPUs.

Also you should remind theyre is not enough drivers optimisation yet for the kepler GPU soon these beast will outperform anything in the 500 series

bjorntju1

2012-06-23, 08:12 AM

Its not totally true the GTx590 have less texel rate than the gtx680 and the 590 is not base on the new kepler tech
texel rate :
The better this number, the better the video card will be at texture filtering (anisotropic filtering - AF). It is measured in millions of texels in a second.

but also the Gtx590 is not a single video card its a sli in one card its 2 gtx580 in sli !

And the performance of the new kepler gpu shine in few games but planetside 2 will be one of them

http://www.hardwareheaven.com/reviews/1452/pg14/nvidia-geforce-gtx-680-kepler-graphics-card-review-gtx-680-vs-gtx-590.html

Look here in Batman AC the gtx590 is quiet better but in bf3 at ultra high resolution the Gtx680 just Own in everyway the gtx590 ;)

BF3 5760 x 1080 4xmsaa 16x AF
In this test the strength of the GTX 680 is clear. At ultra-high resolutions and detail the core configuration along with the extra memory available to the GPU and speed of the memory bus allow it to outperform the GTX 590 which also relies on profiles to get the most from its dual GPUs.

Also you should remind theyre is not enough drivers optimisation yet for the kepler GPU soon these beast will outperform anything in the 500 series

Yeah, on what resolution again? 5760 x 1080 lol. I am talking about 1080P and 2560x1600. 98% of people don't have 3 monitors. And yes the GTX 680 is faster. But if a 670, can run the game on its highest settings, at 2560x1600 on an unoptimized build, I suppose the GTX 580 can at 1080P, or even 2560x1600 in an optimized build. If they can't do that at 1080P they are doing something very wrong if the GTX 670 can at 2560x1600.

Of course we don't know anything for sure because we haven't even played the game. But I don't see how a 580 can't run the game smoothly at its highest settings at 1080P and even 2560x1600 if a GTX 670 can in an unoptimized build. And yes the GTX 590 is two cards in one. But the SLI scaling is extremely good in the 500 series. most of the time above 80%. But oh well, I don't have nothing to worry about since I have 2 GTX 580 in SLI, (even Higby runs that: This PC is rocking SLI GTX 580s which is serious overkill for PS2, but I run at 2560x1600 most of the time... And I have to be able to play the game when there is no optimization done. (http://www.planetside-universe.com/showpost.php?p=645932&postcount=12/)

and two GTX 580's are faster than one GTX 680 so I am defenitely safe.

Really dude, you have a great GPU, but that doesn't mean other GPU's cant run games at its highest settings anymore. It is not like a GTX 680 is a huge improvement over the previous generation imo. I'd love to have one. But I'd rather have two 580's in SLI than one 680. I would of brought a 680 if I haven't had a GTX 580 already in my previous PC, but since I build a new PC a week ago, it is faster to buy an extra 580 than get rid of my old one and put a 680 in it. WIth means it is slower, and costs more money because I have to get rid of my gtx 580.

Stew

2012-06-23, 08:39 AM

Yeah, on what resolution again? 5760 x 1080 lol. I am talking about 1080P and 2560x1600. 98% of people don't have 3 monitors. And yes the GTX 680 is faster. But if a 670, can run the game on its highest settings, at 2560x1600 on an unoptimized build, I suppose the GTX 580 can at 1080P, or even 2560x1600 in an optimized build. If they can't do that at 1080P they are doing something very wrong if the GTX 670 can at 2560x1600.

Of course we don't know anything for sure because we haven't even played the game. But I don't see how a 580 can't run the game smoothly at its highest settings at 1080P and even 2560x1600 if a GTX 670 can in an unoptimized build. And yes the GTX 590 is two cards in one. But the SLI scaling is extremely good in the 500 series. most of the time above 80%. But oh well, I don't have nothing to worry about since I have 2 GTX 580 in SLI, (even Higby runs that:

and two GTX 580's are faster than one GTX 680 so I am defenitely safe.

Really dude, you have a great GPU, but that doesn't mean other GPU's cant run games at its highest settings anymore. It is not like a GTX 680 is a huge improvement over the previous generation imo. I'd love to have one. But I'd rather have two 580's in SLI than one 680. I would of brought a 680 if I haven't had a GTX 580 already in my previous PC, but since I build a new PC a week ago, it is faster to buy an extra 580 than get rid of my old one and put a 680 in it. WIth means it is slower, and costs more money because I have to get rid of my gtx 580.

I understand but i have based my tough on whats they have done with Nvidia to push as far the limites of the game based on Kepler gtx670 series

higby said at E3 the Ultra setting are pushing the limites of the gt670 whiout breaking it thats why ive bougth my Gtx 680 because i want everything max out in 1920 x 1080 at least and in 2560 x1600 if possible !

I had a gtx570 dcuII overclock with the performance mostly of a 580 stock

I personally think the gtx570 and 580 will run the game fine at 60 fps at High or very high but on ultra i doubt it ! If it 2 x gtx580 sli i can beleive it will run it smoothly !

They have use gtx690 and 670 at E3
E3 2012: Planetside 2 Powered By The GeForce GTX 670 - YouTube

Thats why i did this ;)
GTX 680 DcuII For planetside 2 Ultra setting here i come - YouTube

bjorntju1

2012-06-23, 09:25 AM

They actually used 590's at E3 on their portable demo machines (or whatever it was :P ) And since a GTX 580 can run BF3 at its highest setting at around 50 FPS, so I take PS2 can at 60. And don't forget that the game was long in development before the GTX 670/80 came out. And I suppose they used the GTX 580/90 as their most high-end machines to build the game. But we will find out when the beta starts. I don't think a single 580 has any problems on ultra(or whatever they are going to call it) at 1080p. I suppose 2560x1600 will do fine too, maybe it has a little more trouble with that. But we will have to see and wait. But have fun with your card. It should run PS2 just fine. My new pc (http://www.planetside-universe.com/showthread.php?t=42963/[) should be good to go too.

What are your other specs btw?