integrated graphics

tsplanetsid · 2013-06-10, 02:22 PM

Low settings, 8 gb of RAM. 1024x768

I am unable to find a consensus to this on any forum. Is this game playable using Intel HD 4000 (i5-3570K) or AMD Radeon HD 7660D (AMD 5800k) with 8 GB of ram?
I've seen various claims; 30-60 fps to runs better on a toaster.

From what i've read, the game doesn't seem to go above 30-35 fps in large battles even with high end hardware. Is that true?

Narrack · 2013-06-10, 07:09 PM

I doubt it will run as im using an i5@3ghz with a nvidea 540m which has 3gb of ram and 8gb of system ram and i can only play at 720p with everything turned low or off (except textures) and if i turn anything else on my fps tank immediately to unplayable.
i suppose if the game even booted up i think esamir would be your only hope as that's mostly empty but when lattice hits there as well there will only be big battles so there will be nowhere for you to fight anyway.

so while it is true people are getting cpu throttled to 45 fps on high end cards with a low end card or integrated you will be gpu capped long before you are cpu capped and it will only get worse in big battles where both your cpu and your gpu will simply hit a performance wall.

tldr = No im 99% sure it wont run

Rbstr · 2013-06-11, 01:52 PM

Download the damn thing and find out.

You won't be able to turn the eye candy up much but it's not that GPU intensive of a game. Especially at that tiny resolution.

Wahooo · 2013-06-11, 02:26 PM

I play with custom low graphics with this:

Intel i7 2.8ghz
8 Gig ram
NVIDIA GeForce GT 330M (Below minimum specs)

I manage 30-35 fps at a WG and a slide show at the absolute biggest battles when the render range stuff starts to happen.
Most of the time i'm 15-20 fps in a fight. I am unable to gun a lib, for some reason the FPS drops even more (I think it has to do with so much to draw at one time) and things stutter.
SOME people would say the game as it runs on my computer is unplayable, but it is what I have. I can't really justify a gaming rig so I play on the computer I have that is for other uses right?
This is why you won't find a consensus. Some people will say anything that isn't on ultra settings and stays above 60 fps is unplayable. Others will get by with stuttering and random frames as long as it isn't a slide show.

People warp more on my screen. I die a lot more than maybe I would if people moved smooth. I only have to avoid the absolute biggest fights and the only thing I can't really do is gun a lib. I get plenty of fun out of the game.

DL it try. Can't hurt.

Ailos · 2013-06-12, 08:27 PM

The A10 should be able to run it. I've played the game on an A6-3650 with HD6550D and 4 GB of RAM, get 20-30 FPS on all lowest settings. It runs, but only just. Equip it with faster RAM, and your experience will go from "Runs better on a toaster" to "30-60 on all lows". Refer to my "Low FPS?" thread for more info how to get the most out of the thing.

Intel HD 4000 will only get you to the log in screen and that's about it.

tsplanetsid · 2013-06-15, 02:46 AM

Thanks for all the responses. Sorry for not responding quickly as well, I had to go out of town for a week.

Unfortunately, I can't test the game since I have not bought a computer yet. I'm trying to get a feel for what I need to buy.

I read through your thread Ailos, and it seemed to address a few of my concerns. I am a little bit worried, though, as I'm breaking a few of the guidelines you wrote.

My brother booted the game up on his computer to convince me that I was over-thinking this whole mess. He has a Phenom II x4 965, 8 GB ram and a HD 6850. It seemed to run at an acceptable framerate in a fight that involved approximately 8 people and two tanks. I'm not sure if that's considered a big battle

I'm still a little worried, though, so I'll ask: If I buy a GTX 650, FX-6300, and 8 GB of ram (1x8 1600 DDR3-- part of a deal, or I'd by two sticks) will I be able to handle large battles at 1024 768? Does anyone have experience on a similar machine?