PDA

View Full Version : Processor for WAR



Wardog
2008-10-01, 02:25 PM
Can someone with good techie knowledge tell me what processors are "equivilent" to a 2.4GHz P4 (single core)?

I bought WAR last weekend, but my computer (Dell Inspiron 9400) isn't quite powerful enough to run it. (It goes slowly even at the lowest graphical settings, and crashes every 5 to 10 minutes).

I have the minimum required memory (1Gb)
I have a better-than-required graphics card (256Mb Radeon Monile X1400 vs 128 Mb minimum).

My processor is 1.83GHz dual-core.

I'm guessing it is this that is the weak point, but I have been unable to find out what difference having a dual core chip makes to the effective speed/power of the processor.

So can anyone advise me on what would be the best upgrade to get (without spending too much money)?

(And, indeed, if a processor upgrade is the best way to go, or if it might be the memory that is the problem).

Crispy Dave
2008-10-01, 02:54 PM
acualy the thing that will help you the most is probley another gig or ram

Mando Knight
2008-10-01, 03:22 PM
It's definitely the RAM, you'll never want to go with the minimum, especially if you happen to be running Vista (1 gig RAM on Vista is the bare minimum for the OS...), and a couple gigs extra won't hurt. 2 or 3 is good, 4 or more will ensure that whatever the problem is, it's not the amount of RAM available. For another few years, at least...

Saithis Bladewing
2008-10-01, 03:58 PM
I think your processor is fine, as others have said, get your RAM sorted first.

Destro_Yersul
2008-10-01, 04:15 PM
Aye. I've got 2GB of it, and it's still a little slow. My processor is a good one, so I know it ain't that.

AMD's X2 6000+ Dual Core, for anyone who was wondering. Clocks in at around 3GHz. And my Graphics card is Nvidia's 5500, which is more than adequate, even if it is on the low end of usable now.

Erloas
2008-10-01, 04:26 PM
While you could use another GB of RAM, it might be your video card that is the problem. The x1400 isn't very powerful, if you look at the minimum requirements posted by Mythic they skip over the x1400. Not sure if it is worse then the x1300, but considering that it is a laptop card rather then a desktop card, and they are always less powerful then their desktop equivelents. At very least the video card is at the very low end of what will work.

More RAM is going to help, but I can't say how much it is going to help. Although the game does seem to be much more CPU and RAM bound then GPU bound.
Of course you can't switch out a laptop video card. I would recommend getting 2GB of memory anyway, with it being as cheap as it is and having an impovement on everything you do with the computer. You might still be having issues though, its hard to say for sure.

warty goblin
2008-10-01, 05:44 PM
Can someone with good techie knowledge tell me what processors are "equivilent" to a 2.4GHz P4 (single core)?

I bought WAR last weekend, but my computer (Dell Inspiron 9400) isn't quite powerful enough to run it. (It goes slowly even at the lowest graphical settings, and crashes every 5 to 10 minutes).

I have the minimum required memory (1Gb)
I have a better-than-required graphics card (256Mb Radeon Monile X1400 vs 128 Mb minimum).

My processor is 1.83GHz dual-core.

I'm guessing it is this that is the weak point, but I have been unable to find out what difference having a dual core chip makes to the effective speed/power of the processor.

So can anyone advise me on what would be the best upgrade to get (without spending too much money)?

(And, indeed, if a processor upgrade is the best way to go, or if it might be the memory that is the problem).

Could be the graphics card as well. Many games don't support mobile chipsets for whatever reason. Not sure about WAR, but it might be worth looking into.

Tengu_temp
2008-10-01, 05:48 PM
I bought WAR last weekend, but my computer sn't quite powerful enough to run it.

I think a machine that lets you run WAR smoothly on max settings has yet to be made.

Forthork
2008-10-01, 08:56 PM
Unless its a Pentium D, a dual-core at 1.83 ghz is faster than a Pentium 4 2.4, not because it is dual-core, but because newer processors are more efficient per mhz. Intel's core2duo is about twice as efficient, and AMD's dual cores are about 1.5 or more times as efficient as a Pentium 4. It is your RAM and graphics card that are causing the problems.

Saithis Bladewing
2008-10-01, 09:49 PM
I think a machine that lets you run WAR smoothly on max settings has yet to be made.

There is always a machine to do it, the only question is how much money are you willing to sink into the bastard...

Wardog
2008-10-02, 03:56 AM
Thank's guys.

That was about 10 times more information (and 10 times quicker) than what I got asking either the EU or US official tech support.