We have detected that cookies are not enabled on your browser. Please enable cookies to ensure the proper experience.
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4
Results 76 to 82 of 82
  1. #76
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Lappeenranta, Finland
    Posts
    154
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowlock View Post
    I don't mean this facetiously. I would find it helpful, if I were to invest in say a better graphics card than the one I have now, if I knew what it would do for me in LOTRO terms. I have a GTX 650 right now, but I haven't upgraded because LOTRO seems to run ultra high at least as well as anyone else I know. But if Turbine can tell me that this will improve pvmp experience, I would be down for a change, and tell my kinsman that they may want to check into this which might cause them to return to LOTRO.
    I run pvmp ultra high with a overclocked 650ti 2 GB 1920-1080 with average of 30 fps although i usually play with 12 + or - 4 other people against 12 + or - 4 people. I would not know about big raids of 24 plus men vs 24 plus. I get 60 FPS on very high if i turn of portrait frame BTW.
    I think something like a 770 or even a titan would do miles better than 30 fps 1920-1080 ultrahigh if you have the money.

  2. #77
    Quote Originally Posted by Awenir24 View Post
    I'm not sure that the words "recommended" and "Vista" should be used in the same sentence.....
    Let me fix that.

    Vista should never be recommended.

    Better?

  3. #78
    Quote Originally Posted by cdq1958 View Post
    Crell, I read that as the original Pentium 4 CPU, which was single core, if I am not mistaken. I think the 3GHz is a typo for 2GHz, but I may be wrong about that as well. When the original P4 was launched, you could get one with a 2GHz clock.
    I read it the same way. Intel made a Pentium 4 processor with hyperthreading technology and I had one that ran at 3.0 Ghz. The game ran great on that older system of mine.
    [SIZE=3][COLOR=#a52a2a]I want my signature panel back[/COLOR][/SIZE]

  4. #79
    Maybe back then, but the larger towns in Rohan and newer regions require signifficantly more CPU power for the same framerates as the old ones. And for those wondering, even the (at launch) slowest Core 2 Duo at just 1.86GHz kicked the but of every Pentium 4 (and yes that includes all the dual-core Pentium D variants), only for the 3.73GHz Pentium Extreme Edition you could maybe call it a tie.

    So I really don't think it's a mistake that the recommended Core 2 Duo has "only" 2.66GHz, while the minimum Pentium 4 is now 3GHz.
    It'd need at least some hypothetical 5GHz Pentium 4 to replace a Core 2 Duo E6700.

    If you want some nostalgia, just read through reviews like this one:
    http://www.anandtech.com/show/2045
    PyLotRO with Python 3.x support and bugfixes: [url]https://github.com/Lynx3d/pylotro[/url]

  5. #80
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    139
    Quote Originally Posted by Sapience View Post
    New Recommended System Requirements

    • OS: Windows Vista 64-bit
    • CPU: Dual Core 2.66 GHZ
    • System Memory: 2GB
    • Graphics Cards: 512MB dedicated discrete card
    • Internet Connection: Cable or DSL Connection
    • Disk Space: 20 GB (+3 GB for international Clients)


    Please keep in mind that these are requirements we feel should allow you to run the game reliably at low to moderate settings. If you wish to experience the game at the highest settings, additional system memory and higher end graphics cards should be considered.

    I haven't read all posts in this thread, so maybe this has already been mentioned in here:

    Vista, seriously ???

    I mean: it is one of the worst Window versions.
    In my experience the older Windows XP outperforms Vista.
    My alarm tried to wake me this morning.
    Things escalated and now my alarm is broken and I am awake. . .
    Not quite sure who won . . . .

  6. #81
    Quote Originally Posted by Tardall View Post
    Vista, seriously ???
    The 64-bit part is what's important. Vista was the first Windows to have a mainstream 64-bit version. XP did have a 64-bit version but it wasn't easily obtainable by most consumers, driver support was very sparse and it could have some odd quirks with games. Also Vista wasn't quite as bad after it's first service pack if you ran it on current hardware. (Windows 7 is still the better choice, however.)

  7. #82
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    5,577
    Quote Originally Posted by Tardall View Post
    I haven't read all posts in this thread, so maybe this has already been mentioned in here:

    Vista, seriously ???

    I mean: it is one of the worst Window versions.
    In my experience the older Windows XP outperforms Vista.
    Not on 64 bit systems nor for multi-threaded applications on dual-core or better processors.
    "No sadder words of tongue or pen are the words: 'Might have been'." -- John Greenleaf Whittier
    "Do or do not. There is no try." -- Yoda
    On planet Earth, there is a try.
    Indeed, in a world and life full of change, the only constant is human nature (A is A, after all :P).
    We old vets need to keep in mind those who come after us.

 

 
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

This form's session has expired. You need to reload the page.

Reload