The specs needed aren't so bad,i'll try to upgrade my computer up to at least a little more of the recommended specs when it will be out.
UT2007 Hardware Requirements?
- Thread starter hal
- Start date
-
Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.
Yes, I was expecting something higher, so that's a relief.
I should be able to play it no problem at High and/or Medium though.
I should be able to play it no problem at High and/or Medium though.
Last edited:
Dark Pulse
Dolla, Dolla. Holla, Holla.
Hmm, let's see.
CPU: Whoa now. My poor Athlon XP 3000+ (2.2 Ghz) is out of the running for this thing, but I expected that, to be dead honest.
RAM: I got a Gig. I'm fine.
Videocard: 6800 GT clocked up to Ultra speeds. I'm fine here, though I also wouldn't mind a 7800.
PPU: I'll want one of these if they're out at that time.
It's still gonna cost me a pretty penny to upgrade though. A new CPU means a new Mobo...
CPU: Whoa now. My poor Athlon XP 3000+ (2.2 Ghz) is out of the running for this thing, but I expected that, to be dead honest.
RAM: I got a Gig. I'm fine.
Videocard: 6800 GT clocked up to Ultra speeds. I'm fine here, though I also wouldn't mind a 7800.
PPU: I'll want one of these if they're out at that time.
It's still gonna cost me a pretty penny to upgrade though. A new CPU means a new Mobo...
Was really expecting you to need a meaner system than this...
I presume this must be to run in 1024x768 or maybe 1280x768..
I can probs run on medium / high with what i got at the moment, yet i have to run Fear on medium settings.
I presume this must be to run in 1024x768 or maybe 1280x768..
I can probs run on medium / high with what i got at the moment, yet i have to run Fear on medium settings.
Thanks for finding that for me, but I'm not sure if you got what I meant. That page just compares Athlons to each other unless I missed something, but what I'd like to know is which Athlon processors are equivalent to a 3-4ghz Intel. I'm already aware recent Athlons are a lot faster than equivalent clockspeed Intels (hence none of the non-M2s rising above 2.8ghz or so), I just don't know how much by.The Jackal-XMP said:
(I won't risk calling Intel processors "Pentiums", I lost track of their bizarre naming schemes years ago ;P)
Last edited:
BlackDragon323
Free Citizen of the World
tool said:
I was just thinking the other day as I was trying to finish Doom3 (which I still haven't): I'm walking through the game on High Detail. I see tons of wall textures, desk and computer models....and it looks very very crappy and "old".
I was playing Quack(sic)4 and noticed how ugly the floor/ground textures are. I come across some computer or something and noticed how awful and low res and PIXELATED it looked. To clarify: I run both at High Quality with AA maxxed out, so you would think there would be no reason to see crappy textures and such.
This is the reason why there are only 3 games using the Doom3 engine (D3,Quack4,Prey)---and why everyone has signed up to use UE3.
WHen Unreal 2k7 (they need to change the naming) comes out it will SO blow the Doom 3 engine outta the water.
I remember seeing a pic of Cliffy at some convention somewhere with his middle finger up and the question was "what do you think of the Doom3 engine".
Funny how that D3 engine got SO hyped...all for nothing. Carmack is not this "god" that people keep claming he is to be. (sic)
Granted the requirements for UT2k7 will be high, but why not? it IS the next true generation of graphics and why limit yourself to the lowest common denominator so anyone with an older/crappy computer can run it as well? (a la Doom3)
On a side note, does anyone know what the timetable for UT2k7 is at this point? Is it going to be like 2k4 where we might see a demo around March-April of next year??
Last edited:
BlackDragon323
Free Citizen of the World
Polycron said:
Get a job like everyone else?
just teasing...sort of...
;D
Dark Pulse
Dolla, Dolla. Holla, Holla.
The problem with the Doom 3 Engine is actually its limits.
1) Levels are entirely BSP. This is why you need such a super huge processor to run it and the videocard is more or less an afterthought.
2) Textures are 256x256. This was the standard about... 6, 7 years ago. UT and Quake 3 used 256x256 textures.
3) The bumpmapping on the textures really suck.
Now, I like Doom 3, but there's no doubt that id has truly lost its position as "The Leader" - something Epic has now taken, and I'm really looking foward to the next half-decade or so pretty much being ruled by Epic's Engines.
Of course, eventually they'll be toppled... and I'd like to see who it will be to do so, because they're going to have to have some pretty mindblowing **** at the clip Epic's going at. Let's not forget UnrealEngine 4 is in the R&D stage, kids.
1) Levels are entirely BSP. This is why you need such a super huge processor to run it and the videocard is more or less an afterthought.
2) Textures are 256x256. This was the standard about... 6, 7 years ago. UT and Quake 3 used 256x256 textures.
3) The bumpmapping on the textures really suck.
Now, I like Doom 3, but there's no doubt that id has truly lost its position as "The Leader" - something Epic has now taken, and I'm really looking foward to the next half-decade or so pretty much being ruled by Epic's Engines.
Of course, eventually they'll be toppled... and I'd like to see who it will be to do so, because they're going to have to have some pretty mindblowing **** at the clip Epic's going at. Let's not forget UnrealEngine 4 is in the R&D stage, kids.
U
Unregistered
Guest
@BlackDragon232
So you forgot about the CryTek engine, the HL2-engine? Come on, don't pretent IdSoftware and Epic are the only 2 companies who are making decent shooters / engines. And for the record, the Doom engine is allready 1,5 years old, the UT2007 engine is still in development (and therefor not yet released). You are comparing UT99 with Quake 2.
Althrough I am looking forward to this magnificent game. I'm willing to buy a new configuration (like a AMD X2 with 64 bit instructions). My Athlon64 with OC'ed 6800 GT is running the current games fine, but I guess my rig is not going to like this engine. =)
So you forgot about the CryTek engine, the HL2-engine? Come on, don't pretent IdSoftware and Epic are the only 2 companies who are making decent shooters / engines. And for the record, the Doom engine is allready 1,5 years old, the UT2007 engine is still in development (and therefor not yet released). You are comparing UT99 with Quake 2.
Althrough I am looking forward to this magnificent game. I'm willing to buy a new configuration (like a AMD X2 with 64 bit instructions). My Athlon64 with OC'ed 6800 GT is running the current games fine, but I guess my rig is not going to like this engine. =)
Hmmm, the exact date I got my current system is... 05-07-2002 (or 07/05/2002 USA).
I have put off buying new hardware for more than 3 years now, and I'll only have to do it for a little (?) longer.
Not that much came out that warranted spending a lot of money for new hardware; I have been playing some somewhat older games that amused me just the same, and were cheaper at by then as well.
I'll just buy Half-Life 2 and Doom 3 after I finally do upgrade near UT2007's release, when they will be cheaper as well.
I'm glad I had the patience now, otherwise I would've needed to upgrade soon again as well.
I have put off buying new hardware for more than 3 years now, and I'll only have to do it for a little (?) longer.
Not that much came out that warranted spending a lot of money for new hardware; I have been playing some somewhat older games that amused me just the same, and were cheaper at by then as well.
I'll just buy Half-Life 2 and Doom 3 after I finally do upgrade near UT2007's release, when they will be cheaper as well.
I'm glad I had the patience now, otherwise I would've needed to upgrade soon again as well.
I just made enough money working around the house for quarters since last year and saved enough for a high end video card which all I need........ Thank yee
mommy and poppy!!
mommy and poppy!!
Well I think Doom3 hinted at that, and Quake4 pretty much confirmed that id has lost it's crown.
Anyways, something less OT, as someone else was asking earlier and didn't get a good response, does anyone know what the equivalent CPU specs are for the AMD64 line? Those are definitely Intel specs there.
Anyways, something less OT, as someone else was asking earlier and didn't get a good response, does anyone know what the equivalent CPU specs are for the AMD64 line? Those are definitely Intel specs there.
Dark Pulse said:
U
Unregistered
Guest
Retodon8 said:
This is so true, if you don't head straight in the upgrade melee each year you can get so much good older games that are quite cheap (see: ebay) and run them on full detail. I just recently upgraded my old box (pentium 2, tnt2) to a 1.2ghz amd/geforce 5200 and it was mighty cheap. I spent roughly £80 on it, new motherboard/processor/harddisk.
Retodon8 said:
This is so true, if you don't head straight in the upgrade melee each year you can get so much good older games that are quite cheap (see: ebay) and run them on full detail. I just recently upgraded my old box (pentium 2, tnt2) to a 1.2ghz amd/geforce 5200 and it was mighty cheap. I spent roughly £80 on it, new motherboard/processor/harddisk.
War Tourist disagrees with those system requirements.
http://www.ataricommunity.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=501050
http://www.ataricommunity.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=501050
About the Intel vs AMD...
I can say that from my experience, if you take an AMD and an Intel of the exact same PRICE (NOT same clock speed or "naming" convention, e.g 3000+ is NOT equal to a 3000mhz P4), the AMD will come out faster for games. Also the other hardware (mobo and ram) will cost less for the AMD than Intel compatable stuff.
BUT for some other tasks such as video encoding or 3dsmax render are faster with the Intel, because of various diferences in the micro-architecture and the raw power of the clock speed etc.
I think this is still true today with most of their CPUs. You can check out a gaming benchmark of a 3.2Ghz P4 vs Athlon64 3500+ here:
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1854788,00.asp
And also a shootout between the big guns, P4 3.2Ghz dual core Extreme Edition vs Athlon64 X2 4800+ is here:
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1860211,00.asp
So to answer your question: The prices are a pretty good measure to see which Intel and AMD cpus are equivalent - 3.2Ghz P4 is about the same as Athlon64 3500+ though the Athlon is a little faster for games, and maybe the Intel is faster for other things.
I can say that from my experience, if you take an AMD and an Intel of the exact same PRICE (NOT same clock speed or "naming" convention, e.g 3000+ is NOT equal to a 3000mhz P4), the AMD will come out faster for games. Also the other hardware (mobo and ram) will cost less for the AMD than Intel compatable stuff.
BUT for some other tasks such as video encoding or 3dsmax render are faster with the Intel, because of various diferences in the micro-architecture and the raw power of the clock speed etc.
I think this is still true today with most of their CPUs. You can check out a gaming benchmark of a 3.2Ghz P4 vs Athlon64 3500+ here:
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1854788,00.asp
And also a shootout between the big guns, P4 3.2Ghz dual core Extreme Edition vs Athlon64 X2 4800+ is here:
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1860211,00.asp
So to answer your question: The prices are a pretty good measure to see which Intel and AMD cpus are equivalent - 3.2Ghz P4 is about the same as Athlon64 3500+ though the Athlon is a little faster for games, and maybe the Intel is faster for other things.