Hardware & Technical Users System Specs

Sir.Tj

The Moderator who shall not be Blamed....
Volunteer Moderator
Sir.Tj
Sparticus said:
I will be testing this jigger in a few days when it arrives.

• CPU: Intel Core i7 4770K
• CPU Cooling: NZXT Kraken X40 140mm AIO Liquid CPU Cooler
• Motherboard: ASRock Z87 Killer Motherboard
• Graphics: Gigabyte GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB
• Memory: G.Skill Sniper F3-1866C10D-16GSR (2x8GB) 16GB DDR3
• Solid State Drive: Intel 530 Series 120GB SSD
• Hard Drive: Seagate Barracuda 2TB ST2000DM001
• Optical Drive: Pioneer DVR-220LBKS Black 24x DVDRW Drive
• Case: NZXT H630 Case Matte Black
• Power Supply: Seasonic G-650 80Plus Gold 650W
• Operating System: Microsoft Windows 8.1 64bit
2 x BenQ RL2455HM 24in LED Gaming Monitor's


PCCG-STLTH1111ss.jpg


Monitor

RL2455HM-FEATURE.jpg

It is replacing a

HP xw4600 Workstation ( purchased in 2008 )
Intel Core 2 Duo E8500 3.16 6MB/1333 CPU
HP 4GB (2x2GB) DDR2-800 ECC RAM
ASUS GeForce GT630 (902MHz), 2GB GDDR3 (1800MHz), PCI-E 2.0, Heatsink, DVI, HDMI, VGA
:D
Click to expand...


That is very nice, I'm now looking into upgrading. Looking to source a quadcore 775, a bit more memory and a reasonable Gfx card to keep me going until I can afford afford a better rig. Ebay here I come. :D

Theres some nice stuff out there at the moment. :cool:
 

Sparticus

Sparticus
T.j said:
That is very nice, I'm now looking into upgrading. Looking to source a quadcore 775, a bit more memory and a reasonable Gfx card to keep me going until I can afford afford a better rig. Ebay here I come. :D

Theres some nice stuff out there at the moment. :cool:
Click to expand...

Thanks TJ - Like I posted in an other thread reply to you - I had to make budgeting changes to afford it.
 

Kleinholz

K
Judging by what people posted in that spreadsheet till now most of the players won't have problems playing the game, i guess. I just wonder if these setups are representative for a larger crowd. Having some of the less-performing in there might help getting a bigger picture.

I'd also suggest to format all components properly (CPU & GPU) for people to be able to sort the tables. I took the liberty of unifying some of the formats (not done yet). Should be easier to look through when ready :)
 

Asp Explorer

Asp Explorer
Slawkenbergius said:
It's' odd that you get higher scores for physics than me, even though our CPU and RAM specs are similar. Wonder what affects that.
Click to expand...

I have no idea, but I'm open to testing and discussion to find out.
I hope to get my current project finished today, once that's done and the VM's are on another machine, I'll be reformatting this one and can test pretty much at any stage.
 

rab

R
It is really good being able to look through that spread sheet at all the different set setups thank you for taking the time to set it up :)

Cant wait to see how they all compare performance wise in the game.
 

Aewarin Jameson

Aewarin Jameson
Slawkenbergius said:
It's' odd that you get higher scores for physics than me, even though our CPU and RAM specs are similar. Wonder what affects that.
Click to expand...

I am sure a fair bit will depend upon what you have installed and is running in the background taking up precious CPU cycles. Different driver versions will affect things too.
 

Capt. Hook

Capt. Hook
Liqua said:
I am sure a fair bit will depend upon what you have installed and is running in the background taking up precious CPU cycles. Different driver versions will affect things too.
Click to expand...

I think I read somewhere that anti-virus programs and auto updaters can be a real pig when it comes to slowing a system down.

I moved to Kapersky as I found it least intrusive and system delaying but it too can have its moments
 

Commander Mick

Commander Mick
Liqua said:
I have a suggestion for you, but to be truely effective we need FD / Michaels help on this.

Listing components in a spreadsheet is a great start but with so many variants out there - manufacturers; basic clock speeds; drivers and settings - it can be difficult to make an informed decision.

What we need is a standard to judge against ... cue Heaven (3DMark you need to pay for)

It's free, tests DX11, takes up approx 250Mb of HDD space and the test lasts 260 seconds.

If we all run this test and record the results, including Michael on his minimum spec machine, then you have a like for like test to compare against.


Download the software, run it, and set the following:
  • Preset: Custom
  • API: DirectX11 (as FD are only supporting this)
  • Quality: Low (to give low end users a chance)
  • Tessellation / 3D / Multi-monitor / Anti-aliasing: off
  • Full screen: ticked
  • Resolution : 1280x800 (closest one to the minimum Michael said)
Hit RUN .. click the sound button at the top to silence it, then press benchmark. 260 seconds later you will get some results:


My laptop, for instance:
  • FPS: 108.3
  • Score: 2728
  • Min FPS: 9.4
  • Max FPS: 172.5
This should give your spreadsheet a standardised result column for comparison purposes.
Click to expand...

I followed the link and download the free version of Heaven and ran it.

First with sound with your requested specifications and then after rereading your post correctly. I ran it without sound, but same ads before.....

Unigine Heaven Benchmark 4.0​

FPS:
4.4
Score:
110
Min FPS:
2.8
Max FPS:
6.3
System
Platform:
Windows 7 (build 7601, Service Pack 1) 32bit
CPU model:
Pentium(R) Dual-Core CPU T4200 @ 2.00GHz (1994MHz) x2
GPU model:
NVIDIA GeForce G 105M 7.15.11.7930 (512MB) x1
Settings
Render:
Direct3D11
Mode:
1280x768 fullscreen
Preset
Custom
Quality
Low
Tessellation: Disabled​

Of course, I already know the Elite - Dangerous - Alpha/Beta won't be playable on my system if it even runs at all.
 

Razorwire

Razorwire
Heaven 4 Benchmark scores

FPS: 167.3
Score: 4214
Min FPS: 31.6
Max FPS: 298.9

on the settings suggested.

Just for shiggles, I also ran it on the Extreme pre-set (with the sound on)...

FPS: 24.0
Score: 604
Min FPS: 6.1
Max FPS: 60.6

I was thinking of upgrading my machine, maybe I'll upgrade my car instead... :D
 

Sir.Tj

The Moderator who shall not be Blamed....
Volunteer Moderator
Sir.Tj
Commander Mick said:
I followed the link and download the free version of Heaven and ran it.

First with sound with your requested specifications and then after rereading your post correctly. I ran it without sound, but same ads before.....

Unigine Heaven Benchmark 4.0​

FPS:
4.4
Score:
110
Min FPS:
2.8
Max FPS:
6.3
System
Platform:
Windows 7 (build 7601, Service Pack 1) 32bit
CPU model:
Pentium(R) Dual-Core CPU T4200 @ 2.00GHz (1994MHz) x2
GPU model:
NVIDIA GeForce G 105M 7.15.11.7930 (512MB) x1
Settings
Render:
Direct3D11
Mode:
1280x768 fullscreen
Preset
Custom
Quality
Low
Tessellation: Disabled​

Of course, I already know the Elite - Dangerous - Alpha/Beta won't be playable on my system if it even runs at all.
Click to expand...


Hi mick,

I've removed the extra blank lines for you, the post was a bit on the long side. :D
 

Commander Mick

Commander Mick
Razorwire said:
Heaven 4 Benchmark scores

FPS: 167.3
Score: 4214
Min FPS: 31.6
Max FPS: 298.9

on the settings suggested.

Just for shiggles, I also ran it on the Extreme pre-set (with the sound on)...

FPS: 24.0
Score: 604
Min FPS: 6.1
Max FPS: 60.6

I was thinking of upgrading my machine, maybe I'll upgrade my car instead... :D
Click to expand...

I tried everything at full-bore and my machine paused for longer time and than just gave me image within of floating town that was frozen. It took a while for this one frame to fully render, but there was part of brick wall, a railing and some nice trees.
 

Flak

Flak
Details added to spreadsheet. All we need now is some FPS values from ED to drop in there :D

3DMark 11 Scores

Score : P11937
Graphics Score : 12390
Physics Score : 11061
Combined Score : 10335
 
Last edited:

Capt. Hook

Capt. Hook
Flak said:
Details added to spreadsheet. All we need now is some FPS values from ED to drop in there :D
Click to expand...

Jax came up with the following earlier:

Just had a browse around on the Futuremark site and the estimated graphics score of a GTX 285 in 3DMark 11 is:

2910
 

el_tel

el_tel
Benchmarks

Regarding the benchmark columns, it's not possible to run every benchmark at the resolution contained in column Q (Graphics Settings), so the results are currently not useful because they're more ambiguous than they need be.

I suggest we keep the column Q for the resolution at which we plan to run ED (which will have a bearing on the FPS column), and use a set of standard settings for each benchmark (with a different group for each benchmark).
For example, I ran Heaven at the basic settings originally recommended by Liqua, which were derived from what MB wrote. These settings aim to replicate the minimum spec as closely as possible.

Preset: Custom
API: DirectX11 (as FD are only supporting this)
Quality: Low (to give low end users a chance)
Tessellation / 3D / Multi-monitor / Anti-aliasing: off
Full screen: ticked
Resolution : 1280x720*

I posted these settings as a comment in the column header for Heaven but it got deleted :smilie:

If I remember correctly, the settings for 3DMark11 Basic were more limited, but the (fixed) resolution was different at least, so that column would have it's own settings.

If we all use the same settings for each benchmark, then the results will be more useful (comparison is the key I think).

Just my 2p worth.

*Liqua said 1280x800 originally, but I found 1280x720 on my PC, so I changed it. Maybe these should be considered 'ideal' settings, so everyone could aim to get as close as possible.
 

tsh

T
Windows machine:
FPS 6.2, score 155
HD3400/PhenomII 720 (2800 MHz x3)

Linux machine (openGL, other settings same)
FPS 31.3, score 789
HD7660/A10-5700 (3400 MHz x4)

So some upgrading looks necessary
 

Serpentstar

S
And people are hoping that a 32bit OS will run this? Really? It can't even get full use out of 4 gb of ram, let along a bare minimum 8....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom