Ship Simulator
English forum => Ship Simulator 2008 => General discussions => Topic started by: 02ian on December 26, 2009, 18:11:40
-
merry christmas everyone...
just wanted to ask a quick question regarding system requirements
i'm planning on a buying a new laptop, because my current one is unable to cope with the high graphical requirements of certain pieces of software (including ship sim)
my current laptop specs:
intel core 2 duo T5550
(1.83Ghz 667Mhz 2MB)
2GB DDR2 Ram
120GB HDD
Vista
with this i can run ship sim, i can even turn on player wakes, provided i set view distance to minium and make sure the weather is sunny, multiplayer has so much lag its untolerable (at least to the other players who on my screen are still 2km's away, but in (virtual) reality are 1/2 Meter to port)
i have similar issues with other games, which is not suprising since most of the time i either barely meet or am under the system requirements
but i've had enough, its time for an upgrade
using a selection of my higest spec games as a reference, i can see that the main area i'm lacking in is clock speed (either that or the specs on the box are incorrect)
so i went out to look on the net for a laptop with a higher clock speed, but i havant been able to track down much more than 2.16Ghz (Intel Pentium Dual-Core processor T4300) that fits within my kinda price range £500 ish
having checked the specs on shipsim new horizons it needs 2.4ghz pentium 4
so bascially what i want to ask is... with a laptop like this:
* Intel Pentium Dual-Core processor T4300
* (2.10Ghz, 800Mhz, 1MB Cache)
* Genuine Windows(R) 7 Home Premium
* 4GB Memory
* 500GB Hard drive
http://www.pcworld.co.uk/martprd/product/seo/590597#productInformationSection
or like this
* Intel Pentium Dual-Core processor T4300
* (2.16Ghz, 667Mhz, 1MB Cache)
* Genuine Windows(R) 7 Home Premium
* 4GB Memory
* 320GB Hard drive
http://www.pcworld.co.uk/martprd/store/pcw_page.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@0015513880.1261843876@@@@&BV_EngineID=ccchadejehjllldcflgceggdhhmdfok.0&page=Product&fm=null&sm=null&tm=null&sku=822766&category_oid=#productInformationSection
would i be able to run ship sim and other games of similar quality, at a resonable level of detail, ie with no lag, and several kms view distance, wakes etc or do i need to spend more?
any suggestions would be appreciated
many thanks
02ian
-
Yep. you need a better CPU. 2,4 at least
i have 1,6 :C :'( so im unable to play ss08
-
If you search on Google for 'Custom Build Laptop' then you can find several sites where you can make your own laptop. I have used PC Specialist (www.pcspecialist.co.uk) to do 3 different laptop configurations for you. The reasons that they are so expensive is that laptops cost a lot more for better quality. It's alot cheaper to get a PC instead, even WITH roughly the same specs. My brother paid the same amount (roughly £1000 pounds, like our first two options here) for a PC with much better specs (GTX 280 1GB video card, 12GHz Quad Core Processor, 4 giant fans, giant case, brilliant ASUS motherboard, disk drive, everything a computer needs. And he put it all together himself in 4 hours!)
£1032 inc VAT and Delivery is a very good (custom specced by me) StyleNote 17N laptop. Here is a picture of the specifications:
(http://img63.imageshack.us/img63/9186/stylenote17n.jpg)
£1072 inc VAT and Delivery is a very good (custom specced by me) 18.4" screen Viper laptop. The only differences here are the better graphics system with a more economical use of your CPU (processor) and the 802.11n wireless for faster wireless (where available).
Specs:
(http://img690.imageshack.us/img690/791/18viper.jpg)
£990 inc VAT and Delivery is our cheapest option. The difference here is that the card is not Nvidia like the other two, but a 512mb (good) ATI card. This also has the 802.11n wireless.
Specs:
(http://img31.imageshack.us/img31/1458/156enigma.jpg)
Hope that helps, James
-
in the intrest of saving myself a few bob (since as an apprentice i don't even earn minimum wage)
how do these specs for a desktop sound?
Operating system Genuine Windows (R) 7 Home Premium
Operating system mode 64-bit
Processor brand Intel
Processor model Core 2 Quad
Processor Number Q8300
Processor clock speed 2.5GHz
Processor cache 4MB
RAM memory size 4GB
RAM memory type DDR2
RAM memory clock speed 800MHz
Hard drive capacity 640GB
Hard Drive Spin Speed 7200rpm
First hard drive interface SATA
would they run shipsim ok?
-
You need a better video card and a better processor. Processor needs to be about 3 GHz. About 256mb video card will probably max out all the details on SS, (and is cheaper) but I think it'll be hard finding a site where you can get a good laptop with a 256mb video card. Usually they jump the gun to 3xxmb or 5xxmb.
-
each time you post the specs you dont post anything about the graphics card.. thats almost the most important part that tells you weather you can run ship sim good or not along with the processor and RAM
-
* AMD Phenom X4 9650 Quad-Core processor
* (2.3GHz, 2MB Cache)
* Genuine Windows(R) 7 Home Premium 64-bit
* 4GB DDR2 memory
* 640GB hard drive
* 512MB ATI Radeon HD4350 graphics
* DVD Rewriter
* Built-in wireless (802.11b/g)
how about this one?
-
Good but it needs a faster processor (about 3.0 Ghz) then it will be perfect. You SHOULD be able to have SS on full everything smootly! I have a 6Ghz, 2GB RAM, three hundred and something mb video card and SS runs beautifully maxed out, so provided you have a processor over 3.0 Ghz, you're fine!
-
Processor (CPU) Intel® Core™i7 Processor i7-960 (3.20GHz) 4.8GTs/8MB Cache
Memory (RAM) 6GB CORSAIR XMS3 TRI-DDR3 1333MHz - LIFETIME WARRANTY
Motherboard GIGABYTE GA-EX58-UD3R:DDR3, 2-Way SLI & CrossFireX
Operating System Genuine Windows 7 Home Premium 64 Bit - inc DVD & Licence (£79)
USB Options 8 x USB 2.0 PORTS (6 REAR + 2 FRONT) AS STANDARD
Memory - 1st Hard Disk 640GB SERIAL ATA 3-Gb/s HARD DRIVE WITH 16MB CACHE (7,200rpm)
1st DVD/BLU-RAY Drive 22x DUAL LAYER DVD WRITER ±R/±RW/RAM
Graphics Card 1GB ATI RADEONâ„¢ HD 4670 PCI EXPRESS
Sound Card ONBOARD 8 CHANNEL (7.1) HIGH DEF AUDIO (AS STANDARD)
Network Facilities WIRELESS N 300Mbps PCI CARD (£16)
Case COOLERMASTER SILEO 500 QUIET MID TOWER CASE
Power Supply & Case Cooling 600W Quiet Quad Rail PSU + 120mm Case Fan (£59)
Processor Cooling COOLERMASTER V8 EXTREME CPU COOLER - Experience the power of V8 (£49)
Firewire & Video Editing 1 x IEEE 1394a FIREWIRE PORT ONBOARD
Monitor 22 Inch Wide TFT Silver/Black 1680 x1050 5MS D-Sub, DVI (£125)
Keyboard & Mouse Logitech® Internet 350 USB Keyboard (£9)
Mouse Black Logitech® Optical Wheel Mouse USB (£4)
Speakers LOGITECH S120 2.0 BLACK SPEAKER SYSTEM (£7)
Surge Protection Belkin 4 Socket 2M Surge Protector with £25,000 Protection! (£8)
Warranty 1 Year Return-to-Base incl 1st Month Free Collect & Return
Delivery STANDARD INSURED DELIVERY TO UK MAINLAND (MON-FRI)
Build Time Standard Build - Approximately 6 to 9 working days
Quantity 1
£1278 inc VAT and Delivery.
how do these specs sound?
or are there any admendments you can suggest based on this?
-
Great Just like mine i have same graphics card and same procsser speed
-
and you can run ship sim at full potentional on that?
(also other software, particulary Trainz, MS Flight simX, other high graphic games?)
-
All of those, yes you can! Although because the processor is a little bit slow you may find FS X a bit laggy if you have it completely turned up, however I doubt you can find a processor you can fit in with all those specs the same. Go for it! Just be prepared not to have FS X on full blast detail. Otherwise that's perfect!
-
3.2ghz is not a slow processor, an intel core i7 is a quad core processor and intel doesn't make a processor that can go much faster, this one can go up to 3.46ghz with intel's turbo boost technology, other than overclocking you're not really going to find a faster quad core processor
-
Quad core? I thought this was Dual Core? I'm not saying it's slow... I'm saying it might mean that it's not capable of maxing out! (see below)
And anyway, on the back of my Flight Sim X box, it states that the minumum processor is 1.0 Ghz! Get out of it! Fat chance... I have a 6 Ghz Dual core and a three hundred and something mb video card and FSX is maxed out and goes perfectly. I'm just saying that Ian should not expect flat out perfect performance, but this doesn't mean he has to have the detail settings right low.
I suggest Ian, that you have the Graphics detail on 1 or 2 below max, aircraft on 1 or 2 below max, scenery on 1 below max or full, weather on 1 or 2 below max maybe full, and traffic on full. It MAY be possible you could go on max on more than just traffic (I mean you can definately).
Trainz should max out no problems. I used to play it, but abandoned it for Rail Works which I have everything maxed out on.
Good luck! :captain:
P.S. BE CAREFUL WITH WINDOWS 7! I suggest that you buy a copy of Windows Vista as well, 'just in case' as many games are known to have malfunctioned on Windows 7. I'd wait about 6 months ish for Windows 7 game patches, upgrades and games themselves to come out before using it. I suppose you could say that most companies haven't really prepared themselves for Windows 7 (as in game companies).
-
intel core i7 is a quad core processor, and with the specs ian posted above, that computer will perform better than yours. Since a 6ghz processor does not exist you must have an Intel core 2 duo running at 3ghz. The quad core is running at 3.2ghz, which is faster. He has a 512mb graphics card, yours is only 300 something. a 512mb card will perform better.
-
and you can run ship sim at full potentional on that?
(also other software, particulary Trainz, MS Flight simX, other high graphic games?)
Yes perfecctly I have FSX and Trainz2006 and Trainz Classics, Railworks (get it I just got it better that Trainz and MSTS), pirates of the Caribbean, and it all runs perfectly
-
intel core i7 is a quad core processor, and with the specs ian posted above, that computer will perform better than yours. Since a 6ghz processor does not exist you must have an Intel core 2 duo running at 3ghz. The quad core is running at 3.2ghz, which is faster. He has a 512mb graphics card, yours is only 300 something. a 512mb card will perform better.
No, Quad Core ISN'T better than a dual core, because most programs only use 1 or 2 cores meaning that potential is lost. You've gotta have a good processor to get the best out of your video card, and having a Quad Core 3.xx Ghz processor may not get the full potential of that 512mb. AND, it doesn't matter if he has more video RAM in his card than I do, beacuse as well as the processor, the card has to be efficient. Some cards eat your CPU for breakfast. Mine however, doesn't.
Technically 6Ghz processors DO exist, because processor speeds are said as a combined speed of all cores AS WELL AS the speed of each core and the number of cores.
:evil: :police:
-
i never specifically said 4 cores were better than 2, i prefer dual core over 4 as most programs as you said only use 1 to 2 cores. But the speed of the processor is fast than yours, the one ian posted above is a 3.2ghz and yours is a 3ghz. .2ghz isn't much but it can make a difference. The good thing about 4 cores is the un used cores can maintain normal computer functions while the other cores dedicate themselves to whatever program you're using. The memory a card has usually allows it to perform better, i only have a 256mb card, that 512mb card is going to perform better than mine. Some cards now have over 1 gig of memory allowing for excellent performance. The only time you have a 6ghz processor is if both 3ghz cores were running at maximum capacity which doesn't happen very often. and please dont use caps, it makes it seem as if you're shouting
-
i never specifically said 4 cores were better than 2, i prefer dual core over 4 as most programs as you said only use 1 to 2 cores. But the speed of the processor is fast than yours, the one ian posted above is a 3.2ghz and yours is a 3ghz. .2ghz isn't much but it can make a difference. The good thing about 4 cores is the un used cores can maintain normal computer functions while the other cores dedicate themselves to whatever program you're using. The memory a card has usually allows it to perform better, i only have a 256mb card, that 512mb card is going to perform better than mine. Some cards now have over 1 gig of memory allowing for excellent performance. The only time you have a 6ghz processor is if both 3ghz cores were running at maximum capacity which doesn't happen very often. and please dont use caps, it makes it seem as if you're shouting
No, mine is 2X 3 Ghz = 6Ghz max usage. ;D :doh:
BTW: I use CAPS as supposed to using italics. ;)
Processor power influences how much you can get out of your video card. :)
So who's right? :captain: !:)
-
I'm right, i'm in school for this stuff. People dont refer to processors by their maximum power as they're rarely at full capacity, so correct name would be a dual core processor running at 3ghz
-
I'm right, i'm in school for this stuff. People dont refer to processors by their maximum power as they're rarely at full capacity, so correct name would be a dual core processor running at 3ghz
How about going to school for Grammar? ;) :angel: :doh:
As I said in the other thread, everywhere I have seen a processor whether it's for sale or not, the power has been listed as the combined maximum power of all cores together.
-
i will speak however i want, dont start criticizing my typing. For future reference if you're gonna talk about processors use the format everyone is used to
-
i will speak however i want, dont start criticizing my typing. For future reference if you're gonna talk about processors use the format everyone is used to
I use the format that I want to use. I use the format that I see most commonly used on websites I go to. I use the format that I am used to.
-
How about going to school for Grammar? ;) :angel: :doh:
As I said in the other thread, everywhere I have seen a processor whether it's for sale or not, the power has been listed as the combined maximum power of all cores together.
Look once you know what your talking about come back to talk to us....Don't criticize others if you don't even know if what your saying is right or not
-
Look once you know what your talking about come back to talk to us....Don't criticize others if you don't even know if what your saying is right or not
Thank you very much, but I'll think you'll find I have my facts right. Oh, no I don't. Off I go...
Here I am again! Yes I did have them right, wanted to check with the big big cheese to make sure I wouldn't get spancked by all the geeks.
-
this confuses me, you continue to multiply all the cores together when even on intel's website its not listed like that...
-
That's your problem, not mine. Go sort it out or something, because I'm not doing anything about a problem that isn't mine in the first place.
-
Were just trying to correct you...if the processor is a 3 GHz processor and its a quad core it doesn't make it a 12GHz processor...its just not how it works
-
i agree with matt, and how can i fix something on intel's website when its the format we are all used to?
-
Well this is the first time I've ever heard/seen anybody refer to a processor power that way. In all my life it has always been the same. Even my techno wiz computer building brother always says the power in the maximum combined form.
-
Well apparently hes not a wiz because any idiot would know that you don't multiply it by the amount of cores
-
it just doesn't make sense.... Computers hardly ever run at full capacity and when they do they become sluggish, and if they're at maximum capacity it means they're working quite hard. Makes more sense to tell you how fast a single core is not the whole thing.
-
http://www.intel.com/products/processor/corei7ee/mobile/specifications.htm
I-7 up to 3.2GHz not 12.8GHz
-
I don't think so. I find it easier to know the full power of the processor so I can bear in mind how many of the cores and how much power would be used straight off with less maths... Every forum I've ever been on, bar this one, every member has stated their processor power the way I have here.
-
Who said anything about the I-7 being 12.8 Ghz?
-
upload your dxdiag and we'll see how they state the processor speed
Well obviously you did its a quad core running at 3.2 GHz so that MUST be 12.8 in your mind
-
could you guys just let it go? I agree that MC and Matt are right about it and so do many other. So what if someones doesn't agree? Just let him have his own opinion on it. You've tried, but it's not changing his mind, so there's nothing more that can be done, both parts have proven their point and further arguing wont get you any longer.
-
alright how about this, here is my dxdiag. I have an intel core 2 duo running at 2.5ghz and no where does it say i have a 5ghz processor
-
could you guys just let it go? I agree that MC and Matt are right about it and so do many other. So what if someones doesn't agree? Just let him have his own opinion on it. You've tried, but it's not changing his mind, so there's nothing more that can be done, both parts have proven their point and further arguing wont get you any longer.
Agreed :)
And Right-O Keane
-
could you guys just let it go? I agree that MC and Matt are right about it and so do many other. So what if someones doesn't agree? Just let him have his own opinion on it. You've tried, but it's not changing his mind, so there's nothing more that can be done, both parts have proven their point and further arguing wont get you any longer.
Thank God for that! Firestar has already pointed out how useless this is and I think you've matched him. I'm very easily aggrevated - if I'm in an arguement I'm determined not to lose it, even if there are xx times me on the 'other side'. My nature I suppose.
@Master Captain: Could be because of single core usage... Still, I get some programs which tell me exactly that in their system evaluation - but they don't actually pick up the second core in the first place.
-
what?? it says right in the dxdiag i'm using a dual core processor look
Processor: Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU T9300 @ 2.50GHz (2 CPUs), ~2.5GHz
The intel core 2 duo is a dual core processor, if you dont believe me go look it up on intel's website
-
Processor: Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU E7400 @ 2.80GHz (2 CPUs) Made it bigger in case you couldnt see it ;)
-
I kinda saw it... But I mean sometimes you don't get the power of both displayed, you get 'Dual Core' and only the power of 1 core. Sometimes you don't. Sometimes you get 'Dual core' and the combined power. Sometimes you don't get 'Dual core' and the power of 1 core. It depends what diag program you use, DxDiag being the most common I guess, giving you the results you posted.
e.g. I have a simulation game which sees both of my cores and displays their combined power. Another game I have, a racing game, is an older one so only sips power from one core, and only sees that core.
-
Is that so....so what your saying is that every computer in the world does it wrong?
-
yes, this is the standard thing people use, i have NEVER seen another diagnostic post like dxdiag... ever. Every single one has the processor the same way
-
I bet even in your dxdiag its like that why dont you check?
-
I bet even in your dxdiag its like that why dont you check?
Nope, I've already seen my DxDiag twice today, because two games I installed automatically do a DxDiag on their first run. Yes, it is how you say. But this brings you no further towards 'converting' me in an endless arguement which I thought had finished. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm off to bed (1:10 AM local time here) and to be honest I can't see why you're still trying to prove your point after TWO forum members have tried to intervene and get us to stop. Now, to put it quite bluntly, you shut up, and so will I. But then again, if you keep going on, you just make me more agitated, and then I will explode. (or I'll just ignore you and you'll get very bored of getting no replies) Which unless I do privately, will end up in me getting banned. And you can blame a bad history of parenting on my father's side for my impertinent, annoying, short fused nature. I'm now subject to it myself, and I pray that it stops with me.
-
ok well just post your dxdiag so we can see. Also we're not realy interested in your life story about parenting and such, and i will keep going until i feel i'm finished
-
Good Night :) ::)
-
ok well just post your dxdiag so we can see. Also we're not realy interested in your life story about parenting and such, and i will keep going until i feel i'm finished
Life story? Oh, you want more?
And what don't you understand? I said that my DxDiags BOTH said the processor power the way YOU say it! What the hell do you want now? You are not going to like what I say if you get on the wrong end of me. That's no threat, that's a damned fact.
To be honest, I think it's quite SAD that you are continuing your little campaing to 'convert' me. It really makes me wonder if you have NOTHING better to do in your life than play silly little arguements on forums. Get a grip, lad!
GOOD <insert 'something' here> NIGHT!
P.S. Thank you Capt Matt! I pronounce you sane.
-
P.S. Thank you Capt Matt! I pronounce you sane.
Why thank you...sweet dreams :) :lol:
-
Guys, why not explain to jammydodger, if you can penetrate, that most software cannot divide the load between cores, and uses only one of the cores. The effective speed is, then, the speed of a single core.
It is unlikely that all cores will be run continuously, so multiplying the speed of a single core by the number of cores is silly. As is arguing over how it may be stated by the DxDiag or by a manufacturer.
-
Good Point
-
thanks mvsmith, for putting it nice and simple
-
And I hope this clears everything up, including Master Captain's mouth.
*scribbles name of list of people who post in this thread*
-
Wait so you realize that the "Official" way to state the processor speed is not by multiplying the cores?
-
Wait so you realize that the "Official" way to state the processor speed is not by multiplying the cores?
That isn't what I'm saying. Yes I know that is a way it can be done. I still stand by my way of saying it. But what I was saying is that I've had enough of this thread and I'm not going to post in here ANYTHING about damned processors!
-
And I hope this clears everything up, including Master Captain's mouth.
*scribbles name of list of people who post in this thread*
just for that i'm gonna open my mouth again, watch what the heck you say
-
Your dxdiag can be obtained by following these instructions:
Click Start > Run. type in dxdiag and press Enter. You may see a popup asking about WHQL drivers, click Yes/Ok to proceed.
In the window that appears, click the button that says Save All Information, when the Save Dialog box appears, save the file to your desktop. To upload the file here, click Additional Options underneath the reply area and choose Browse near Attach. Browse to your desktop, click the file and click Open
Eric