On what settings should i be running the witcher?

[marwanbaki]

On what settings should i be running the witcher?

So before i go on complaining about the fps, i need to know what you think i should be running the game on to get a smooth fps. I don't want to install beta drivers or change settings and destroy the pc world just to find out that it was working fine from the start, so my friends, i need your help. What do you think is the recommended or average settings for my rig.These are my specs quoted from DxDiagrocessor :Intel Pentium D CPU 3.40GHZ(2 CPUs)Memory: 1024 MB RAMPage File : 371MB used, 3553MB AvailableATI HD3870 512 MB DDR4Core clock 777 MHzMemory clock 1126 MHz.The thing is, the game, runs somewhat fine, but if i turn around real quick it lags for a little bit. And meh, not just that, it doesnt feel like the game should be running as fast as it should.One thing id like to mention is that i have recently installed a game that is supposed to have the toughest requirements, StrangleHold. And i can run that game perfectly on 1280x1024 with video settings on(you cant adjust video preferences alot). And thats why im wondering if theres something wrong. Cheers, thanks.

 

[vaernus]

The Witcher is pretty rough. It's being used as a benchmarking tool now in some areas from what I've read. So that says a lot about how tough the game is to run.That being said, you shouldn't have too much of an issue running this at medium quality. Or at least, play around with custom until you find the perfect frame rate vs quality for you. You should have some leeway. Now keep in mind, some areas in the game bog down even the highest end systems like Act 3 and Epilogue, so with your system I'd still expect lag in these areas.

 

[Majic8]

If you haven't downloaded the hot fix drivers, from a day ago, you can wait for the 8.4 official drivers. The hot fix is basically the 8.4 drivers. I'm using it with no problems so far. It does get rid of the PowerPlay issue completely. The downclocking to 2D speeds in game was a stupid idea. This is one of the biggest reasons for lags on my 3870. Between the hot fix and finally an official bios from ATI that fixes the fan issue on the BBA cards I finally have the cards I paid for. Too bad crossfire makes absolutely no or very little difference in Witcher. I get 40 to 90 FPS in the fort at the beginning of the game with all in game settings maxed except for 2AA. When the latest patch finally gets out I will get further in the game and see what I have to lower. I run on a Core 2 Duo 6600 at 3.0 ghz.

 

[onkl.627]

1gb RAM is probably the reason for your lags. Defragging your harddrive and pagefile could help a bit.

 

[Maerd.298]

Definitely it's about the lack of memory... so, whatever your settings are it won't help you to fix the problem significantly.

 

[szmik]

On my specs it runs pretty good (except for Trade Quarter) at 1024x768 and all settings maxed (4xAA, 16xAF), so it's not the video card issue. I think you should get another GB of RAM.

 

[Squall]

Try lowering to medium the light effects...it may help!

 

[Majic8]

One other thing I did when I first got the card was download Net 3. At the time I was playing Oblivion on a 1900XTX and had everything running very smooth for Oblivion. When I put the 3870 in I lost all the smoothness, really bad lag at cell loads and frame rate drops when I turned. I kept seeing posts stating that Net 3 made the card run a lot smoother. I was skeptical, not knowing why Net 3 would make a difference, but on my system it worked. I got back the smoothness that I lost. I hate to recommend something that would just be bloatware if you don't need it but you could always uninstall it if it doesn't help.

 

[vaernus]

To those saying to get another GB of ram, that's really not going to make enough difference to justify the cost. I run this on a laptop with a Core 2 Duo 1.8ghz, Nvidia Quadro 1600M, and 1GB and have absolutely no problem. I have tested 4GB ram and the only difference was slightly faster load times. Your biggest issue really is the processor as it is simply just two Pentium 4's stuck together and Pentium D's did not do so hot for the time they were out, even for gaming. It did have 4mb cache, however that was because it was simply two Pentium 4's with 2mb cache on each. Basically the same as the quad cores out now, two Core 2's plunked on the same chip.Core 2 Duo processors, even the original ones, were made to be at a minimum 40% faster than the fastest Pentium 4 extreme edition. And that was when they came out. Newer ones, with the higher L2 cache and better architecture, are much faster, and now you have the quad cores as well. You could even go for a Core 2 that's on the low end scale and still see a big performance increase, something around 2ghz or so.If you were to upgrade, you'd want to go towards a Core 2 processor first before dealing with the memory to see a significant increase in performance. Now that's even more expensive than RAM, and may require other upgrades across the board, but would definitely help you out in the long run for games. Otherwise, just play around with the custom settings until you find your personal compromise between quality and performance. As mentioned, medium should be a good shot for The Witcher for your setup.

 

[Maerd.298]

Vaernus, it also depends on the operating system too. If you have XP then 1 Gb RAM is bearable, but if you have Vista... it is eating 1.35 Gb of RAM on my computer just by itself as I'm typing this message and I have only the browser, e-mail client and an anti-virus (passive mode) running. So, it's a heck of a difference.

 

[vaernus]

Very true point, then you're just depending upon the page file to play the game. So yes, in the case of Vista, 1GB more of ram would increase performance somewhat. The Witcher would work better, especially if using JKDefrag and keeping the hard drive defragged at least once a week. I'd say even more with The Witcher based on the amount of auto saves it does. It still depends on the processor and video card though. While the video card is not bad, the processor is dated.The biggest increase would be upgrading to a better processor. If you're getting an upgrade for one game, they are only going to become more demanding in these next years. Better to plan ahead and upgrade the system when memory is cheap and you can get most components for decent prices at Newegg. A Core 2, 4GB of Ram, and an 8800GT should be able to handle games at least for another 3-5 years, on low setting in the later years.

 

[marwanbaki]

Quite frankly i don't have the will or money to buy a new board/processor , i guess i will buy more RAM. Just a few questions, 1) What is that hotfix you speak of?, i found nothing on ati website.2) What is this Net 3 you speak of? 3) Thanks for the replies4) I know its a noob question, what drive should i be defgramenting, the one with the page file, or windows files or the game itself.

 

[vaernus]

1) http://game.amd.com/us-en/drivers_catalyst.aspx2) I'm assuming he means .NET Framework 3.0, or 3.5 now. Off Microsoft Update program or in microsoft.com.3) Anytime4) The main one is the drive with the game itself. If the page file has other data in that drive, one technique is shutting off the page file, restarting, doing a defrag, and then setting up the page file again so it's concurrent. Also, have been using JKDefrag for some time and it's one of the most efficient programs to date.

 

[Majic8]

Thanks Vaernus for clarifying and answering the OP's questions. I've been dealing with a new set of tires for my pick-up and migrating to a new WD 640 hard drive. Kind of busy. I assumed the OP was on XP from his specs, hope I wasn't wrong. I think Net Framework 3.5 is included with Vista SP1 or Vista itself. Haven't had any pressing reason to try Vista yet so I am depending on my old fart memory.