Specs for TW2 on Ultra

[1orveth1271.879]

Specs for TW2 on Ultra

Hey folks. I dunno if this should rather go into the "Would this PC run it?" topic so I posted it here. If it belongs there, I hope the mods can move it

Now I'm planning to at some point this year upgrade my PC's specs since they're slowly getting outdated. I've seen a lot of videos and screenshots of TW2 with Ultra settings that look absolutely stunning and therefore would like to make that sort of an investment for a change

My specs atm are:

AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 5200+ 2.69 GHz
4 GB RAM
nVidia GeForce GTS 250

With these specs, I can play the game on low-medium settings absolutely smoothly, and on medium-high settings with lag in open areas and more or less heavy framerate drops. What I'd like to reach would be Ultra settings without lag and (ofc) without Ubersampling. My question: Does anyone have a few recommendations as to what video card etc. I should get to achieve that?

Note: I'm not exactly a tech expert so go easy on the rookie with tech language xD

Thanks in advance!

 

[DeargRuadhri]

Hmm....I'm trying to throw my ideas in here, but it might be better waiting for a tech expert (like Guy N'wah).
Anyway:
TW2 is a really GPU intensive game, so it might worth upgrading that, and as far as I know, an nVidia GTX 560 Ti can run the game in ultra without lag, though never had the chance to try it myself.
Anyway, a little comparison between your current card and a 560 Ti:

GTS 250:

GPU Engine Specs:

128 CUDA Cores
738 MHz Graphics Clock
1836MHz Processor Clock
47.2 Texture Fill Rate (billion/sec)

Memory Specs:

1100 MHz Memory Clock
GDDR3 Memory Interface
256-bit Memory Interface Width
70.4 Memory Bandwidth (GB/sec)

GTX 560 Ti:

Graphics card version GTX 560 Ti
CUDA Cores 384
Graphics Clock (MHz) 822
Processor Clock (MHz) 1645
Texture Fill Rate (billion/sec) 52.5
Memory Specs:

Memory Clock (MHz) 4008 Gbps
Standard Memory Config 1024 (Note: I suppose MB, as geforce.com had no units of measurement there)
Memory Interface GDDR5
Memory Interface Width 256-bit
Memory Bandwidth (GB/sec) 128

Specifications are taken from www.geforce.com

In short, the GTX 560 Ti has a pretty good performance-price ratio, and it has way more CUDA cores than the GTS 250. Also, it uses GDDR5 memory and has a memory bandwith of 128 GB/sec.

If I'm right, there was a 448 CUDA core version of the GTX 560 Ti, which was only a limited edition card, and I have no information of its performance (should be better than the normal 560 Ti's, but not sure).

You could also wait for the GTX 660 Ti, which isn't released yet, but that card should be able to handle TW2 pretty well, even with Übersampling, but nVidia hasn't released too much information about that card, so no concrete things can be known.

As for the CPU, I can not give advice about that, I'm not really an expert about AMD processors, so someone else might be able to tell you if an upgrade is needed.

That 4 GB of RAM is fine, until it is DDR3.

Sorry for the long post and somewhat liberal use of tech language.

Oh, and TW2 looks stunning indeed in Ultra.

 

[Franpa]

iirc, the Geforce 560Ti with 448 Cuda Cores is OEM only. I have a 560Ti (2048MB VRAM) and it runs the game realatively fine (Above 30fps) on ultra with everything maxed out (Except Uber Sampling/AA).

If you want a truly smooth gameplay experience then I would suggest a Geforce 570 video card or better.

 

[DeargRuadhri]

iirc, the Geforce 560Ti with 448 Cuda Cores is OEM only. I have a 560Ti (2048MB VRAM) and it runs the game realatively fine (Above 30fps) on ultra with everything maxed out (Except Uber Sampling/AA).

If you want a truly smooth gameplay experience then I would suggest a Geforce 570 video card or better.

Are you sure the 448 is OEM only? The Geforce site lists 352 CUDA cores variant as the OEM card. Aside from this, you might be right, but I haven't seen the 448 as an OEM only one, and it can be bought in normal computer shops.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&Order=BESTMATCH&N=-1&isNodeId=1&Description=nvidia+gtx+560+ti+448+core

If I am right, the difference between the GTX 560 Ti 448 and the GTX 570 is some CUDA cores and a slightly lower Clock rate, as well as a lower price (for the 560). How this really affects the framerates? I don't know, it would have to be tested, but sadly, I have none of the 560 Tis/570 to do that.

 

[omerbu1]

I can run it with full Ultra (Ubersamplling included) with about 30-40 FPS

My Specs:
Intel Core i7 860
MSI ATI Radeon HD5870 OC factory and UM OC.
4 GB RAM

 

[1orveth1271.879]

I can run it with full Ultra (Ubersamplling included) with about 30-40 FPS

My Specs:
Intel Core i7 860
MSI ATI Radeon HD5870 OC factory and UM OC.
4 GB RAM

Sounds good! Since I don't need Ubersampling, I presume the framerate is really smooth without it?

 

[volsung]

A GTX 560 Ti will do fine, and it is an excellent performer in that price category.

You will have to get a new motherboard too, so you may change to Intel if you want. Otherwise, you may want to get something like an AMD FX 8120, and 4 GB DDR3 RAM is fine. Make sure the motherboard you get has at least one PCI-Express 2.0 or better at full x16.

I currently have a GTX 560 Ti, Phenom II X6 OC'ed to 3.7 GHz, 8 GB DDR3 RAM (Corsair) and the game runs well above 50 FPS on Ultra minus Übersampling.

 

[GuyNwah]

Hey folks. I dunno if this should rather go into the "Would this PC run it?" topic so I posted it here. If it belongs there, I hope the mods can move it

Now I'm planning to at some point this year upgrade my PC's specs since they're slowly getting outdated. I've seen a lot of videos and screenshots of TW2 with Ultra settings that look absolutely stunning and therefore would like to make that sort of an investment for a change

My specs atm are:

AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 5200+ 2.69 GHz
4 GB RAM
nVidia GeForce GTS 250

With these specs, I can play the game on low-medium settings absolutely smoothly, and on medium-high settings with lag in open areas and more or less heavy framerate drops. What I'd like to reach would be Ultra settings without lag and (ofc) without Ubersampling. My question: Does anyone have a few recommendations as to what video card etc. I should get to achieve that?

Note: I'm not exactly a tech expert so go easy on the rookie with tech language xD

Thanks in advance!

That's about as old as most of my computers, too. I run Ultra specs on a Core 2 Quad Q9550 and an nVidia GTX 285, but they haven't made those for years.

The game isn't CPU-bound except when you get into extremely high performance levels, so the CPU isn't as big a deal as the GPU with this game.

The GTX 560Ti [standard models are 384 shaders, not 352 (OEM only) or 448 (limited edition)] is deservedly popular, and its price has come down recently (under $200 after rebates at Newegg). AMD has nothing that competes in this price range; they have less-capable cards (7750, 7770) for less, but I don't think those could handle Ultra too well.

The game doesn't fully use a quad core, but it suffers on dual cores. If you had a Phenom II x4 or old Core 2 Quad, I'd look for a way to keep it, but you don't, so I won't. The current "gold standard" for this game and games in general is the "Sandy Bridge" Core i5 2500K. (If you're not overclocking, the 2500 is the same without overclocking features; if you're penny-pinching, lesser Core i5 2xxx CPUs, like the 2400, are only fractionally slower.) The new "Ivy Bridge" CPUs are considerably faster and should displace "Sandy Bridge" within the year. Unfortunately, Intel prefers to maintain prices on back stock, so there may not be bargains so good as there ought to be.

 

[AsTheDeath]

It looks as if there's plenty of experts here already, but a 2500K processor? To me (not exactly an expert), it seems your processor may bottleneck if you decide to upgrade your graphics card (as has been said, you'll want a 560 Ti or HD 6950/7850 to run Ultra w/o uber @1920x1080). I think that spending so much money on a mobo + CPU for the 2500K is not really in proportion to the amount of money spent on the GPU, considering the latter is generally more important for video games... if you decide to upgrade everything (mobo, CPU and GPU), which considering the age of your processor probably isn't a bad idea, I would suggest spending your budget more on the GPU than on the CPU, since you probably won't notice any difference between a 2500K and an i5 2400... again, I'm not really aware of prices in the US.

Having said all that, you may also want to have a look at your power supply: a heavier GPU and CPU will also take more power, so if you have less than ~550W you may want to upgrade your PSU as well.

 

[GuyNwah]

It looks as if there's plenty of experts here already, but a 2500K processor? To me (not exactly an expert), it seems your processor may bottleneck if you decide to upgrade your graphics card (as has been said, you'll want a 560 Ti or HD 6950/7850 to run Ultra w/o uber @1920x1080). I think that spending so much money on a mobo + CPU for the 2500K is not really in proportion to the amount of money spent on the GPU, considering the latter is generally more important for video games... if you decide to upgrade everything (mobo, CPU and GPU), which considering the age of your processor probably isn't a bad idea, I would suggest spending your budget more on the GPU than on the CPU, since you probably won't notice any difference between a 2500K and an i5 2400... again, I'm not really aware of prices in the US.

Having said all that, you may also want to have a look at your power supply: a heavier GPU and CPU will also take more power, so if you have less than ~550W you may want to upgrade your PSU as well.

I agree; the lesser Core i5's have usually been better value than the much sought-after 2500K. But at current prices and in the perspective of the total system cost, the difference between a 2500K and a 2300 may or may not make a difference to you.

Again, the 2500K is of interest only if you plan to overclock.

Per Newegg:
2500K (3.3-3.7 GHz, unlocked): $220
2500 (3.3-3.7): $210
2400 (3.1-3.4): $190
2300 (2.8-3.1): $180

Ivy Bridge CPUs are now in general distribution, and their prices are close enough to be attractive, within $10 of comparable Sandy Bridge models (except for the high end models).

Sadly, AMD has nothing that can compete with these, except to offer a cheaper product. Only the high-end 8-core Zambezis are performance-competitive, and only on heavily threaded loads, which most games are not. If you want to pinch pennies, you might look for a Phenom II x4 (Deneb or Zosma), which are now priced to clear, rather than the more costly and little improved Zambezis.