PDA

View Full Version : Post Your PC Specs & TRA Playability Here!



Gamer4Lyfe
29th Jun 2007, 11:25
I thought this may be helpful, I have the following setup running TRA:

Vista Home Premium
Athlon XP @ 2.1 Ghz
1 GB DDR Ram
Radeon X1650 Pro w/512 MB DDR2 Ram (AGP 4x)

Now for the playability results:

Framerate stays constant for the most part with all settings set to On w/2xAA, but dropped considerably in St. Francis' Folly Sword Room. Parts where fog & graphics get intense is where my system struggles & it is mainly due to my CPU's limits.

I'm upgrading to the following:

Athlon 64 X2 4600+ @ 2.4 Ghz (w/2 CPU Cores)
2 GB DDR2 Ram
With my current Radeon X1650 Pro w/512 MB DDR2 Ram (AGP 4x)

I'll post my results soon now that those specs ^ exceed Eidos' Recommended for TRA.

http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f150/Gamer4Lyfe/TRAPCSetup.jpg

Gamer4Lyfe
30th Jun 2007, 23:46
Ok, I upgraded as detailed above & easily exceed Eidos' preferred specs. Guess what? Framerate still suffers in the Sword Room & other places that have the fog effect. So I decided to disable some features & slightly improved the FPS. (Fullscreen Effects & Depth of Field Off) I believe because my resolution is high it also causes a performance drop, but because my monitor's native res is 1680 x 1050, every other res looks crappy on it. All said, I'm still enjoying this game & it does play rather smooth overall. :thumbsup:

Mods, what specs do you have & are you experiencing any slowdown in graphically intense areas as well?

Xcom
1st Jul 2007, 11:04
XP Home
Athlon 64 3700+
2GB Ram
7900GT 256mb

I play in 1024x768 resolution (by choice, not because of performance) and everything is silky smooth with max gfx. settings. I also tried maximum available to me resolution (2048x1536) just for fun, and it was still very much playable with everything maxed out, although I didn't test it extensively.

Capkeez
1st Jul 2007, 12:31
Vista home premium
1022 mb ram, dx10
core2duo T5600
ATI mobility radeon X1400

Runs smoothly on highest resolution/maxed out
I'm allowed to activate next-gen in Legend but it's too laggy to be playable.

weirdo
1st Jul 2007, 13:27
P4 3.2GHZ HT
2 GB Kingston HyperX DDR 400Mhz (2-3-2-5-1)
ASUS AX850XT 256 MB AGP (ATI)
Windows XP Professional
SATA150 Hard Disks

Playing resolution 1280x1024 (my default TFT Monitor resolution)
w/ 2x AA & all of the effects on the setup checked.

Runs totally smooth, no problems what so ever. Rooms with Fog etc. can slow down a bit, but not much. Same with Tomb Raider Legend.


Controller used is Logitech Cordless Rumblepad 2 Wireless, which i consider perfect.

Capkeez
1st Jul 2007, 13:42
do you guys think it would be worth it to get a 360 controller for my pc?

Discordia666
2nd Jul 2007, 10:25
Hi Capkeez,

I have a 360 controller for my PC and I never use it. It's a nice controller, but only for games that have been ported from the 360. I also have a Logitech PS2 style controller and that's actually better for most console games like Devil May Cry. For most games (especially fps), you just can't beat the control you get from the mouse. I wouldn't dream of playing Call Of Duty or Half Life 2 with a controller.

BTW, I have the following system:

XP64 4000
nForce4 Ultra
2Gb DDR400
SATA300
Vista 64bit
BFG 7900GTX 512mb seriously overclocked - it rocks

I play Legend at 1280 x 1024 (my panel's native resolution) with NextGen on and all other settings at max and Vsync ON. I get frame rates of whatever my refresh rate is set to (60 or 70, basically).

Gamer4Lyfe
2nd Jul 2007, 10:53
XP Home
Athlon 64 3700+
2GB Ram
7900GT 256mb

I play in 1024x768 resolution (by choice, not because of performance) and everything is silky smooth with max gfx. settings. *I also tried maximum available to me resolution (2048x1536) just for fun, and it was still very much playable with everything maxed out, although I didn't test it extensively.
When I set my resolution to 1024x768 with all settings on, the framerate increased significantly & everything was very smooth. But then the image quality looks crappy since my native resolution on my monitor is 1680x1050. So I guess I'm gonna have to chose the higher res because of this. It just bothers me that I can't get a solid framerate in certain areas of the game. Every other area so far is butter smooth.

*A good test will be to go to the Sword Room in St. Francis Folly & get on top of the pillars where the lighting & fog gets real intense & let me know if your framerate drops.

Discordia666
2nd Jul 2007, 11:48
This is the problem with these high resolution flat panels. You have to have a monster graphics card to render modern games at playable framerates at the native resolution of a large panel. Unlike a CRT, you can't just drop the resolution until the card can handle it 'cos it looks c**p. That's why I only bought a 1280 x 1024 panel. The latest games run great and look stunning at the native resolution.

I think a lot of people fall for this. They buy a nice big panel thinking it's gonna make thair games look great and then find that the rest of their system isn't up to it. If I were more cynical, I might believe it was a conspiracy to get us to spend more money upgrading our PCs. :rolleyes:

Gamer4Lyfe
2nd Jul 2007, 17:27
^ Yeah I know now. But you'd think with specs like this below, everything will be fine.

Vista Home Premium
Athlon 64 X2 4600+ (2 CPU's @ 2.4Ghz each!)
2 GB DDR2 800 Ram
ATI Radeon X1650 Pro w/512 MB DDR2 Ram AGP 8X
LCD 20" Widescreen @ 1680x1050 Resolution

:mad2:

Ghostwolfalpha
3rd Jul 2007, 10:04
Try this self system test to see if your PC is qualified to run TR:A or TR:L
The filenames are "Lara Croft Tomb Raider: Anniversary" and "Lara Croft Tomb Raider: Legend"

http://www.systemrequirementslab.com/referrer/srtest


Here's my system specs:
ASUS F3JC notebook computer with 15.4" WXGA LCD monitor
CPU: Pentium Dual-Core (T2060) at clocked 1.6 GHz (per core)
(Actual performance rating by the test in the link is 2.75 GHz)
RAM: 2 GB 667 MHz DDR2 RAM
Graphics: nVIDIA GeForce Go 7300 with 128 MB onboard VRAM (256 MB system shared memory)

Runs TR:A smoothly at 2xAA, every graphics setting on and resolution at 1280x800. But if I want to take screenshots then I use 4xAA, full screen effects and depth of field OFF because I don't see any differences when switching them on. Also 2xAA and full screen effects off can ensure stable framerate if you are not into very high end graphics.

Tyron
3rd Jul 2007, 11:47
I have these specs:

P4, AMD ATHLON 2600+, with 1,91 Ghz
1024mb ddr ram
GainwardBA7600Gs,Agp 8x, with 256mb of Vram


Tomb Raider Anniversary Runs smooth on my machine,with Very High(but not fully maxed out) settings.

Gamer4Lyfe
4th Jul 2007, 06:18
My PC past that test in the link above with flying colors. Check this, I found a great resolution that keeps TRA sharp & framerate very smooth on my 20" LCD!

1280 x 1024 :D

Captain Mazda
4th Jul 2007, 07:20
Humm

Intel Pentium D 805 LGA775 Dual-Core 3.2GHz CPU
1024MB (2x512) DDR400 PC3200 RAM
Western Digital 80GB IDE
Western Digital 250GB SATA-II
eVGA NVIDIA GeForce 6600GT 128MB DDR3 AGP 8x (overclocked 550/1100)
19" LG L1970HR Flatron Slim 2ms 2000:1 DCR LCD
Sound Blaster Live! 24-bit EAX HD
Logitech X-530 5.1 Surround Sound System

1280x1024, 4x AA, all effects turned up. Frames stay stable at 60, even with Fraps recording.

Gamer4Lyfe
5th Jul 2007, 17:26
How can I test/see the actual in-game framerate?

Edit: Never mind....FRAPS!

http://www.fraps.com/download.php

mikeysg
9th Jul 2007, 17:59
Both my rigs can play both TRA and TRL @1920x1200, 4xAA/8xAF.....all possible ingame setting maxed out. I wouldn't say it's smooth 100% of the way, but it's in general pretty smooth.

Main gaming rig as follows -
Intel C2D E6600 @3.33ghz
Asus P5W DH Deluxe
4x 1GB Corsair XMS2 DDR2 800
2x PowerColor HD 2900XT in CF mode
X-Fi Fatal1ty FPS
1x 74GB WD Raptor (OS) + 2x 150GB WD Raptor (storage)
Benq FP241W (1920x1200)

2nd gaming/HTPC rig
AMD AM2 4200+ @2.21ghz
MSI K9N4 Ultra
2x 1GB KVR DDR2 667
XFX 7950 GX2 520M
X-Fi ExtremeMusic
1x 36GB WD Raptor (OS) + 2x 250GB Seagate SATA HDDs
Sharp Aquos 32" WS LCD HDTV (1360x768)

I've run my 2nd rig on my Benq 24" monitor @1920x1200 and TRL ran relatively smoothly with next gen enabled, though there were gfx glitches which I attribute to driver.

Gamer4Lyfe
10th Jul 2007, 11:17
So I ran some tests with FRAPS using my Radeon X1650 Pro w/512 MB DDR2 Ram video card. Average frames per second was 28. During graphically intense areas like the Sword Room & other fog effect areas it would drop in the single digits. I had enough. I purchased the Radeon X1950 Pro w/512 MB DDR3 256-Bit Ram AGP 8x. Popped it in & was very impressed. A solid 60 frames per second & zero slowdown in all the areas where I experienced them. And I get to keep using my monitor's native resolution of 1680x1050.

So inconclusion, TRA has hit the sweet spot using the following specs:

Windows Vista Home Premium
Athlon 64 X2 4600+ (2 CPU's @ 2.4 Ghz each)
2 Gigs of DDR2 800 Ram
Radeon X1950 Pro AGP 8x w/512 MB of 256-bit DDR3 Ram
20" Monitor @ 1680x1050 Resolution
Tomb Raider Anniversary - All settings On w/4xAA = 60 FPS

:D

mangina
10th Jul 2007, 21:42
^ Yeah I know now. But you'd think with specs like this below, everything will be fine.

Vista Home Premium
Athlon 64 X2 4600+ (2 CPU's @ 2.4Ghz each!)
2 GB DDR2 800 Ram
ATI Radeon X1650 Pro w/512 MB DDR2 Ram AGP 8X
LCD 20" Widescreen @ 1680x1050 Resolution

:mad2:

I registered on here only to point out this one little tidbit that someone in another forum passed on to me. My system specs are as follows:

Core 2 E6700
4GB DDR2 800
Radeon X1650 512MB
(2) WD Raptor 10K RPM 150GB HD
SoundBlaster X-Fi Gamer

Note that I also have the X1650. The problem with that the card is the 128bit memory interface. That's why when you step to the 256bit X1950 you see so much improvement. I'm not complaining as I still average 40fps at 1920x1080(native Res. on the 52" DLP) with everything maxed, but I'm still going to upgrade to an 8800GTX as soon as I get off my lazy butt and buy a new MoBo with PCI-e. :)

mikeysg
11th Jul 2007, 03:48
I registered on here only to point out this one little tidbit that someone in another forum passed on to me. My system specs are as follows:

Core 2 E6700
4GB DDR2 800
Radeon X1650 512MB
(2) WD Raptor 10K RPM 150GB HD
SoundBlaster X-Fi Gamer

Note that I also have the X1650. The problem with that the card is the 128bit memory interface. That's why when you step to the 256bit X1950 you see so much improvement. I'm not complaining as I still average 40fps at 1920x1080(native Res. on the 52" DLP) with everything maxed, but I'm still going to upgrade to an 8800GTX as soon as I get off my lazy butt and buy a new MoBo with PCI-e. :)Wait a sec, isn't the C2D E6700 + DDR2 combo, that you have now, available ONLY on a PCIe platform? Why do you need to get a mobo with PCIe?:confused:

Athlon 64 X2 4600+ (2 CPU's @ 2.4 Ghz each)
2 Gigs of DDR2 800 Ram
Gamer4Lyfe, I believe your CPU's an AM2, right? I draw this conclusion from the RAM that you're using. Are you using one of those special AM2 mobo that has both AGP and PCIe interface? What brand is it? I was out looking for one with my nephew when he had to upgrade his rig becoz his old rig died on him.....couldn't find one though.

Captain Mazda
11th Jul 2007, 08:39
4GB RAM is useless unless you're using a 64-bit O/S.

mikeysg
11th Jul 2007, 09:00
4GB RAM is useless unless you're using a 64-bit O/S.Exactly! All 32bit OS would recognize only 2GB (although some tweaking may be involved to get it to recognize more.....haven't been successful at this though). BTW, I'm using 64bit VISTA HP on my main gaming rig, so it's not useless for me.:whistle:

Gamer4Lyfe
11th Jul 2007, 11:20
Gamer4Lyfe, I believe your CPU's an AM2, right? I draw this conclusion from the RAM that you're using. Are you using one of those special AM2 mobo that has both AGP and PCIe interface? What brand is it? I was out looking for one with my nephew when he had to upgrade his rig becoz his old rig died on him.....couldn't find one though.

Yup. It's an MSI K9MM-V Mobo.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813130064
But it only has AGP. I'd browse at NewEgg.com for that AGP & PCIe hybrid mobo that you mentioned.

mangina
11th Jul 2007, 12:25
Wait a sec, isn't the C2D E6700 + DDR2 combo, that you have now, available ONLY on a PCIe platform? Why do you need to get a mobo with PCIe?:confused:

Upon further inspection I am running only 2GB of RAM, the other 2 is in the desk drawer. It's on this motherboard from ECS (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813135027).

It doesn't work all that splendidly, but it does work. Long story short, ASUS and I are arguing about my original motherboard and I had this laying around in one of my half a dozen older systems. It worked with the E6700 without too much effort, and since I had to buy new RAM anyway, I just picked up the DDR2 800. This MoBo (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131073) and this Video Card (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814121033) are headed my way as soon as ASUS gets my RMA straightened out, so it's only a fill in.

Lectrician
11th Jul 2007, 14:17
do you guys think it would be worth it to get a 360 controller for my pc?


I know I am 9 days late...maybe 10...too early for math..lol, but yes. I love my 360 controller for the PC.

mikeysg
11th Jul 2007, 16:35
Upon further inspection I am running only 2GB of RAM, the other 2 is in the desk drawer. It's on this motherboard from ECS (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813135027).Holy crap! I honestly didn't know that C2D mobos are available with only AGP slot!:scratch: HeHeHe, I thought C2D's come in PCIe flavors only :o ........live and learn is all I can say. Same goes for Gamer4Lyfe, I thought you'd gotten the Asrock AM2 mobo with both PCIe and AGP slots. :whistle:

UTWarden
11th Jul 2007, 16:40
I know I am 9 days late...maybe 10...too early for math..lol, but yes. I love my 360 controller for the PC.


I'mma second this post, the 360 controller for the pc is nice, I also OWN an Xbox360 as well so I'm VERY accustomed to the X360 controller.

as for pc specs
AMD 4000+ (2.4 ghz) 2 gig ram
NF4 SLI Motherboard
BFG GF 7800 in SLI

I play in 1280X1024 (LCD) framerate is usually 100, in heavy area's 70 ish.

mangina
11th Jul 2007, 16:52
The majority of motherboards that support AGP and the C2D don't do it natively. Usually it requires some sort of BIOS update, and in my experience, they only 'sort of' work. That is the issue with my ASUS P5PE that I'm trying to get fixed.

It's extremely unstable and with the C2D in place intermittently loses the secondary IDE and SATA channels. ASUS has been good to me, but is in the process of moving their tech support facility so it's been about a month long ordeal of phone tag trying to get the right parts replaced and so on.

UTWarden
11th Jul 2007, 19:12
I'm going to add to this:

laptop:
P4 3.2 GHz+ HT
1 gig ram
Mobile radeon 9600 Default clocks 250/350, when I game the clocks are 280/400 played in 800X600, no shadows, avg fps is 40 ish

ExHarT
6th Aug 2007, 13:51
Windows XP
Intel Core 2 4400 @ 2.0 Ghz
1 GB DDR Ram
nVidia GeForce 8600GT w/256 MB DDR2 Ram

I have no complains at all, everything works so softly with best quality...