Thread: Thief: Deadly Shadows System Specifications

Thief: Deadly Shadows System Specifications

  1. #301
    Originally posted by Guineapiggy
    You're right! Your actions were indeed retarded! I'm sorry but are you blaming Edios for how utterly stupid you are for not checking the sys REQs? It's probably the first thing you should do when looking at a game.

    Just to say, if you buy a game without checking the REQs and can't run it, anyone who has posted or will do so in this nature - YOU HAVE NO ONE TO BLAME BUT YOURSELF
    i wasn't blaming eidos for anything. i dont know where u got that idea. i was just stating the fact that making a game that wont run on an older card is retarted. even if i had read the req's in the store i would have thought to myself "that's retarted" and STILL bought it, and wait for some $$$$ to get a better card (like im doing now). i mean seriously...take a chill pill lol. sounds like ur mad or sumthin...

  2. #302
    Erm... right, so you think they should support a glorified Geforce2 TI? Do you have any idea how old the technology is? If you're going to be angry at anyone be angry at yourself for being stupid enough to buy a game for full price they can't use instead of waiting for a potential price drop, or not researching the fact your card is actually a glorified Geforce 2? How is that Eidos' fault? Do you really expect them to cover so many years of support?

  3. #303
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    1
    I downloaded the demo and I liked it. What I didn't like though was that the game doesn't run very smoothly.

    My system: Asus K8V Deluxe, AMD 64 Athlon 3000, 1024Mb Kingston HX DDR 400MHz, Radeon 9800XT and so on.

    I run the game at 1024x768, without AA or AF, all details at max and my fps hangs at around 30-50, sometimes even below 30. At 1280x1024 fps is constantly below 30. Did I really buy a system like that for nothing?

  4. #304
    Originally posted by SuGoSu
    guys ... i just bought a FX 5600 for this game before that i was using mx440... anyway here is my system and how ty it works in t3

    p4 2.4
    512 Ram
    Fx 5600 as i said.
    Also 5+1 supported sound card from my main board.

    with medium details, its like 20-25 fps in 800*600.
    is it normal or just my computer has some problem ?
    The FX 5600 is pretty low on the FX chain. It's a value card. So you get value performance. If you'd gotten a 5700, 5700 Ultra, or 5900-XT, you'd be in better shape.

    Here's a tip: Next time, look at some benchmarks to see what a card's performance is before you buy it. It's easy, just type "geforce fx 5600 benchmark" into a search engine. Or just go to www.tomshardware.com and look in their graphics cards section.

    Another tip: It's pretty much impossible to spend less than $150 on a card and still have it run the latest, most modern, most demanding games really really fast. In fact, that's extremely conservative because I haven't seen anything for less than $185 - I'm assuming a slight lowering of my standards, and a willingness to run at 640x480 if need be.

    Come on guys, why do you think they make cards that cost more than $250, if there are cards that cost $70? Do you think it's for the designer brand name? The nice color of the plastic? Do you think you're just paying for the extra heatsink material? If you pay cheap-cheap-cheap for your card, you can expect cheap-cheap-cheap and double-cheap performance!

  5. #305
    Originally posted by ^Oizo^
    I downloaded the demo and I liked it. What I didn't like though was that the game doesn't run very smoothly.

    My system: Asus K8V Deluxe, AMD 64 Athlon 3000, 1024Mb Kingston HX DDR 400MHz, Radeon 9800XT and so on.

    I run the game at 1024x768, without AA or AF, all details at max and my fps hangs at around 30-50, sometimes even below 30. At 1280x1024 fps is constantly below 30. Did I really buy a system like that for nothing?
    Erm... well what on earth are you running? R9700 non-pro, 800 x 600 full whack x4aa x4af + 512mb PC3200 and an XP2500+ (NForce2 Ultra NF7S Mobo) says you've got something else causing problems or too many background tasks.

  6. #306
    Originally posted by ^Oizo^
    I downloaded the demo and I liked it. What I didn't like though was that the game doesn't run very smoothly.

    My system: Asus K8V Deluxe, AMD 64 Athlon 3000, 1024Mb Kingston HX DDR 400MHz, Radeon 9800XT and so on.

    I run the game at 1024x768, without AA or AF, all details at max and my fps hangs at around 30-50, sometimes even below 30. At 1280x1024 fps is constantly below 30. Did I really buy a system like that for nothing?
    Well my 9800 Pro runs 1024x768 very nicely but I bet it wouldn't go higher (if that puts your performance in perspective.) Keep in mind that this engine is doing a lot of ultra-modern effects, and doing them very well. You've got your real-time perspective-projected shadows from lots of sources at once, your very nice bump mapping, all kinds of pixel shader work. Remember your pixel shader work goes up exponentially with your resolution. If your card's just capable of running 1024x768 at full speed, and you bump it up to 1280x1024, your card needs to do 167% of the work for all per-pixel calculations.

    Did I really buy a system like that for nothing?
    Well, if by that you mean, "Did I really spend an extra $200 to $300 on a 9800-XT that's only 8% to 12% faster than a much much cheaper card, only to be disappointed because it's not all that much faster?" then, yes, you did. You fell for that extreme, ridiculous exponential price jump at the top of the performance curve, and ATI has pwned you. But I bet it won't happen again next time. Shop smart!

  7. #307
    With the price of good mobo's & cpu's now its pretty cheap to upgrade.
    PCI Express & 64Bit is making current 32Bit CPU's/Mobo's etc cheap.
    Only thing still way overpriced is a decent video card although you can get something like a NViDiA 5700 with 256Mb of RaM for under $140 US - They arent too bad!

    Thief 3 runs & looks great on my
    AMD 3200+
    1gb DDR 400 RaM
    NViDiA 5900 Ultra 256Mb

    1024x768 High

    Great job EiDOS!!!

  8. #308
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    15

    I love T:DS too!

    Originally posted by grafixmonkey
    I'll say it again - the MX cards are crap cards marketed towards businesses that need computer labs stocked with just enough video power to get email and run the internet, and want to spend the minimum amount possible per machine to get that. The cards have had a bunch of their 3D graphics features removed to make them cheaper, and that's why the game won't run. It requires those features.
    What's really sad is that, with the naming conventions NVIDIA chose, the common user thinks they are getting a nice modern card, not a piece of crap that can't even match the best card from two generations ago. Not that ATI is any better about naming their card chipsets. There's a push among the big computer retailers (Dell, Gateway, etc) to get PCs into everybody's homes, yet manufacturers have yet to respond by making their product naming conventions any less confusing. Even the savvy computer users agree that calling a GF4 MX and a GF4 Ti part of the same generation of cards is damn silly.

    And what's with people complaining that they can run the game on a processor lower than the minimum?
    If you're referring to my posts, I'm not complaining at all about that. I'm actually celebrating concerning being able to play the game. It certainly isn't as pretty as most everybody elses' experience with the game (dragging any slider above minimum, aside from resolution and texture quality, HURTS the performance), but it's (A) prettier than Thief 2 by far (damn those shadow/light effects RULE), and (B) still easy to play and enjoy. My complaint was with the way the system specs were generated and then printed - it's misleading.

    The reason they posted P4 1500 as the minimum is that's the lowest speed processor they tested it on.
    Which is misleading to a high degree, and could lose them sales. It seems a bit lazy, considering the proliferation of processor speeds and types out there. Regardless, calling something a 'minimum' when it really isn't at all is just a disservice to potential customers. Less savvy users than me might think, "Damn, my processor is only a P4 1.2GHzt, so I guess I can't run it. Oh well, I'll just play more UT2004." 'Minimum' implies that, if you tried to run the game with specs below that, it just wouldn't ever work. Not that it would run fairly well with specs slightly below, or even some aspects well below.

    I know it's more expensive, and time-consuming, to test new software on the full range of hardware still being run today. Yet that's what QA testing is about. Finding real, practical minimum and recommended specs. Someone previously was saying they had very little room (on the retail box) to put the specs, and it was more important to talk about what video cards worked (yet we still get dummies buying the game even when their video cards are wrong, DOH). I'll nod to that for space considerations -- the BOX doesn't say anything about 'minimum' or 'required' or even 'recommended', just 'technical specifications' -- but elsewhere, on such official outlets of info as Eidos' own support site, that P4 1500 spec is quoted as a minimum. Here's the link:
    http://support.eidosinteractive.com/...168&platform=3

    I got this game a couple days ago and it's the best Thief in the series, and everything about the game is beautiful
    I think I agree. I'm definitely charmed by the first city segment, and one quote keeps ringing in my head: "this is how the Thief 1 team wished they could have done it years ago." This is closer to the true vision of what the guys at Looking Glass wanted, and it's very cool and very fun, IMO.
    Now and Forever,
    lmjh

  9. #309
    hey guys

    i have a prob when i want to start thief 3 it tells me that it cant find a soundcard but i have a soundcard on board my mainboard isMSI K7T Turbo with Via KT133A Chipset

    is there anyway to fix that? or bought i thief for nothing?

    tia

  10. #310
    Originally posted by ^Oizo^
    I downloaded the demo and I liked it. What I didn't like though was that the game doesn't run very smoothly.

    My system: Asus K8V Deluxe, AMD 64 Athlon 3000, 1024Mb Kingston HX DDR 400MHz, Radeon 9800XT and so on.

    I run the game at 1024x768, without AA or AF, all details at max and my fps hangs at around 30-50, sometimes even below 30. At 1280x1024 fps is constantly below 30. Did I really buy a system like that for nothing?
    I'm gettin the same frame rates as you, but at 1280x1024. I even lowered the res to 640x480 and the frame rate remains the same. Maybe they will release a patch or something.
    Athlon xp 3200+
    512mbs DDR
    Radeon 9800pro

  11. #311
    Originally posted by Guineapiggy
    Erm... right, so you think they should support a glorified Geforce2 TI? Do you have any idea how old the technology is? If you're going to be angry at anyone be angry at yourself for being stupid enough to buy a game for full price they can't use instead of waiting for a potential price drop, or not researching the fact your card is actually a glorified Geforce 2? How is that Eidos' fault? Do you really expect them to cover so many years of support?
    first off i have a geforce4 mx-440 64mb. and i didnt buy the game with MY money...otherwise yes i would return it. i had money from my grandma and i picked the game out. so yes i would like to keep it. if u read my post AGAIN MABYe u'll catch the part where i said "i wasn't blamind eidos for anything"?!?!? u people just randomly take parts out of my post without reading the rest. and as far as i know...almost ALL the other games i have will at least support my geforce4 card. so it cant be IMPOSSIBLE for eidos to do the same.

  12. #312
    I just upgraded from a gf4 mx 440 because this game, new splinter cell, and prince of persia don't support it. Got my 9800pro for $200, i want to make love to this card because of how good it is.
    Athlon xp 3200+
    512mbs DDR
    Radeon 9800pro

  13. #313
    Originally posted by 4W4K3
    first off i have a geforce4 mx-440 64mb. and i didnt buy the game with MY money...otherwise yes i would return it. i had money from my grandma and i picked the game out. so yes i would like to keep it. if u read my post AGAIN MABYe u'll catch the part where i said "i wasn't blamind eidos for anything"?!?!? u people just randomly take parts out of my post without reading the rest. and as far as i know...almost ALL the other games i have will at least support my geforce4 card. so it cant be IMPOSSIBLE for eidos to do the same.
    Keep talking, don't bother with the reading thing, it's value for money entertainment.

  14. #314
    Originally posted by dakilla
    hey guys

    i have a prob when i want to start thief 3 it tells me that it cant find a soundcard but i have a soundcard on board my mainboard isMSI K7T Turbo with Via KT133A Chipset

    is there anyway to fix that? or bought i thief for nothing?

    tia
    On-board soundcards won't help you here

    Firstly, they're probably not supported by Thief3.

    Secondly, an Audigy 2 is so worth it I can't begin to describe. If you have the means, I'd get one. If you lack the means, I THINK that a Soundblaster Live! Value card will do the trick (still a good card), but don't quote me on that.

    The bottom line is that you'll need a new soundcard, and you're going to want one from Creative Labs (www.creative.com).

  15. #315
    Originally posted by keencuedess
    I just upgraded from a gf4 mx 440 because this game, new splinter cell, and prince of persia don't support it. Got my 9800pro for $200, i want to make love to this card because of how good it is.
    lol dude thats nasty!

  16. #316
    Originally posted by Guineapiggy
    Keep talking, don't bother with the reading thing, it's value for money entertainment.
    could i say the same for you? im not TRYING to argue...but the very FIRSt post i had at this forum...someone decided to blame me for somethjing i didnt do. so naturally im not just gonna leave it be. but w/e. i have money to save...and im not earning it arguing here...lol.

  17. #317
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5
    Originally posted by grafixmonkey
    The FX 5600 is pretty low on the FX chain. It's a value card. So you get value performance. If you'd gotten a 5700, 5700 Ultra, or 5900-XT, you'd be in better shape.

    Here's a tip: Next time, look at some benchmarks to see what a card's performance is before you buy it. It's easy, just type "geforce fx 5600 benchmark" into a search engine. Or just go to www.tomshardware.com and look in their graphics cards section.

    Another tip: It's pretty much impossible to spend less than $150 on a card and still have it run the latest, most modern, most demanding games really really fast. In fact, that's extremely conservative because I haven't seen anything for less than $185 - I'm assuming a slight lowering of my standards, and a willingness to run at 640x480 if need be.

    Come on guys, why do you think they make cards that cost more than $250, if there are cards that cost $70? Do you think it's for the designer brand name? The nice color of the plastic? Do you think you're just paying for the extra heatsink material? If you pay cheap-cheap-cheap for your card, you can expect cheap-cheap-cheap and double-cheap performance!
    i closed every detail, make the 640*480 and started to play nice at last.
    this game is not successfull about this. i mean i can play prince of persia with everything on @ 1024 @ 768 and it has much better graphics then t3 (except shadow effects of course).

  18. #318
    Have to get a new graphics card today, is the GeForce FX 5600 or 5700 a good choice?

  19. #319
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    15

    Sound solution

    Originally posted by Stolen_Away
    I THINK that a Soundblaster Live! Value card will do the trick (still a good card), but don't quote me on that.
    That's what I have (came with the comp), and it works fine for stereo sound with TS and all other games. Of course, the Thief series has almost always been about surround sound, but that's not an easy thing to pull off with my home setup, nor is it cost effective.
    Now and Forever,
    lmjh

  20. #320

    strange behaviour while playing demo

    Hi all,

    When playing the demo graphics look wierd. It looks like the shadows are jsut everywhere and sometimes it just starts to make all screen look like it's all white, white, bright white spots everyhere. can't be intentional.

    Plus the game takes a looong time to start up and i have to press some wierd combinations of Esc enter and Ctrl Esc to get into the game window.

    The game menues look unreadable, i can't even see what the they say on the first screen.

    My system specs are:

    AMD64 3200 on gigabyte k8nnxp
    512Mg RAM
    GeForce FX 5700 256 MG
    onboard sound

    Is this the problem with my video card ? or is this some sort of bug ?

    Regards

    Andrei

  21. #321
    Using a GF-FX, Athlon 1.73GHz, Audigy 2 ZS (5.1 Setup), and 1.5GB of RAM. That's the only system that's allowed me, thus far, to play this game on max detail seamlessly (except the frequent, annoying cloudy load-points. Develop for the PC first, next time...PLEASE. That's why I don't have a console system).

  22. #322
    Regarding my prev post:

    downloaded latest drivers - works fine now

  23. #323

    Exclamation Newbie Graphics Card Question

    Ok - I loved Thief 1 and 2, and was really looking forward to T DS.

    THat said, I immediately, without a care in the world went out and bought a copy only to find that my computer's graphics card will not support it. Stupid on me.

    So, here is the deal. I have read through al the posts, and have come to the conclusion that the more experienced here might offer me some guidance as i am graphics card illiterate.

    My current graphics card is Intel(R) 82865G Graphics Controller.
    which will not work


    Here are my NEWBIE qeustions so please be kind.



    1. Can i replace this intel graphics controller with a store bought card. Or are the cryptic references my newbie brain is getting to onboard graphics card leading me to the reality that im out of luck.

    2. If i can replace the graphics card, how do i determine what slot, what kind of slot to use. I have seen reference to agi (i believe) and dunno what that means.

    3. What is the difference, besides price, betweeen:
    RADEON 9200 256MB 8X AGP - RETAIL POWERED BY ATI VIDEO CARD and a RADEON 9200 64MB DDR AGP W/TV-OUT/DVI - BULK POWERED BY ATI VIDEO CARD -- I can see the ram difference but, again, im a newbie so besides perhaps a speed issue, i dunno what the difference is.

    4. Finally, there have been several suggestions to replace graphics card with those runnning in the 150 range, such as the radeon 9600. When i do a froogle search on a RADEON 9600 i get a price range from between 114 and 200 us bucks. is that standard with graphics cards or are there big differences between a RADEON 9200 at 200 and a RADEON 9200 at 114.

    thanks for your patience, i know to some of you these are stupid questions, but like i said, im clueless on this.

  24. #324
    I dont see the point in buying a new part for my pc everyday.
    I never waste my money on the "latest technology" as next month it will be obsolete.
    Here is my spec:
    Amd 3000+
    ati radeon 9800 pro 4.3 catalyst drivers
    512ddr 3200
    crappy soundblaster live 5.1 player

    And i play thief 3 (demo) at an average of 50fps. 1024 by 720 resolution.
    If you dont research the products you are buying then you are gunna face problems.
    Most of the newish geforces 5900's in particular have direct x 9 problems, whereas the radeon 9800 models fully support it.
    Thats one of the reasons we get better frames per sec.
    I do feel sorry for the people who have the recommended system requirements and are experiencing big problems.

    Nowadays with new features in graphics cards and sound etc, you can have the recommended system specs, but still experience problems.
    Fortunatley i am lucky when it comes to thief 3...........but half life 2 and doom 3, well we will see.

  25. #325
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    15

    Re: Newbie Graphics Card Question

    Originally posted by FFrustrated
    Here are my NEWBIE qeustions so please be kind.
    Something the non-newbies need to remember is that they too were once stumbling around without a clue . I'm no expert, but I can handle your questions I think....

    1. Can i replace this intel graphics controller with a store bought card. Or are the cryptic references my newbie brain is getting to onboard graphics card leading me to the reality that im out of luck.
    On-board graphics cards can be supplanted by a store bought card, sure. I've read of this being done in many cases, but I'm not sure if there are any complications. I doubt it's that complicated.

    2. If i can replace the graphics card, how do i determine what slot, what kind of slot to use. I have seen reference to agi (i believe) and dunno what that means.
    The term is AGP, and it's a slot for an advanced graphics processor (aha!). Your motherboard should have this slot - it's been pretty standard for several years now. An AGP video card only fits an AGP slot, so it should be pretty easy to tell where to put the card. Just look at the pins on the card (the little metal strips that meet up with the socket) and find the socket that is the same size/configuration on your MB. You should note that buying an 8X AGP card when you only have a 4X AGP slot is no problem - the card will run at the max speed your mother board can handle, and buying a nice video card now (even if your current mobo isn't that nice) means you can transfer it to a nicer configuration later.

    3. What is the difference, besides price, betweeen:
    RADEON 9200 256MB 8X AGP - RETAIL POWERED BY ATI VIDEO CARD and a RADEON 9200 64MB DDR AGP W/TV-OUT/DVI - BULK POWERED BY ATI VIDEO CARD -- I can see the ram difference but, again, im a newbie so besides perhaps a speed issue, i dunno what the difference is.
    The first one is a straight graphics card (does 2D and 3D graphics, that's it), while the second is an "all-in-one" type card with options for various inputs and outputs, usually relating to TV (TV-OUT is for outputing your video to a TV, DVI is digital video input). That stuff really isn't too useful for the traditional gamer, IMO, and it does cost more. The difference between a 64MB card and a 256MB card is BIG in terms of performance, especially for future games that will really use the larger video memory.

    BTW, if you are getting a Radeon, go with a 9600/9700/9800 card, perhaps in a Pro configuration, instead. Those cards are going to last a reasonably long time (about 2 years, I'd say), and they work quite well with DX9. This advice is mostly keyed to you wanting to play PC games in the future, of course, and not JUST Thief 3.

    4. Finally, there have been several suggestions to replace graphics card with those runnning in the 150 range, such as the radeon 9600. When i do a froogle search on a RADEON 9600 i get a price range from between 114 and 200 us bucks. is that standard with graphics cards or are there big differences between a RADEON 9200 at 200 and a RADEON 9200 at 114.
    The price difference between identically configured cards often depends on the packaging. An 'OEM' card comes with nothing but the necessary hardware - the card, any cables needed, and an installation disc with drivers. They're the cheaper options. More expensive 'bundle' deals often include games and useful software. Games range from the latest titles (cost more) to somewhat older fare, and the software is often utilities such as CD burning programs or DVD player programs. While these packages can cost significantly more, if you want the games and software involved you can sometimes save a lot of money buying the bundle.

    Note that you don't usually find OEM cards in your average retail store (like CompUSA or Best Buy or EB) -- they tend to only offer bundles.

    Note also that while the two gamer chipset designers on the market are NVIDIA (the GeForce people) and ATI (the Radeon people), a number of different manufacturers make the video cards, sometimes tweaking the original designs in tiny ways. One company might change out the ATI-designed fan and put in their own heat-sink/cooling system. Another might simply opt to make their cards with different colored parts than the other guys. NVIDIA does not manufacture their own cards, and ATI is manufacturing their own cards less and less, so the issue of WHO is manufacturing the card becomes a slightly bigger deal. Publications like Computer Games have nice periodic reviews of the latest video cards, but don't really put their info online. There are plenty of websites to look at for hardware reviews - just searching for 'hardware reviews' on Google yielded plenty of appropriate hits. I'm sure the experienced hardware junkies here can suggest some good places to look as well.
    Now and Forever,
    lmjh

Page 13 of 24 First First ... 39101112131415161723 ... Last