Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Jaqie Fox]

The game is running @10 fps on my Toshiba Libretto 70CT.  P120MMX, 32MB ram, Windows XP Professional SP2.

I can provide a screenshot if needed.

[Devastator]

32 MB ram, XP sp2.  I'm suprised it even boots.

[Jaqie Fox]

nLite.

[Axle Gear]

Uhm, I would say, NO.

Considering that windows XP requires 192 MB to run with all features functional, and 128 MB to theoretically run at all...

If every game-maker used requirements based on individual tweaked rigs and custom OSs, they'd spend years on development time just to figure out what the hell it'd run on.  =/
"Halo 2 will run on most Vista compatible systems, provided they're not running Vista, in which case they need an additional 256 MB of RAM since Vista will use all available.  It will also run on Bob Hershey's PC, but will not function on Tybalt Lanahan's.  If your system was dipped in a lye solution to encourage pyramid-shaped octahedrons in the silicon, and was successful within the 0.0000062% probability, you will be able to run Halo 2 with 64 MB of RAM, unless..."

Besides, I wouldn't run DF at all on less than 1.5 GHz.  My 1.8 GHz AMD64 1 GHz FSB Venice, with 2 GB PC3200 DDR dual channel, and X550 128 MB PCIe x16 video card, I get ~30 FPS at 110 dorfs and ~50 aminalz.

[ March 21, 2007: Message edited by: Axle Gear ]

[Mechanoid]

quote:Originally posted by Devastator:
<STRONG>32 MB ram, XP sp2.  I'm suprised it even boots.</STRONG>

I would be surprised if Windows 98 would boot. I too have an ancient 120Mhz comp, but it has at least 128MB of RAM; 256MB tops...
I'll keep it blunt.

Running StarCraft on this computer will cause framerate issues, and it is nowhere near the calibur of Dwarf Fortress.

I think it's time to upgrade. 3Ghz, 2 Gigs of RAM; when you hit 200 dwarves you'll still get your framerates' ass kicked around, but you'll get a stable 60 frames per second at for at least the first 100 dwarves.

[Jaqie Fox]

Wow, people. the one time *I* try to joke I get taken seriously. Ironic, that.

And if you think that's my main system you have issues.

Athlon 64 x2 3800+ (2Ghz dual core) 1.5GB PC3200 in dual channel, xp x64.

[Axle Gear]

Jaqie, there's nothing there that isn't semi-beleivable.
I've run normal XP Pro on a 486 DX (66 MHz) with 192 MB RAM.  No tricks.  Slow, but it ran.

And, yesterday, I replaced a HDD on a DOS system.
Technology is moving fast, but not all computer owners are.  Never think people aren't running 'relics'.

[Jaqie Fox]

OK I'll spell it out in crayon for you then.

The joke was revising system requirements down instead of up.

Check my title. 'BOFH'. You aren't the only one with computer experience, even though you may think you are.

[ March 21, 2007: Message edited by: Jaqie ]

[Axle Gear]

So, you post a prank thread, to request the requirement be stated as unreasonably low?

Quit trollin'.

[Jaqie Fox]

If you cared to check my post history, you would see I am not trolling at all. On the other hand, you seem to be thread crapping.

I don't have time to deal with trolls that call me one, later.

[Mechanoid]

Ah, now i see what's going on. You want the requirements for DF to be lowered to include the older computers, because they're actually capable of playing DF.

Somehow though ... I doubt that will happen when the next version is released.

[ March 21, 2007: Message edited by: Mechanoid ]

[Zonk]

I had the same problem until I installed the Radeon Catalysts...then speed became x10 of what it was...'course, this would require you to have a Radeon video card.