Print

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

[Jackrabbit]

There are no pictures, I just realized the title was so dull most people wouldn't bother looking.

I was on canyourunit.com recently, flicking through recent games and I kept running into the same problem. I never have the recommended specs, not for recent releases, and it's always my video card. Always. This has led me to deduce that I should get a new video card because I am the new Sherlock Holmes. Anyway, here's what I got when I tested Skyrim:

   
CPU
Recommended: Quad-core Intel or AMD CPU
You Have: Intel(R) Core(TM) i5 CPU 760 @ 2.80GHz

   
CPU Speed
Recommended: Info
You Have: 2.8 GHz

   
RAM
Recommended: 4 GB
You Have: 6.0 GB

OS
Recommended: Windows 7/Vista/XP PC (32 or 64 bit)
You Have: Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium Edition Service Pack 1 (build 7601), 64-bit

Video Card
Recommended: DirectX 9 compatible NVIDIA or AMD ATI video card with 1 GB of RAM (NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260 or higher; ATI Radeon HD 4890 or higher)
You Have: ATI Radeon HD 5450
      Upgrade Suggested: Unfortunately, your Video Card does not meet this requirement. Click here to see some recommendations. Click here for the latest Video drivers.
Features: Recommended attributes of your Video Card
      Required    You Have
   Video RAM    1 GB    3.7 GB
   Pixel Shader version    3.0    5.0
   Vertex Shader version    3.0    5.0
   
Sound Card
Recommended: Yes
You Have: AMD High Definition Audio Device

Free Disk Space
Recommended: 6 GB
You Have: 183.6 GB

So yeah. FIRSTLY, is a video card upgrade going to solve all my problems? And secondly, if so, can you recommend a good one? And finally, why the hell is it saying my card is out of date when it clearly has the required features? I'm not saying it'll run, canyourunit has never actually let me down yet, but it seems I should run games fine and I simply can't. I'm lost when dealing with computers.

[Vibhor]

Actually it will run skyrim, not on maximum(or maybe it will) but on medium. If you have bought the game then why dont you try it first?

[nenjin]

Uhm....er....uh.....

I have an Nvidia 8800GTS. Let me repeat that. An 8800GTS. I can run it between medium and high, no problems. You and I have identical systems Jackrabbit, except the cards AND you have more RAM. Your card blows mine out of the water. You should be able to crank Skyrim all the way up and throw on HD textures for good measure.

[Simmura McCrea]

You'll note that all of the recommended features under the GPU section are less than what you have, and that the ATI card recommended has a lower number than yours. Higher numbers == better card. (This doesn't apply when comparing between ATI and NVidia, though.) The site did the exact same thing with my card.

tl;dr: Your graphics card is fine, go nuts, site's being stupid.

[anzki4]

Yeah, I have ATI Radeon HD 3400 and it runs Skyrim on 800x600 resolution, everything set to low or medium and all view distances at max.

[Haschel]

Yeah, you're pretty much fine unless you want to crank up the settings in game. If you're ready to spend money you could obviously upgrade your card, or if your motherboard supports it you could consider getting a second GPU and running it in crossfire. You would have to ask someone else if that would be a worthwhile option though, I don't have any experience with it myself.

[Criptfeind]

That website always does that. More likely then not it has been bribed by NVIDIA or something.

It did the exact same thing to my computer.

When I asked about a ten year old game.

[Heron TSG]

Free Disk Space
Recommended: 6 GB
You Have: 183.6 GB

Considering how much you blew this requirement out of the water, I think you can safely play without changing your machine. [/troll]

You're fine, go crazy.

[Jackrabbit]

Yeah, I figured I'd at least be able to run it, but bizarrely my computer has serious trouble playing a lot of recent games on max settings, like, for example, Empire Total War, which it can't handle on anything other than medium-low, or Company of Heroes. I guess my real problem is that I SHOULD be able to play these things on max but it never works out that way. That said, I'll give it a go. Thanks for the confidence booster.

[Nilum]

the ATI card recommended has a lower number than yours. Higher numbers == better card.

Er, actually, it's not like that at all. Even a Radeon 3870 is significantly better (three times) than a 5450. The Radeon card numbering scheme breaks down like so: [series number][model numbers], i.e., SMMM
The series number will increase every 'generation'; generally, these come with changes in architecture and new product lines.
The model numbers are the best indicator of performance, though.
Models 000-330 are integrated or mobile graphics cards, while 330-590 is their 'budget' selection. 600-790 are their mainstream cards, and over 800 are their enthusiast cards. A higher series number generally means an improvement -- but only in the same model class. A budget-class card will not outperform an enthusiast card, even given two or three generations of difference.

Jackrabbit: I'm sure your graphics card is the source of most of your gaming woes, and an upgrade will improve your experiences dramatically. The 5450 is one of the lowest-end cards ATi produces; you can get a much, much better card for under $200. The Radeon HD6850 is $150 and has a benchmark score almost 10x higher than the HD5450, for instance.

Edit: As for why your card meets the requirements but still fails the test -- there is a lot more to graphics cards than RAM and shader models. The really important specs are things like the number of processing units, clock speeds, memory bandwidth, and others.

[3]

I have my suspicions about that site. Either it's wrong/misleading or you're wrong in identifying the graphics card as the culprit here, because I can run Skyrim playably on mid-to-high settings and my card (Mobility HD4500 series) has an average mark of 259.

[Nilum]

I have my suspicions about that site. Either it's wrong/misleading or you're wrong in identifying the graphics card as the culprit here, because I can run Skyrim playably on mid-to-high settings and my card (Mobility HD4500 series) has an average mark of 259.

Hm, that's interesting -- I don't doubt you, but you must be running on an awfully low resolution, and I suspect our definitions of playable differ. Does it stutter or slow down during combat? I don't have personal experience with Skyrim, but he mentioned he had trouble with Company of Heroes which is over 5 years old now; even mid-range cards from that era could run it maxed out. It's probable that Skyrim is processor-heavy, so if you have a decent processor that might help to explain your playable performance at low resolutions with graphics-heavy settings turned down or disabled.

[3]

Resolution is 1366x768. Textures are on high (the default); other settings are higher and lower than the default (view distances are higher, FXAA's off). The framerate isn't perfect in places (there's a little stuttering while the game's loading exterior cells for example), but I get 25-30 FPS otherwise.

My CPU's worse than his too. Turion X2 RM-75.

[Nilum]

Huh, that's really interesting. I'm almost tempted to try Skyrim myself, now. I'm still running a Pentium IV, though -- while my graphics card can pull its weight, my processor would crash and burn. Still, I am positive that his issues with Company of Heroes and likely Empire (if Shogun 2 is anything to go by) stem from his video card, and upgrading it would let him run Skyrim maxed out with a steady framerate. His processor is quite good, and his GPU is definitely the bottleneck here. An upgrade isn't absolutely necessary, but would make things go much more smoothly.

[Jackrabbit]

the ATI card recommended has a lower number than yours. Higher numbers == better card.

Er, actually, it's not like that at all. Even a Radeon 3870 is significantly better (three times) than a 5450. The Radeon card numbering scheme breaks down like so: [series number][model numbers], i.e., SMMM
The series number will increase every 'generation'; generally, these come with changes in architecture and new product lines.
The model numbers are the best indicator of performance, though.
Models 000-330 are integrated or mobile graphics cards, while 330-590 is their 'budget' selection. 600-790 are their mainstream cards, and over 800 are their enthusiast cards. A higher series number generally means an improvement -- but only in the same model class. A budget-class card will not outperform an enthusiast card, even given two or three generations of difference.

Jackrabbit: I'm sure your graphics card is the source of most of your gaming woes, and an upgrade will improve your experiences dramatically. The 5450 is one of the lowest-end cards ATi produces; you can get a much, much better card for under $200. The Radeon HD6850 is $150 and has a benchmark score almost 10x higher than the HD5450, for instance.

Edit: As for why your card meets the requirements but still fails the test -- there is a lot more to graphics cards than RAM and shader models. The really important specs are things like the number of processing units, clock speeds, memory bandwidth, and others.

That's fantastically helpful, thank you.