F5F Stay Refreshed Software PC Gaming For those who claim you can play WoW on a potato...

For those who claim you can play WoW on a potato...

For those who claim you can play WoW on a potato...

Pages (3): 1 2 3 Next
X
xFontes_
Junior Member
17
11-05-2016, 12:12 PM
#1
You haven't played much lately. I've boosted my settings to 80*C and my GTX 1080 works at 88*C. Loading 1440p textures with high resolution uses a lot of energy. I'm limited to around 100fps because the monitor only refreshes at 144hz.
X
xFontes_
11-05-2016, 12:12 PM #1

You haven't played much lately. I've boosted my settings to 80*C and my GTX 1080 works at 88*C. Loading 1440p textures with high resolution uses a lot of energy. I'm limited to around 100fps because the monitor only refreshes at 144hz.

N
nobody21286
Junior Member
45
11-09-2016, 07:01 PM
#2
Your opinion? If you attempt to play any game on a potato, you won’t be using 1440P with high-res textures or top settings. You’re content as long as you achieve more than 30 FPS *Cries on intel 3520M iGPU*.
N
nobody21286
11-09-2016, 07:01 PM #2

Your opinion? If you attempt to play any game on a potato, you won’t be using 1440P with high-res textures or top settings. You’re content as long as you achieve more than 30 FPS *Cries on intel 3520M iGPU*.

I
Iam2GD4U
Member
189
11-10-2016, 01:42 AM
#3
Great! Let's get started.
I
Iam2GD4U
11-10-2016, 01:42 AM #3

Great! Let's get started.

J
jxzuzuzo
Posting Freak
750
11-11-2016, 04:51 PM
#4
This phrase seems to be a casual way of saying something is good for you.
J
jxzuzuzo
11-11-2016, 04:51 PM #4

This phrase seems to be a casual way of saying something is good for you.

S
snowcone03
Member
123
11-20-2016, 05:41 AM
#5
Wow.
S
snowcone03
11-20-2016, 05:41 AM #5

Wow.

M
Max16Def
Member
61
11-20-2016, 09:01 AM
#6
Some say it works on a potato since it's a highly scalable title. Slide the performance control down to 1 and it might run smoothly on a calculator. Not everyone requires high-end graphics—many console players are content with around 30 frames per second. (And wow doesn’t really gain much from higher FPS either. The recent update only improved performance slightly, making 10 frames per second seem reasonable now.) Judging a game’s demand mainly depends on many factors, so it’s not as straightforward as checking car noise to estimate speed.
M
Max16Def
11-20-2016, 09:01 AM #6

Some say it works on a potato since it's a highly scalable title. Slide the performance control down to 1 and it might run smoothly on a calculator. Not everyone requires high-end graphics—many console players are content with around 30 frames per second. (And wow doesn’t really gain much from higher FPS either. The recent update only improved performance slightly, making 10 frames per second seem reasonable now.) Judging a game’s demand mainly depends on many factors, so it’s not as straightforward as checking car noise to estimate speed.

S
Spidercyber
Senior Member
673
11-20-2016, 01:50 PM
#7
WoW launched in 2004 and was built for older systems, so it could work on a potato.
S
Spidercyber
11-20-2016, 01:50 PM #7

WoW launched in 2004 and was built for older systems, so it could work on a potato.

R
ricby
Senior Member
681
11-24-2016, 05:17 AM
#8
I can play Witcher 3 on ultra with better frame rates than in World of Warcraft, but the engine is quite old and there aren't many options to improve it. If you play WoW on low settings, yes it works well on most systems, and honestly even at ultra it still feels pretty rough.
R
ricby
11-24-2016, 05:17 AM #8

I can play Witcher 3 on ultra with better frame rates than in World of Warcraft, but the engine is quite old and there aren't many options to improve it. If you play WoW on low settings, yes it works well on most systems, and honestly even at ultra it still feels pretty rough.

Y
YIO87
Junior Member
10
11-24-2016, 05:47 AM
#9
I attempted to launch it on a Sempron 2.8GHz with 16GB RAM and a 240GB SSD GTX 1080. At 1280x720 resolution, it ran below 10 frames per second. That’s quite different from what I expect. You’ll likely need at least a Core 2 Quad or newer Pentium to handle anything playable. Nearly all systems from the last five years would suffice.

Original World of Warcraft specs (to enable the game): P3 800MHz, 32MB graphics, 4GB storage, 256MB RAM.

Current recommendations (medium settings): Intel Core I5-3330 or AMD FX-6300 with 4GB RAM and a GTX 750 Ti/RT7 260X.

Based on past experience, a GTX 1050 at 1080p works around 6 out of 10 settings before performance drops significantly.
Y
YIO87
11-24-2016, 05:47 AM #9

I attempted to launch it on a Sempron 2.8GHz with 16GB RAM and a 240GB SSD GTX 1080. At 1280x720 resolution, it ran below 10 frames per second. That’s quite different from what I expect. You’ll likely need at least a Core 2 Quad or newer Pentium to handle anything playable. Nearly all systems from the last five years would suffice.

Original World of Warcraft specs (to enable the game): P3 800MHz, 32MB graphics, 4GB storage, 256MB RAM.

Current recommendations (medium settings): Intel Core I5-3330 or AMD FX-6300 with 4GB RAM and a GTX 750 Ti/RT7 260X.

Based on past experience, a GTX 1050 at 1080p works around 6 out of 10 settings before performance drops significantly.

T
tsnyder01
Member
171
11-25-2016, 02:09 PM
#10
Looking at the numbers, there seems to be an issue. The fan curve doesn’t add up, and the CPU stats look off too. That’s pretty suspicious—maybe something’s not right here.
T
tsnyder01
11-25-2016, 02:09 PM #10

Looking at the numbers, there seems to be an issue. The fan curve doesn’t add up, and the CPU stats look off too. That’s pretty suspicious—maybe something’s not right here.

Pages (3): 1 2 3 Next