Arkham Asylum specs

sturmtruppe · 12 Oct 2009 at 21:26

what does AA need gfx card-wsie to be ble to play maxed out including the use of physx? I have an 8800gts 512mb which is basically a lower clocked 9800gtx which im hoping will run this at a good 30fps.

Whats everyone else running it on?

thanks

Rroff · 12 Oct 2009 at 21:35

Depends on the settings/resolution...

2048x res with everything maxed and 4x AA it just about holds 60fps most of the time with my 260GTX SLI setup...

At a lower resolution you could probably get away with a 9800GTX+/250GTS for rendering if you had a 2nd 8800 series card for physx - but then you might as well get matching cards and SLI em if the board supports it.

EDIT: If we assume 1920x1200 with 4x AA, all settings including physics maxed - you'd need probably a 3.2gig dual core or 2.8gig quad core, 2gig of RAM (mostly free) a 275GTX for rendering and a second 8800 or 9800 series card for physx.

slylittlefox · 12 Oct 2009 at 21:37

I've got an E6300, 4GB DDR2, GTX260 - runs everything on max at 1920x1200 but only 2xAA. Thinking about another 260 in the possibly naive hope that I can truly max it out.

Rroff · 12 Oct 2009 at 21:59

Should be able to - aslong as you have a decent speed on the CPU.

Deadbeat · 12 Oct 2009 at 22:41

Hate to add to the ignorance, but what about my sig rig? I've heard there's AA problems with ATI cards, how wrong is this?

Edit: After I pick up my intended monitor my next month's pay is gonna cover a new cooler which, given my ability to talk without dribbling, will allow me to hit 3.8GHz/core, if my computer monkey is one to believe - and he is. I doubted him when he told me he could roll a trident with 10" prongs, and I was very wrong. What could this performance upgrade mean for me?

Rroff · 12 Oct 2009 at 22:48

Theres no native AA path in the game for ATI so you have to force it on from the control panel which results in a bigger hit - or you can use the unofficial "patch".

Deadbeat · 12 Oct 2009 at 22:53

Rroff said:
Theres no native AA path in the game for ATI so you have to force it on from the control panel which results in a bigger hit - or you can use the unofficial "patch".

This is what I thought. Has nobody addressed the fury that gamers have felt over being duped like this? I don't remember a game that's sided with one graphics manufacturer so completely before, surely they must acknowledge that their greed is harming the uninitiated?

Rroff · 12 Oct 2009 at 22:58

Despite whats been banded about - this wasn't necessarily intentional... the branch of the engine that the game is developed on does not have any native AA path at all and relies on it being enabled through the control panel on any hardware... the developer included a vendor specific custom multisampling path for nVidia hardware but disables it on other vendors hardware citing lack of testing... now why they didn't include an ATI specific path or a generic DX AA path is open to speculation... or why someone didn't take the time to properly test the custom multisampling path on other hardware.

The official line is they asked ATI to contribute to a path for ATI hardware or testing the custom AA implementation and ATI had made no real progress by the time the game shipped.

Deadbeat · 12 Oct 2009 at 23:07

Rroff said:
Despite whats been banded about - this wasn't necessarily intentional... the branch of the engine that the game is developed on does not have any native AA path at all and relies on it being enabled through the control panel on any hardware... the developer included a vendor specific custom multisampling path for nVidia hardware but disables it on other vendors hardware citing lack of testing... now why they didn't include an ATI specific path or a generic DX AA path is open to speculation... or why someone didn't take the time to properly test the custom multisampling path on other hardware.

The official line is they asked ATI to contribute to a path for ATI hardware or testing the custom AA implementation and ATI had made no real progress by the time the game shipped.

Thanks for the info. Now I'm glad I asked my brother to stump up for this. Assuming, in my innocent way, that this control panel enabling is relatively simple?

LoadsaMoney · 12 Oct 2009 at 23:42

As long as your GTS can manage about 70+ with no PhsyX on you'll be fine, as with the PhsyX on, your going to take about a 40 frame hit, so you'll be down to your 30.