How well will I be able to run Oblivion with these specs?

Kent · 26 Jul 2006 at 13:22

Hi, how well will I be able to run games like Oblivion on these specs;

AMD Athlon 64 3800+ am2

Gigabyte (not sure on model) Motherboard

Radeon Sapphire x1600 pro 256mb (PCI-e)

1GB DDR2 RAM.

?

Thanks.

Kent · 26 Jul 2006 at 13:27

By 'the rest of the system is overkill for that card' do you mean it will bottleneck my cpu etc when playing games?

Kent · 26 Jul 2006 at 13:32

So we're talking about default settings here with these parts?

Kent · 26 Jul 2006 at 13:35

Úlfhednar said:
Depends on what settings the Oblivion launcher detects for your system, but I can't imagine it being very generous due to the X1600.

Well my friend has the same gfx card, ram and similar board as me apart from the cpu which he has a 3500+ and he said it started and works on all high (not max) for him. :confused:

Kent · 26 Jul 2006 at 13:37

Úlfhednar said:
He's probably pulling your leg.

Hmm no he seemed deadly serious. He start Oblivion started on medium-high settings for him and it works fine.

Kent · 26 Jul 2006 at 13:39

DaveyD said:
You'll probably get away with medium to high settings, just it will depend on how you like your framerates, as some people stick things on high and don't mind the framedrops.

I will be happy with medium to high, any day. I'm not expecting uber settings and frame rate, I was just wondering at how high I could go with it still being decent.

Kent · 26 Jul 2006 at 13:44

FirebarUK said:
Try and get another Gig of RAM and see if you can stretch to a Core 2 Duo 6300. Oblivion would love you for that.

Lol I don't have enough money for that unfortunatly. I am still at school and i've managed to scrape up the money to buy the specs I mentioned in the first post, which i'm happy with for now.

Kent · 26 Jul 2006 at 13:47

Johanson said:
Get a job as soon as you can.

At 14? The most I can earn a week is about £20 doing a paper round.

The only income I do have is web design/development. I can earn enough if I am saving up for something.

Kent · 26 Jul 2006 at 13:49

spinneR~uk said:
My specs:

AMD [email protected] on air
AGP 7800GS
2Gb Cheap RAM

Plays Oblivion nicely on medium settings at 1024. Your spec will have no problem and I certainly wouldn't bother spending money upgrading just to improve something you're not gonna look at much like the sky or the grass.

Thanks, and is the resolution you're reffering to 1024x768? :rolleyes:

Kent · 26 Jul 2006 at 15:04

FirebarUK said:
Yeah true

To the OP, surely you could go stretch for the 6300 and the Gigabyte DS3 board? you could always upgrade graphics in the future ... ?

1) The reason of this thread was not to suggest more upgrades, although I welcome similar/realistic changes.

2) I've already ordered the parts

3) I have onboard graphics at the moment.

Kent · 26 Jul 2006 at 15:44

Úlfhednar said:
I thought that the specs you provided were for an existing rig, my mistake. In your position I would cancel the order (or return it if it's already on the way) and order a socket 939 based system and X1800XT for less cost, but that's just me.

I was initially going to buy a 3000+ on socket 939, but was turned away from it as it's not future-proof and is slower than AM2.

I am only paying £10 more for the 3800+ on AM2 than what I was going to on the 3000+ on 939. Not much point imo.

Kent · 26 Jul 2006 at 16:16

Úlfhednar said:
I must be missing something because I am seeing the AM2 Athlon64 3800+ at £82.19 and the 939 Athlon64 3800+ at £78.67 (£58.69 for 3000+) and AM2 offers no performance increase over 939, it just helps standardise DDR2 and allow for technologies such as Pacifica.

That's no real difference, but if your current motherboard supports socket 939 and DDR333/400 memory then it would cut those things out of the equation entirely and make upgrading much cheaper.

I am guessing though that your current hardware does not support socket 939 processors or else you wouldn't be upgrading it.

Well what happened was, I got a quote for a shop for the 3500+ for £10 more than the 3000+.

It was two days late being delivered to the shop so they gave me a 3800+ for no extra cost. Thus, I got a 3800+ on AM2 for only £10 more.

And no, my current board only supports socket 754. This is a big upgrade in comparison.

Kent · 26 Jul 2006 at 16:27

Úlfhednar said:
Ah, gotcha' so the AM2 3800+ is about £70?

Err something like that, I think it might be closer to £80.

Úlfhednar said:
I am using socket 754 too, see sig.

Lol you're a better man than me then.

Kent · 26 Jul 2006 at 16:30

Úlfhednar said:
Just out of curiosity what CPU do you have now? 3000+?

LOL, I am just a master at being a cheapskate that's all. Can't complain though I get great bang for buck usually.

I currently have an Intel Celeron D 1.8Ghz.

(Socket 754, obviously)

Kent · 26 Jul 2006 at 16:35

Úlfhednar said:
Not LGA775? Either way a 3800+ would be a huge step up, of course.

Nope, it is 754. Everything in this comp atm is standard and was bought about 3 years ago, so I brought it upon myself to upgrade it as I wanted to start gaming properly on the PC.

Kent · 26 Jul 2006 at 16:37

Úlfhednar said:
Never heard of Intel processors running on socket 754 so that's news to me.

This is an undetailed spec page;

you've already seen it.

Kent · 26 Jul 2006 at 16:46

Úlfhednar said:
I don't see any references to socket there, but if you check out this page it has a bunch of Celeron D's listed as LGA775.

A new motherboard would definitely be on the cards then.

You might want to edit out that link though, the dons are pretty strict in regards to posting links to competitors as stated in the FAQ.

So now do you agree with the parts i'm getting? Or more than you did.

Kent · 26 Jul 2006 at 16:53

Úlfhednar said:
I never disagreed mate, was just trying to find any way I could to make it cheaper for to upgrade and possibly increase the power at the same time.

Okay no problem. Thanks for the help anyway.

D'you play Oblivion?

Kent · 26 Jul 2006 at 16:59

DaveyD said:
You are mistaken, if it's an intel, it's definately not a S754.

Oh, well it's a Trigem IM845GL board. :confused:

Kent · 26 Jul 2006 at 17:05

Úlfhednar said:
Aye I do, and it runs nicely on high settings on my system in 1440x900 but I imagine that an X1600 would need a serious resolution drop to cope (800x600 or so, but I hope I am wrong.)

On all high it probably would be 800x600. Someone posted and said I should get away with 1024x768 on medium-high settings, which i'd rather do I think.