Maxed Graphs

[Cyberdragon 20]

I know I'm asking a but too much, but my gaming laptop will come in about 2 weeks.

So I can only play on minimum graphics. Can anybody please post some images with Wurm on ultra graphics?

[silakka 2,360]

heres plenty to check

http://forum.wurmonline.com/index.php?/topic/73668-give-us-your-best-screenshots/

[atazs 965]

Gaming laptop.... LOL 

Anyway wurm is badly optimized and needs some crazy rig to run it smooth with everything on the highest. 

[Cyberdragon 20]

Badly optimized in what point of view?

[Revelation 288]

Does not allocate memory well, handles a lot of stuff on the CPU that the GPU would be much better at.

If you want to run Wurm well, you need a good cpu, an SSD/ramdisk, and a good amount of fast memory, GPU is not that important in wurm.

[Jeixi 146]

Gaming laptop.... LOL 

Anyway wurm is badly optimized and needs some crazy rig to run it smooth with everything on the highest. 

 

If you're implying laptops can't handle gaming, you probably haven't handled any of the more expensive, newer ones. Mine handles SC2 at max settings smooth as silk even on games that make bulky thousand dollar desktops like my friends' lag. It handled ESO beta with no lag, and Wildstar beta with no lag. I had no lag on Diablo 3 and it's expansion. It can even host a server for Minecraft with no lag. Age of Wushu is also not a problem. And it's not even a gaming laptop, just a Dell that cost a little over a hundred bucks more than the cheapest one in the store. Are there even any new PC games more demanding than those I mentioned? Pretty sure a brand new laptop will handle any game if it's not a cheap $300 one. 

Edited May 22, 2014 by Jeixi

[EliasTheCrimson 348]

Wurm is rather CPU-intensive comparatively. The most significant difference in looks (after texture resolution, which is a matter of memory) comes from enabling all shadows, which essentially cuts performance right in half compared to no shadows at all.

 

If you're implying laptops can't handle gaming, you probably haven't handled any of the more expensive, newer ones. Mine handles SC2 at max settings smooth as silk even on games that make bulky thousand dollar desktops like my friends' lag. It handled ESO beta with no lag, and Wildstar beta with no lag. I had no lag on Diablo 3 and it's expansion. It can even host a server for Minecraft with no lag. Age of Wushu is also not a problem. And it's not even a gaming laptop, just a Dell that cost a little over a hundred bucks more than the cheapest one in the store. Are there even any new PC games more demanding than those I mentioned? Pretty sure a brand new laptop will handle any game if it's not a cheap $300 one.

Gaming laptops are a fantastic option for those with the coin, but the point is that a desktop build will always outperform a laptop for the same amount of money. It's just a bit more expensive to max out the graphics of Wurm on a laptop.

Edited May 22, 2014 by EliasTheCrimson

[Hailene 362]

 Are there even any new PC games more demanding than those I mentioned? Pretty sure a brand new laptop will handle any game if it's not a cheap $300 one. 

 

The games you listed aren't particularly graphic intensive.  Blizzard games are almost always exceptionally well-optimized, too.  So you can get more bang for your buck.

 

Unless you sunk like 4000 dollars into the laptop (which you clearly didn't), I imagine it chunking along if it tried, say, Metro Last Light at 2570x1600 resolution.  Hell, that game makes high-end single desktop GPUs cry.  With all the eye-candy and at that resolution, you'll need to SLI some of the spendier cards to get any sort of workable (40+) FPS.

 

What resolution do you play at, Jeixi?

[Zwei 210]

My computer can run Wurm at all graphics as long as I keep it frame-capped at 30,

 

It's a gaming laptop.

 

Intel Core i5 430m @ 2.27GHz (Arrandale 32nm Technology)

6.00GB Dual-Channel DDR3 (7-7-7-20)

1024MB NVIDIA GeForce GTS 360M (Toshiba)

 

I only worry about temperatures now, and I got a cooler-master pad (3 fans) to keep it elevated and blowing cool air at it :3

[Jeixi 146]

The games you listed aren't particularly graphic intensive.  Blizzard games are almost always exceptionally well-optimized, too.  So you can get more bang for your buck.

 

Unless you sunk like 4000 dollars into the laptop (which you clearly didn't), I imagine it chunking along if it tried, say, Metro Last Light at 2570x1600 resolution.  Hell, that game makes high-end single desktop GPUs cry.  With all the eye-candy and at that resolution, you'll need to SLI some of the spendier cards to get any sort of workable (40+) FPS.

 

What resolution do you play at, Jeixi?

 

I almost never mess with graphic settings when I play games, because I never have any trouble out of them, but I've turned the settings up to high on everything on a few just to see if it handled it, and had no problems. I never heard of that game you mentioned, but playing most games on that kind of resolution is kind of stupid unless you have your computer hooked up to a 40" television imo. You'd need mutant super powered eyes and a super HD monitor from the future to make a noticeable difference in game play unless the monitor was that big. I don't think even consoles have that kind of resolution on most AAA games.

[Druidnature 1,118]

I almost never mess with graphic settings when I play games, because I never have any trouble out of them, but I've turned the settings up to high on everything on a few just to see if it handled it, and had no problems. I never heard of that game you mentioned, but playing most games on that kind of resolution is kind of stupid unless you have your computer hooked up to a 40" television imo. You'd need mutant super powered eyes and a super HD monitor from the future to make a noticeable difference in game play unless the monitor was that big. I don't think even consoles have that kind of resolution on most AAA games.

 

.....that's because consoles are ancient technology compared to a regular computer. >_>....

 

But yah, a normal laptop will run most of the games you mentioned fine,  it's when you start getting into games like metro, Witcher, Farcry, Skyrim (modded to 8000 resolution textures >_>) ect that you'll run into problems, though a lot of PC's will also have issues with these.

[Hailene 362]

I almost never mess with graphic settings when I play games, because I never have any trouble out of them, but I've turned the settings up to high on everything on a few just to see if it handled it, and had no problems. I never heard of that game you mentioned, but playing most games on that kind of resolution is kind of stupid unless you have your computer hooked up to a 40" television imo. You'd need mutant super powered eyes and a super HD monitor from the future to make a noticeable difference in game play unless the monitor was that big. I don't think even consoles have that kind of resolution on most AAA games.

 

 

Even at 1920x1080 (1080p), the top of the line laptops can't handle it when everything gets cranked up.

 

http://blog.laptopmag.com/nvidia-gtx-880m-gpu-tested

 

GTX 880M runs around 18 FPS.

 

Also as Druidnature said, the consoles, even the current-gen PS4/Xbox, run on hardware that's already a couple of years old.  Though developers for consoles have the added advantage of knowing the exact specs of each and every user will be using.  This leads to a great deal of optimization, so consoles can do a lot more with less.

 

Even so, they still can't keep up.  PCs just have a lot more room (both space and money-wise).  There's no real way for a console's hardware to keep up.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

Still, even without knowing your setup and at what resolution you're gaming at, I can say confidentially that the most graphically intense games would chunk at the higher resolutions (1080p+).  Those games are playable (40+ average FPS) at 1080p with the higher end cards (500+ dollars, just for the video card).

 

I mean, heck, this doesn't even touch on multi-screen setups. You'd probably need 2 to tackle something like Metro Last Light.  That's a couple thousand dollars.

Edited May 23, 2014 by Hailene

[KunAlt 844]

I almost never mess with graphic settings when I play games, because I never have any trouble out of them, but I've turned the settings up to high on everything on a few just to see if it handled it, and had no problems. I never heard of that game you mentioned, but playing most games on that kind of resolution is kind of stupid unless you have your computer hooked up to a 40" television imo. You'd need mutant super powered eyes and a super HD monitor from the future to make a noticeable difference in game play unless the monitor was that big. I don't think even consoles have that kind of resolution on most AAA games.

 

Lol, consoles have sub par graphics even compared to ancient gaming pc rigs.

[Budda 2,675]

Does not allocate memory well, handles a lot of stuff on the CPU that the GPU would be much better at.

If you want to run Wurm well, you need a good cpu, an SSD/ramdisk, and a good amount of fast memory, GPU is not that important in wurm.

 

That is being worked on.

[Jeixi 146]

Eh, not many computer games I know of are more graphics intensive than console games, so I don't really worry about it like I used to. The point I was making is that computers are ahead of gaming right now as far as I can see, and a new laptop will handle most games if it's not just the cheapest model in the store. If this was a few years ago when most computers on the market couldn't handle most games, I could see the need for worrying about it. But even the cheap laptops now handle most games fine. Technology has come a long way, and gaming has been on the same plateau for a few years now.

[Cyberdragon 20]

It's an Alienware 14.

GPU: Nvidia GeForce GT 750M 2GB GDDR5

CPU: Intelcore i7 4th gen 3.4 gHz model 4700

RAM: 16GB

Memory: 1TB

[neofit 78]

Does not allocate memory well, handles a lot of stuff on the CPU that the GPU would be much better at.

If you want to run Wurm well, you need a good cpu, an SSD/ramdisk, and a good amount of fast memory, GPU is not that important in wurm.

I second that. I have a GTX-780 which can handle pretty much anything you throw at it. And an Intel i7-920 @2.6GHz CPU that I sometimes overclock to 4.0 GHz. I also play a lot of Arma3. Wurm uses much more CPU than Arma3 with almost everything on Ultra, a metric ton of AIs and view distance at 3 km+. And this just on my rather average deed with a couple of small 2-story houses. Glad to hear this is being worked on.

[Revelation 288]

That is being worked on.

 Exceedingly glad to hear this, I like playing with shadows enabled but I think they are still handled by cpu aren't they?

 

I second that. I have a GTX-780 which can handle pretty much anything you throw at it. And an Intel i7-920 @2.6GHz CPU that I sometimes overclock to 4.0 GHz. I also play a lot of Arma3. Wurm uses much more CPU than Arma3 with almost everything on Ultra, a metric ton of AIs and view distance at 3 km+. And this just on my rather average deed with a couple of small 2-story houses. Glad to hear this is being worked on.

 Pretty much the same setup as me except I have an AMD 7950 and my i7-920 is OC'd to 4.0 permanently.

And yeah, sadly what you say is true, although Arma 3 is also a fantastic example of poor optimization (a few months ago, have not tried it for a while)

[Hailene 362]

GPU: Nvidia GeForce GT 750M 2GB GDDR5

 

Ouch.  You bought a "gaming" laptop with a lower-mid tier graphics card?

 

I wouldn't settle for anything less than an X60 (X being whatever the latest generation).

 

Also, why did you pick up a 700 series GPU? The Maxwell stuff is out.  I would have gotten at least an 860m.

[Jeixi 146]

Ouch.  You bought a "gaming" laptop with a lower-mid tier graphics card?

 

I wouldn't settle for anything less than an X60 (X being whatever the latest generation).

 

Also, why did you pick up a 700 series GPU? The Maxwell stuff is out.  I would have gotten at least an 860m.

 

I'm a dummy, and don't know crap about graffix cardz and all that uber 1337 shiz, but is an intel i3 core pretty decent? That's what I use, and it works great.

[Hailene 362]

\but is an intel i3 core pretty decent?

 

Sufficient for lower-speced gaming.

 

You really ought to shoot for an i5 (though, again, not every generation is equal.  A first generation i5 is a much different beast than what's out on the market nowadays).

 

People are oddly attracted to i7s, but you really don't need the additional cores for gaming.  4 cores is more than enough for games (since games only use up to 2, to my knowledge, which gives you 2 cores to run windows and other background processes like music or your internet browser).

 

Mostly, though, what I'd worry about for laptop gaming is GPUs since a lot of budget laptops offer either weak GPUs or none at all.  That's what really hurts gaming performance.

[Arkhir 280]

Intel Haswell Core i7-4770K

Crucial Dual 16GB 1600MHz Ballistix

Gigabyte GeForce GTX780 OC R2.0 3GB WindForce (384-bit) (PCI-E)

 

 

this rig is running wurm at everything maxed out pretty smooth (anywhere in range 30 - 150 fps, where less is when more stuff is around e.g. on deeds), despite the moments when I get memory leaks

Edited May 23, 2014 by Arkhir

[Thorakkanath 444]

Hehe my old

 

Core2Duo E6300 OCed to 2.8 ghz (from 1.86 - equivalent with a E6700) together with

4 gb RAM,

a Samsung 830 and

a HD6870

 

can handle wurm on medium settings in the range 0(yes 0)-50 fps depending on hangs. Usually is in the 20s though (10s on deed).

[Jeixi 146]

Sufficient for lower-speced gaming.

 

You really ought to shoot for an i5 (though, again, not every generation is equal.  A first generation i5 is a much different beast than what's out on the market nowadays).

 

People are oddly attracted to i7s, but you really don't need the additional cores for gaming.  4 cores is more than enough for games (since games only use up to 2, to my knowledge, which gives you 2 cores to run windows and other background processes like music or your internet browser).

 

Mostly, though, what I'd worry about for laptop gaming is GPUs since a lot of budget laptops offer either weak GPUs or none at all.  That's what really hurts gaming performance.

 

I'm pretty happy with my i3, but I can see why an i4 would be better, it's like, a whole number higher, and stuff. 

[Gone420 609]

It's an Alienware 14.

GPU: Nvidia GeForce GT 750M 2GB GDDR5

CPU: Intelcore i7 4th gen 3.4 gHz model 4700

RAM: 16GB

Memory: 1TB

itll be able to run wurm quite well, def maxxed if there arnt to many lights/building/characters/big dirt walls around in local

that 750m is very meh, but not a big deal w/ wurm

 

 

'gaming laptops' are pretty cool i guess but its just too easy to run into heat problems when you start to stress the hardware w/ long gaming sessions