{MOD}DREW
Member
+26|6852
I remember when I bought BF2 about a year ago I had a beaming smile on my face and a quick paced beat in my heart.  I ran to the local video store and bought myself my copy, ripped open the plastic cover with my car keys and was amazed and excited all at the same time; it was like my first bicycle on Christmas Day.  When I returned home I loaded the various discs, installed the game and watched in awe as the opening video launched.  I chose my weapon of "Pure Pwnage," created an EA Account and dove right in.  Unfortunately I lagged, everything skipped, my system froze up, I encountered the blue screen of death, and I even crashed to desktop.  I sat there confused, annoyed and downright bummed.  As it turned out though my system had held up to the requirements of what EA suggested it seemed that it just wasn't enough for the game to run on an advanced setting and my own satisfaction.  Reluctantly I upgraded my system, effectively making my bank account as empty as my recycle bin. 

With that in the past we are at another crossroads with 2142 nipping at our collected heels.  An extremely large online community awaits a depart from the traditional classic multiplayer that was BF2 and prepares for a new, futuristic experience sure to refresh the already established community as well as invite new ones.  My main concern is what plagued many-a-gamer when BF2 first came out, and that is the expense of upgrading.

Here is a list of what BF 2142 is "Recommending" for system requirements.

Recommended System Requirements: BF2142

Operating system: Windows XP with latest service pack installed
DirectX 9.0c February 2006 edition (included)
CPU: 3.0 Ghz
RAM: 1.5 Gb
Video Card: 256Mb DirectX compliant video card, Pixel shader 2.0 and above.
Hard Drive space: 1.8Gb of space is required to install the game
Internet connection: 512Mb Cable/DSL connection

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now if we were to turn back time to when BF2 came out, about a year ago, we can see what the system requirements were at that time.

SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS:  BF2

Windows XP (32-bit) with Admin rights
1.7 GHz Intel Celeron D / Pentium 4 or AMD Athlon XP/ Sempron or greater
512 MB of RAM or more
8x or faster CD/DVD drive
2.3 GB free hard drive space or more
Video: DirectX 9.0c compatible (see video)
Sound: DirectX 9.0c compatible (Sound Blaster X-Fi series recommended )
VIDEO
Video card must have 128 MB or more memory and one of the following chipsets:
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5700 or greater
ATI Radeon 8500 or greater

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is my concern.  When BF2 came out EA suggested  system requirements that hardly ran the game.  The gameplay was quite unstable and most settings had to be set to LOW.  Currently my setup runs BF2 well enough to where I can set everything on High without any AA/AS settings, but they are completely different from what EA suggested when the game was introduced.  For example:

BF2: Suggested              vs.             BF2: Actual

1.)  1.7 GHz Intel Celeron D                1.) Athlon 3000 64-bit
      Pentium 4 or AMD Athlon XP       
      Sempron or greater

2.)   512 MB of RAM or more               2.) 2 Gigs of at least DDR400 (3200) RAM

3.)  Video card must have 128 MB       3.)  7600 GT (PCIe) 256mb
      or more memory and one of the
      following chipsets:
      NVIDIA GeForce FX 5700 or greater
      ATI Radeon 8500 or greater

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Seeing that both my CPU and GPU were 2 generations ahead of the suggested and my RAM was four times the requirement I shudder at the thought at the initial requirements for BF2142.  If the numbers were the same from our previous experience then we would expect something such as this.

BF 2142: Suggested              vs.             BF 2142: Speculated*

1.)  CPU: 3.0 Ghz                                      1.) CPU: 3.8 Ghz (dual core / 64 bit minimum)

2.)  RAM: 1.5 Gb                                       2.) RAM: 3 Gb (DDR 400 minimum / dual channel)

3.)  Video Card: 256Mb DirectX                  3.) Video Card:  512Mb
      compliant video card,
      Pixel shader 2.0 and above.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ok... so let's crunch some numbers shall we.  If we were to hop on over to newegg.com for our needs let's see what we would be spending for this highly anticipated game.

Shopping List Speculated*: 
1.) CPU: 3.8 Ghz (dual core / 64 bit minimum); 2.) RAM: 3 Gb (DDR 400 minimum / dual channel); 3.) Video Card:  512Mb

What we got:
AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+ Manchester 2.2GHz 2 x 512KB L2 Cache Socket 939 Dual Core Processor - Retail $187.00
CORSAIR XMS 2GB (2 x 1GB) 184-Pin DDR SDRAM ECC Registered DDR 400 (PC 3200) Dual Channel Kit System Memory - Retail $303.00
ATI Radeon X1950 XTX - Retail $449

Total: $939 (approx)

Though this is a speculation* of times to come and everyone's idea of optimal gameplay is different, one cannot overlook the changes that PC gamers financially deal with as 6-month old technology becomes obsolete.  With the current state of PC technology and its ever changing environment combined with the advances developers have made over the past year alone one can see the unbelievable growth gaming has had over time.  When we all power down for the night hardcore gamers that want only the best will upgrade regularly, but their numbers are few compared to the majority of gamers that simply cannot afford the speed at which their recreation changes.


GL and HF,

Drew


The author can be reached at www.moveordie.net
stryyker
bad touch
+1,682|6907|California

...you cant have 3 GB of dual channel RAM, it wouldnt be dual channel anymore
Smackin_U
VAGITARIAN
+35|6831|Somewhere in the shadows

stryyker wrote:

...you cant have 3 GB of dual channel RAM, it wouldnt be dual channel anymore
w0rd
manitobapaintballa
Member
+32|6806
3.8 ghz cpu??? 3.2 runs the beta fine with 1 gb ram
Sgt_Sieg
"Bow Chicka Bow Wow." The correct way.
+89|6962
I only read about half... but it seems you compared the Recommended BF2142 settings... to the REQUIRED BF2 settings? Those are a tad different.
skizzz
Member
+22|6996|Moore, Oklahoma
well im not going to get 2142 then, I'm not gonna waste money upgrading for a game that will have serious bug issues, I think we learned that with bf2
doc. josh
Member
+48|6732

stryyker wrote:

...you cant have 3 GB of dual channel RAM, it wouldnt be dual channel anymore
un less u had a 2gb stick and a 1 gb stick that dule channle
stryyker
bad touch
+1,682|6907|California

its the same fucking engine as BF2. The computer requirements are not that high

doc. josh wrote:

stryyker wrote:

...you cant have 3 GB of dual channel RAM, it wouldnt be dual channel anymore
un less u had a 2gb stick and a 1 gb stick that dule channle
thats not Dual Channel.

Last edited by stryyker (2006-08-29 15:07:05)

jord
Member
+2,382|6865|The North, beyond the wall.

skizzz wrote:

well im not going to get 2142 then, I'm not gonna waste money upgrading for a game that will have serious bug issues, I think we learned that with bf2
Fine,i guess i'l have to play with just another 100 000 people instead of 99 999,ah well.
Consollus
Member
+21|6912|Sweden
Go for the new Intel processor - Core 2 Duo E6600 instead!
notorious
Nay vee, bay bee.
+1,396|6934|The United Center
Wrong.  Dual Core processors don't even have much, if any effect on running games.

Also, your BF2 Actual recommendations are wrong too.  I have a 6800GT and can run everything on high with no lag or stutter whatsoever.  A 7600 isn't necessary.

Plus, nowhere does it say that the recommended system requirements are what you need to run everything on high.  The difference between high and medium graphics settings is minimal.  Everything just looks a bit more smooth and pretty.
Goven
/̵͇̿̿/'̿'̿ ̿
+125|6668|Purdue
Yea, if you run a game on the required hardware, expect to run the game on low. It's common sense. And as said above, don't compare the required specs to the recommended specs. Think before you post.
{MOD}DREW
Member
+26|6852
All of your comments are appreciated and well put.  Most do all have one thing in common and that is they argue what would work best.  Some people would keep what they have currently, and some people would upgrade.  Some people stick with their current dual core and some people go with the new Intel Core 2 Processor.  The simple fact of the matter is that a very small amount of you will not change your system a year from now.  In fact when BF 2142 or any new game for that matter comes out you will in-turn due to your own wishes, or the wishes of DirectX 10 will upgrade. 

I never said it would never happen, I am not a fool.  I simply open up conversation of a topic that has been around since the debate between Atari and Collicovision (TM).


Drew

Last edited by {MOD}DREW (2006-08-29 15:19:47)

notorious
Nay vee, bay bee.
+1,396|6934|The United Center

{MOD}DREW wrote:

1.)  Before the "hardware debate" begins, please read the entire post including what would actually be bought.  I.e. Buying 3 gigs of RAM is unheard of, thus 2 gigs of high quality RAM was purchased. 

2.)  The BETA Version is a difficult benchmark being that is it unfinished and you not are experiencing the full retail version with all of the bells and whistles, maps, etc.  And EA has some nerve to think that I'm gonna shell out $15 to be their Beta Tester.

3.)  Please don't even bother to reply if you didn't even read the post.

And last but not least for the Nay Sayers, Flamers and Useless Posters the data used was speculated as said numerous times throughout the post.  Read before you reply, thank you.


Drew
Wait, wait, so us telling you what the requirements are for running the beta on medium and high settings is less accurate than you speculating what the requirements would be, even though you haven't played any version of 2142?

Take your pick, hypocrisy or ignorance.
MuseSeeker
2142 Soldier: Behenaut
+110|6962|EUR
I heard that BF2142 was to run smoother then BF2. I really really hope this is true. This is from some of the forum members.
[RDH]Warlord
Quakecon Attendee
+17|6846|SLC, Utah, USA
If anything, running on a dual core hurts you.  BF2 has a problem (constant "lost connection to server" disconnects) unless you set the affinity to one CPU.  So far, the beta has yet to do it to me.
{MOD}DREW
Member
+26|6852

stryyker wrote:

...you cant have 3 GB of dual channel RAM, it wouldnt be dual channel anymore
Obviously a 3 gig set up would be at the least "different."  However if you notice the portion of the post that lists what would be bought it is infact 2 gigs of RAM that is dual channel.  That should answer your question.


Drew
{MOD}DREW
Member
+26|6852

ThomasMorgan wrote:

Wrong.  Dual Core processors don't even have much, if any effect on running games.

Also, your BF2 Actual recommendations are wrong too.  I have a 6800GT and can run everything on high with no lag or stutter whatsoever.  A 7600 isn't necessary.

Plus, nowhere does it say that the recommended system requirements are what you need to run everything on high.  The difference between high and medium graphics settings is minimal.  Everything just looks a bit more smooth and pretty.
Morgan, no where in my post did I say what processor would work best with the set up, I did however not want to spend a GRAND on a processor.  Dual core has at this point in time a smaller effect on gaming, however the same can be said for the 64-bit processors, 754 chipset motherboards, and DDR2 RAM.  We could go on and on but I think you can see my point.  The processor is under $200 and works well with most of the latest games.

As I said before everyone is different.  Some people want everything on HIGH and some people could care less.  I do though have a feeling that many people here had to do some tweeking in-order for their BF2 to not skip and jump upon inital launch.  (I'm sure that yours was flawless from day one though... )

If you would like to check my Recommended system requirements feel free to go to EA's Official link which is where I found my information.  It is at the bottom of the page under System Requirements.

http://www.ea.com/official/battlefield/ … atures.jsp



Drew
starman7
Member
+15|6912
The major mistake by the original poster was comparing apples to oranges.  He listed the reccomended specs for Battlefield 2142 to the required specs of Battlefield 2.  Recommended means what you should have to play a game, required means what you need to just barely play the game.

Don't compare reccomended specs to required specs.  My computer barely hits the BF 2 and BF 2142 minimum specs, and even with everything set to low quality, BF 2 is a bit laggy, even on SP. (fortunately, my brother has a much better computer).  Recommended specs probably mean what you need to run the game with everything set to high (I'm unsure what the actual benchmark is, though.  It may be that you need to exceed the recommended specs to get everything on high).

If your computer runs BF 2 well, expect it to run BF 2142 well.  At the low end (as in barely meeting minimums), a computer which plays BF 2 might just crash trying to play BF 2142.  At the high end, you may have to set the graphics just a tad lower for BF 2142, unless your computer has more than enough power to handle the maximums.

After all, same engine, so required and reccomended specs may be a little different, but not much.  You will get similar quality gameplay on Battlefield 2142 as you did with Battlefield 2 if you have the graphics set the same way.  You won't need to upgrade your Battlefield 2 rig to play Battlefield 2142.

EDIT: Here are the required specs for Battlefield 2142

Minimum System Requirements
Operating system: Windows XP with latest service pack installed
DirectX 9.0c February 2006 edition (included)
CPU: 1.7 Ghz
RAM: 512 Mb
Video Card: 128Mb DirectX compliant video card, Pixel shader 2.0 and above.
Hard Drive space: 1.8Gb of space is required to install the game
Internet connection: 128kbit Cable/DSL connection

Last edited by starman7 (2006-08-29 15:41:49)

{MOD}DREW
Member
+26|6852
Wait, wait, so us telling you what the requirements are for running the beta on medium and high settings is less accurate than you speculating what the requirements would be, even though you haven't played any version of 2142?

Take your pick, hypocrisy or ignorance.
No Morgan I am listing the BF2142 Requirements from this forum on this thread.  http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=40042  This says nothing of this for the Beta, but for BF 2142.  I am not talking about the beta nor is there any speculation, that is however if you wish to speculate the validity of the above post's factual data which should take you to another thread.  Thank your for you input.  If there are any other questions I will happily clarify them for you.


Drew

*edited for misunderstood details from previous poster

Last edited by {MOD}DREW (2006-08-29 16:10:35)

Souljah
Member
+42|6855

stryyker wrote:

...you cant have 3 GB of dual channel RAM, it wouldnt be dual channel anymore
couldnt you have 2 1gb sticks and 2 512mb sticks to run 3gb in dual?
{MOD}DREW
Member
+26|6852
Starman~

  I completely agree with you.  The one thing I think the both of us can agree on is that it is very difficult for any of us including demo players to pin point a System Setup that will run 2142 at the same setting that they have currently with BF2.  It would seem to be a rather poor business/technological decision to be able to run a game on the same setup as it's predecessor that is already a year behind graphically.  In the end though the engines are the same, I would ASSUME that EA UK made some big graphics improvements that involve DirectX 10, future GPU PCIe, CPU technology etc in order to reinvent a previous version, create and establish a new client base as well as cementing those already in the mix.


Drew
{MOD}DREW
Member
+26|6852

Souljah wrote:

stryyker wrote:

...you cant have 3 GB of dual channel RAM, it wouldnt be dual channel anymore
couldnt you have 2 1gb sticks and 2 512mb sticks to run 3gb in dual?
Not to get off topic...

Im thinking if you have 4 DIMM slots 1, 2, 3, 4.  And you have your gig sticks in 1, 3 and your 512's in 2, 4 or visa versa it should work.  However considering most motherboards as of late are only equipped with 3 DIMMS or less and the cost of 512 sticks are becoming closer and closer to 1 Gb sticks I would say just shell out the extra cash and get yourself a GIG sick baby! 

Drew
jord
Member
+2,382|6865|The North, beyond the wall.
Alot to read here.

I'l just bring up this point,i have no idea what my Pc specs are,if anything they are below recomended.

It runs fine,all games do for me.

I think 2142 will be the same for me.
senor_fulff
Member
+25|6947|Yorkshire, UK.

{MOD}DREW wrote:

3.)  Video card must have 128 MB       3.)  7600 GT (PCIe) 256mb
      or more memory and one of the
      following chipsets:
      NVIDIA GeForce FX 5700 or greater
      ATI Radeon 8500 or greater
[/i]
Erm.. I have a 256MB 6800GT AGP OC'd and i run on high easily.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard