Home Risen Risen2 Risen3 Forum English Russian

Register FAQ Calendar Today's Posts
Page 4 of 11 « First 12345678 ... Last »
Results 61 to 80 of 219
  1. #61 Reply With Quote
    Knight Commander
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    India
    Posts
    2,862
    Not the whole engine. If PB and DS bless us with the source code of Risen's engine, I'm sure Shak-otay and company will go be able to port the require portions of Risen's engine to G3. After all, Risen's engine is only a more optimised and completed version of the Genome engine used for G3. But, the chances of the source code release are approximately 0%.
    My skin for Opera Web Browser.[Bild: tOC_sig1.jpg]
    Nisarg is offline

  2. #62 Reply With Quote
    Metasyntaktische Variable  foobar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Direkt hinter dir! Buh!
    Posts
    21,263
    Quote Originally Posted by Bruell View Post
    I tried to play G3 on my new win 7 gaming Laptop
    A general remark (not specifically addressed to you) from my part: I usually recommend against using laptops for gaming purposes. Their graphics chips are always slower than those for desktops, they cannot be upgraded and the most important aspect: Usually, the manufacturer does not provide driver updates for the system once it's been sold. And those mobile chips usually require adaptations to the driver from the laptop manufacturer in order to work correctly. Some time ago, NVidia and AMD attempted to change the chip design to allow their own reference drivers to be used on mobile chips as well but recent developments (hybrid graphics mode etc.) have thrown a spanner in that.

    If you use a laptop for gaming, you most likely won't find any recent drivers for it. All performance, stability and compatibility enhancements that come with later versions (which are the reason why someone with problems is always told to update his drivers) are lost to you.

    That and the fact that desktop systems with the same performance level are cheaper and more flexible makes laptops for gaming purposes usually a bad choice. Though there are exceptions of course. If you really want to play while travelling around or need the graphics chip anyway (because you're a freelance 3D artist or something like that), you don't have choice. But for most people, a simple work laptop with a gaming PC at home is the better option.
    foobar is offline

  3. #63 Reply With Quote
    Ritter Bruell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Palm Springs, CA, USA
    Posts
    1,416
    Quote Originally Posted by foobar View Post
    A general remark (not specifically addressed to you) from my part: I usually recommend against using laptops for gaming purposes. Their graphics chips are always slower than those for desktops, they cannot be upgraded and the most important aspect: Usually, the manufacturer does not provide driver updates for the system once it's been sold. And those mobile chips usually require adaptations to the driver from the laptop manufacturer in order to work correctly. Some time ago, NVidia and AMD attempted to change the chip design to allow their own reference drivers to be used on mobile chips as well but recent developments (hybrid graphics mode etc.) have thrown a spanner in that.

    If you use a laptop for gaming, you most likely won't find any recent drivers for it. All performance, stability and compatibility enhancements that come with later versions (which are the reason why someone with problems is always told to update his drivers) are lost to you.

    That and the fact that desktop systems with the same performance level are cheaper and more flexible makes laptops for gaming purposes usually a bad choice. Though there are exceptions of course. If you really want to play while travelling around or need the graphics chip anyway (because you're a freelance 3D artist or something like that), you don't have choice. But for most people, a simple work laptop with a gaming PC at home is the better option.
    that's right, for the Joe average out there I would advise to go for a Desktop PC vs a Laptop.

    In my case however, I am on the road allot and use this Laptop not only for gaming purposes, in fact I play maybe 5% of my time.

    I did on the other hand just swap the ini file for G3 from the Forum over there and now things look a bit different.

    By the way, this ASUS Laptop G37 is blazing hot, and it moves through 99.8 % of all current games with a stable frame rate of 32+ frames / second (Crysis, Risen, ArcaniA demo full-blast settings).

    I-7 Processor 8GB Ram ATI HD 5870.
    Bruell is offline

  4. #64 Reply With Quote
    Local Hero
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    267
    Quote Originally Posted by Bruell View Post
    I-7 Processor 8GB Ram ATI HD 5870.
    Well, as foobar already explained, being a laptop, those names don't mean much.. What you have there is a 5870M. The M is important, because in reality it means it's an underclocked 5770! Same with the Core i7 CPU, it's not really equivalent to the desktop variant of Core i7. They're just using those names to ride on the hype of the desktop models.

    8GB would be great.. unless it was actually the speed of the RAM and not the amount that mattered. It's much faster having 4GB 2000MHz RAM than 8GB of 1333MHz RAM.. unless you do a lot of heavy Photoshop work or something.
    mkreku is offline

  5. #65 Reply With Quote
    Ritter Bruell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Palm Springs, CA, USA
    Posts
    1,416
    Quote Originally Posted by mkreku View Post
    Well, as foobar already explained, being a laptop, those names don't mean much.. What you have there is a 5870M. The M is important, because in reality it means it's an underclocked 5770! Same with the Core i7 CPU, it's not really equivalent to the desktop variant of Core i7. They're just using those names to ride on the hype of the desktop models.

    8GB would be great.. unless it was actually the speed of the RAM and not the amount that mattered. It's much faster having 4GB 2000MHz RAM than 8GB of 1333MHz RAM.. unless you do a lot of heavy Photoshop work or something.
    It does mean something, apparently it's very fast. One of the fastest laptops out there.
    Bruell is offline

  6. #66 Reply With Quote
    Local Hero
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    267
    Oh! I wasn't implying it was slow! It was more of a bitter rant at how hardware manufacturers kind of lie when they're naming the laptop hardware..

    It's an awesome laptop, by the way!
    mkreku is offline

  7. #67 Reply With Quote
    Knight RobinHood 13.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,836
    Quote Originally Posted by mkreku View Post
    8GB would be great.. unless it was actually the speed of the RAM and not the amount that mattered. It's much faster having 4GB 2000MHz RAM than 8GB of 1333MHz RAM.. unless you do a lot of heavy Photoshop work or something.
    If you don't need more than 4GB, then having 8GB won't be an advantage.
    However, I've heard speed of 1333MHz vs higher doesn't make a big difference in computer use like playing.
    If you need more than 4GB you will definitely want to have 8GB. If you need 6GB and the memory is accessed randomly, that means there's a 33% chance that requested data is not in ram, and you have to do a disk read. Considering ram operations are in the nanosecond scale, and disk reads a few miliseconds, this will drastically reduce performance.
    RobinHood 13. is offline

  8. #68 Reply With Quote
    Ritter Bruell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Palm Springs, CA, USA
    Posts
    1,416
    Quote Originally Posted by mkreku View Post
    Oh! I wasn't implying it was slow! It was more of a bitter rant at how hardware manufacturers kind of lie when they're naming the laptop hardware..

    It's an awesome laptop, by the way!
    Laptops are always slower than desktops the numbers the manufacturers put on their products are only a rough reference. I would also only compare a laptop to other laptops according to the numbers.
    I can compare a Laptop to a desktop in what performance I experience e.g. the frame rate on a benchmark or a specific game.

    This Laptop outperforms my two years older Desktop on most games.

    I do use lot's of memory on applications such as 3D max or VUE7 and a number of cad software, so I really do need the 8GB, would love to have 16.

    Oh,I forgot to mention Photoshop.

    But what was this thread about again? The original topic may be exhausted by now anyway.
    Bruell is offline

  9. #69 Reply With Quote
    Knight RobinHood 13.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,836
    Just want to mention, that even though your will rarely find games needing more than 4GB, that may change. We've had a limit in the 32bit OS'es, but with more and more getting 64bit OS, game designers may make games that, on higher settings consumes alot of ram.
    Levels or inntelligent memory management handlers can reduce need for much ram, but keeping more memory in the ram, would for example reduce cpu use of memory management, atleast I would think so.
    RobinHood 13. is offline

  10. #70 Reply With Quote
    Metasyntaktische Variable  foobar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Direkt hinter dir! Buh!
    Posts
    21,263
    This is just me smartassing again (ignore this one if you like):

    Quote Originally Posted by RobinHood 13. View Post
    Just want to mention, that even though your will rarely find games needing more than 4GB
    Actually, the limit for any process on 32bit Windows systems is 2 GB. To understand that, we need to understand that there are in fact two relevant limits involved.

    The first limit is the amount of physical memory the operating system can address as a whole. That limit is 4 GB on 32bit systems (2^32 = 4,294,967,296 bytes) because the processor's registers are only 32bit wide. But the memory that sits in the memory slots of your mainboard is not the only RAM in the system. Many components of a PC have their own memory and that needs to be accessible as well. Hence, Windows blends that memory into the normal memory - starting at the top (4GB) going downwards. Any real RAM that is in the way will be hidden. That's the reason why a 32bit system cannot even make full use of 4 GB RAM. Depending on what other components are installed, the usable system memory is usually somewhere between 2.5 to 3.5 GB.

    The following image illustrates that. No matter how much memory (cyan bar) is installed, the only part that can really be used by applications (green bar) is what remains from the 4GB limit after subtracting what other components require (yellow bar).

    [Bild: memlayout2.png]

    There are technologies available that allow to extend that limit, however. PAE (physical address extension), for example, which utilizes the wider address bus of modern processors (36 bit on the Pentium Pro). With that, even a 32bit system can access up to 64 GB RAM (2^36). The layout is basically the same, any excess memory get remapped beyond the 4 GB border. Use of PAE is restricted in Windows because Microsoft wanted people to use their expensive server operating systems on PCs with a lot of RAM. But Linux never had that problem.


    The other limit on 32bit systems is the virtual address space. That is the memory which any running process on the system can see. Because like many desktop operating systems, Windows does not show to processes what's really there. It lies to them, always making them believe they have the maximum amount of memory available for themselves. That maximum is also limited to 4 GB (for the same reason - registers). And that limit cannot be bypassed by PAE or other stuff. While a 32bit system with PAE may use 64 GB of physical RAM, any one process can still only have 4 GB of virtual address space. On the other hand, if there's not enough physical memory installed to give every running process its full 4 GB of RAM, processes are still tricked to believe that. In the background, Windows makes sure that whenever a process wants to access a part of its memory, that specific part is available. If necessary, older and currently unused parts are temporarily stored on the hard drive - that's what the swapspace (pagefile.sys on Windows) is for - and then freed for use by those processes.

    The virtual address space however is divided into two parts of equal size. The first 2 GB can be used by the process as it sees fit, the other 2 GB are mapped by Windows to a shared address space. That shared space can sometimes be lowered down to 1 GB with tricks but the default is 2 GB. And the default is what developers have to expect when making a program for the masses.

    Meaning that any 32bit process on Windows can only expect 2 GB of virtual address space for its own use.


    On 64bit systems, both limits get moved up to 2^64 (which should be sufficient for a while), making that a lesser concern. Especially the larger virtual address space is interesting for developers, even if their programs don't need that much physical memory (only few do). There's a technique called memory mapped I/O where a file can be mapped into the address space. It is not being loaded into the memory completely but it looks as if it were to the process. It allows applications to use the file as they want without having to care about file system operations. The operating system ensures that any part of the file which is accessed will be transferred to real memory. So the real memory will only be occupied by the parts that are really used. Only the virtual address space is occupied by the complete file. Because the virtual address space is limited to 2 GB on 32bit, that makes this otherwise compelling technique unusable for any larger files. But on 64bit systems, you can mess around with the virtual address space as much as you like - it's big enough. But of course, that's an advantage that has to be used by the programmers. Currently, there are only few applications which are developed for 64bit and really profit from it. Especially those with large memory requirements like Photoshop, 3D and video editing software, etc.


    However, I doubt that games will make use of any 64bit advantages any time soon. As long as 32bit systems are still out there, developers must program their games to run smoothly on those systems as well. And once the game is optimized to cope with the limitations of 32bit, it will also run in the same quality on 64bit systems. Theoretically, developers could build a separate 64bit version which can make use of the larger memory/address space. But that costs money during development and support. And only 64bit users will profit from it. If they instead spend the money on something else (i.e. implementing a feature like swimming), everyone (including the 64bit users) will profit from it. I think that makes 64bit a low priority issue for most developers.
    foobar is offline Last edited by foobar; 08.10.2010 at 19:06. Reason: typo

  11. #71 Reply With Quote
    Knight Commander
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    India
    Posts
    2,862
    Quote Originally Posted by foobar View Post
    This is just me smartassing again
    Not really, it was a very instructive read. I probably wouldn't have understood if I'd have looked it up on wikipedia.

    One learns new things each day. (I mean, apart from the boring stuff like chemistry and how to score marks in English exams)
    My skin for Opera Web Browser.[Bild: tOC_sig1.jpg]
    Nisarg is offline

  12. #72 Reply With Quote
    Knight RobinHood 13.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,836
    I've got 2.8GB VM for user mode, and rest for kernel mode

    Memory has often been a limiting factor for games, and forced you to reduce graphics. Graphics are appaerently very important, and if you get a new gaming rig and a powerful graphics card, you will most likely want to get a 64 bit system.
    Adding possibly higher settings, like higher graphics, which only is useful if you have 64 bit system, seeems to be fully possible. It largely depends on how much work there is in making a game that makes use of 64 bit system, and still works on 32 bit systems.
    RobinHood 13. is offline

  13. #73 Reply With Quote
    Local Hero
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    267
    Quote Originally Posted by RobinHood 13. View Post
    Just want to mention, that even though your will rarely find games needing more than 4GB, that may change.
    Yes, it may change. It's just not likely to do so very soon.

    I don't know if you've noticed, but there hasn't been any benchmark PC games since Crysis (released in 2007!). That's three years without anything pushing the limits. Why? Consoles.

    Both consoles (Xbox 360 and PS3) are extremely RAM starved (both having to operate using 512MB) and almost all new games being developed today are multi-platform. It would make no sense in making a PC game that would demand 4GB of RAM if you then have to cram it onto the 512MB restrictions of a console.

    When the next Xbox and PS4 are released, I am sure things will get moving again. Until then.. not so much.
    mkreku is offline

  14. #74 Reply With Quote
    Ritter Bruell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Palm Springs, CA, USA
    Posts
    1,416
    Quote Originally Posted by mkreku View Post
    Yes, it may change. It's just not likely to do so very soon.I don't know if you've noticed, but there hasn't been any benchmark PC games since Crysis (released in 2007!...n. Until then.. not so much.
    If only, even if it takes an indi developer, some dev would dare to develop a "PC only" game despite todays market predictions.

    All of a sudden, just to play that kick ass game, gamers around the world would go out of their way to buy that 64 bit rig with the cutting edge hardware. (if they didn't have it already)

    And of course in that consequence toss their console machines in the bin.

    Microsoft, Sony and who ever they are would go berserk over who is the first to come out with a higher end next gen console.

    Just a Fantasy though.

    Edit: @ Foobar, thank you for the education. :-)
    Bruell is offline Last edited by Bruell; 09.10.2010 at 03:12.

  15. #75 Reply With Quote
    Veteran Aetherian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Somewhere dark.......
    Posts
    673
    Well, I guess my desktop should be good for awhile then before I need to upgrade it.

    Processor: AMD Athlon II X2 245 2.90 GHZ
    Memory: 4GB Crucial PC2-6400 400mhz
    MotherBoard: Gigabyte Technology Co., Ltd. GA-MA785GM-US2H
    Video Card: ATI Radeon HD 5750 1024 MBytes RAM
    Operating System: Windows 7 32bit
    Aetherian is offline

  16. #76 Reply With Quote
    Ritter Bruell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Palm Springs, CA, USA
    Posts
    1,416
    Quote Originally Posted by Osmosis View Post
    Well, I guess my desktop should be good for awhile then before I need to upgrade it.

    Processor: AMD Athlon II X2 245 2.90 GHZ
    Memory: 4GB Crucial PC2-6400 400mhz
    MotherBoard: Gigabyte Technology Co., Ltd. GA-MA785GM-US2H
    Video Card: ATI Radeon HD 5750 1024 MBytes RAM
    Operating System: Windows 7 32bit
    Did you try the new "ini" file, for G3, from the WOG site with the HD setting yet?
    If so, how does it run on your rig?
    Bruell is offline

  17. #77 Reply With Quote
    Veteran Aetherian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Somewhere dark.......
    Posts
    673
    Quote Originally Posted by Bruell View Post
    Did you try the new "ini" file, for G3, from the WOG site with the HD setting yet?
    If so, how does it run on your rig?
    Nope, still playing Mass Effect 2 though I have installed the new CP and saw it fixed the ATI video glitch I was having in G3, kinda like a corduroy effect throughout the landscape. Very annoying, and glad that's fixed. I haven't seen the 'ini' file, where do I find it? I'll put it in and give it a whirl for sure, but I'll still try to finish ME2 first beforehand.
    Aetherian is offline

  18. #78 Reply With Quote
    Ritter Bruell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Palm Springs, CA, USA
    Posts
    1,416
    Quote Originally Posted by Osmosis View Post
    Nope, still playing Mass Effect 2 though I have installed the new CP and saw it fixed the ATI video glitch I was having in G3, kinda like a corduroy effect throughout the landscape. Very annoying, and glad that's fixed. I haven't seen the 'ini' file, where do I find it? I'll put it in and give it a whirl for sure, but I'll still try to finish ME2 first beforehand.
    Here it is, you will need a high end rig, so they say, the Link is in german but the download button is very obvious.
    Once downloaded, back up your Gothic "ini" file (it's in the gothic ini folder) or rename to old, replace with the file downloaded.

    http://www.pcgameshardware.de/aid,76...dventure/Test/
    Bruell is offline

  19. #79 Reply With Quote
    Veteran Aetherian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Somewhere dark.......
    Posts
    673
    Quote Originally Posted by Bruell View Post
    Here it is, you will need a high end rig, so they say, the Link is in german but the download button is very obvious.
    Once downloaded, back up your Gothic "ini" file (it's in the gothic ini folder) or rename to old, replace with the file downloaded.

    http://www.pcgameshardware.de/aid,76...dventure/Test/
    Got it, thanks. Bad thing is that it causes an almost immediate Guru error after the game loads. Guess my recently built rig isn't good enough to handle it.
    Aetherian is offline

  20. #80 Reply With Quote
    Ritter Bruell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Palm Springs, CA, USA
    Posts
    1,416
    Quote Originally Posted by Osmosis View Post
    Got it, thanks. Bad thing is that it causes an almost immediate Guru error after the game loads. Guess my recently built rig isn't good enough to handle it.
    To bad, I read that it runs best on 64 bit windows and an I7 chip. The 64 bit OS is necessary to handle the required 4GB RAM.
    Bruell is offline

Page 4 of 11 « First 12345678 ... Last »

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •