what laptop do you have?bombadilillo said:My laptop card is pretty bad ass for the price I got it for. 700$ for a good laptop with ati 5750. Runs Metro 2033 at medium 1600-900. I just wanted to be able to play my back catalog but the things a little champ!number2301 said:Laptop graphics cards suck, fairly simple ruleDr Jones said:
PC nerds.. Can my PC run this?
- Thread starter Dr Jones
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Funny that someone start's a thread asking for help, in which he insults those he's seeking the help of in the title, then expects no smartass replys.Dr Jones said:
On toppic...
Don't waste your time. Yes you might get it to "run". No, it will almost assuredly not be an enjoyable experience. Safe your money.
Lol, 8 people posted the "Can you run it" thing, even when they were aware that it has been posted a bajillion times. IMO if you keep posting it you're just being a smartass, or wanting to get your comment counter up.deadxero said:
I did not insult those i seeked help from. The people posting Cyri weren't really answering my questions, nor did most of them bother to read my or anyone else's comments.
Hp Dv7...dont know model of the top of my head and I'm at work. Its huge and works very well, got on sale at Office Depot of all places, waiting for my wife to finish shopping somewhere and found a good deal.sean360h said:what laptop do you have?bombadilillo said:My laptop card is pretty bad ass for the price I got it for. 700$ for a good laptop with ati 5750. Runs Metro 2033 at medium 1600-900. I just wanted to be able to play my back catalog but the things a little champ!number2301 said:Laptop graphics cards suck, fairly simple ruleDr Jones said:
Rule 1 about gaming pc's.
Never get a laptop.
While you may ((at any stretch of the word)) be able to run it at minimal graphics, maybe a little higher, it wont be for to long. You might burn the thing out because of how quickly they overheat. ((With or without a game running))
I would suggest upgrading your comp x:
You can get a half decent gaming PC for 35-50$ a month until its payed off.
Never get a laptop.
While you may ((at any stretch of the word)) be able to run it at minimal graphics, maybe a little higher, it wont be for to long. You might burn the thing out because of how quickly they overheat. ((With or without a game running))
I would suggest upgrading your comp x:
You can get a half decent gaming PC for 35-50$ a month until its payed off.
You can also build a desktop PC for about the price of a crappy laptop that will run games 20-50% better than a laptop could (monitor not included). Newegg for parts = win.kouriichi said:
I looked into your specs and you would be able to run it. But at a frame rate so slow it would be impossible to play.
Sorry dude, you're out of luck.
Sorry dude, you're out of luck.
The short answer is "No" - the game won't be fluid enough for the combat to be playable nicely, and that'll ruin the game for you. Though - I don't say this baselessly - allow me to elaborate further (or, of course feel free to ignore the block of text that explains this conclusion);
This is not as simple a problem to answer as it initially seems. Let's start with the Witcher itself, then go from there.
From this techspot article it looks like anything below a Radeon HD6570 will likely be too slow to be realistically playable at a good resolution. That gives us somewhere to start from.
http://www.techspot.com/review/405-the-witcher-2-performance/page7.html
Next, let's check out how the mobile HD6570M stacks up in benchmarks (we can assume the mobile version will be a little less powerful than the desktop version, as that's so far always been the case.)
http://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Radeon-HD-6570M.41479.0.html
Now, as for the Quadro NVS 3100M - this site doesn't list the same benchmarks for it, so we can't quite make a direct comparison - however, the GeForce GT210M and GT310M share the same core as the 3100M (probably where the quadro got the moniker 3100M from), so games performance should be pretty much identical to the GT310M, which is in fact listed (advanced openGL rendering will be faster on your Quadro, but games don't use those features of your card).
http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-310M.22439.0.html
We can see from the CoD:Black Ops scores that you can expect your card to be a little less than half as powerful as the HD6570M. Even if you assume the HD6570M is as powerful as the desktop version (it isn't), and you assume that CoD is a bad game for nVidia cards (it isn't), and you assume that the score difference won't match up across the 2 games (this one will actually likely be the case, though I wouldn't expect it to be too different), then you can at best hope for 15FPS at 1400x900. Not really playable, especially given the likelyhood that you've probably got a CAD workstation laptop which will have a relatively high native resolution, making low resolution selections even more ugly than otherwise expected.
On the other hand, reading all this I discovered that you can play Crysis pretty nicely on low settings, if that's any consolation to you?
http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-Quadro-NVS-3100M.24738.0.html
I hope that helps, and I'm sorry for the answer! The guy earlier on who said he had the same card as you probably summed it up as well as I could hope to, so reread that to get an idea of what the game will feel like.
This is not as simple a problem to answer as it initially seems. Let's start with the Witcher itself, then go from there.
From this techspot article it looks like anything below a Radeon HD6570 will likely be too slow to be realistically playable at a good resolution. That gives us somewhere to start from.
http://www.techspot.com/review/405-the-witcher-2-performance/page7.html
Next, let's check out how the mobile HD6570M stacks up in benchmarks (we can assume the mobile version will be a little less powerful than the desktop version, as that's so far always been the case.)
http://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Radeon-HD-6570M.41479.0.html
Now, as for the Quadro NVS 3100M - this site doesn't list the same benchmarks for it, so we can't quite make a direct comparison - however, the GeForce GT210M and GT310M share the same core as the 3100M (probably where the quadro got the moniker 3100M from), so games performance should be pretty much identical to the GT310M, which is in fact listed (advanced openGL rendering will be faster on your Quadro, but games don't use those features of your card).
http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-310M.22439.0.html
We can see from the CoD:Black Ops scores that you can expect your card to be a little less than half as powerful as the HD6570M. Even if you assume the HD6570M is as powerful as the desktop version (it isn't), and you assume that CoD is a bad game for nVidia cards (it isn't), and you assume that the score difference won't match up across the 2 games (this one will actually likely be the case, though I wouldn't expect it to be too different), then you can at best hope for 15FPS at 1400x900. Not really playable, especially given the likelyhood that you've probably got a CAD workstation laptop which will have a relatively high native resolution, making low resolution selections even more ugly than otherwise expected.
On the other hand, reading all this I discovered that you can play Crysis pretty nicely on low settings, if that's any consolation to you?
http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-Quadro-NVS-3100M.24738.0.html
I hope that helps, and I'm sorry for the answer! The guy earlier on who said he had the same card as you probably summed it up as well as I could hope to, so reread that to get an idea of what the game will feel like.
I tend to ignore most pain when it slowly creeps over my body until after I'm done receiving it. Then it hurts like no other.Dr Jones said:
try this site:
http://www.systemrequirementslab.com/cyri/
it automatically checks your system and tells you what prevent,s you from running it if you can,t.
http://www.systemrequirementslab.com/cyri/
it automatically checks your system and tells you what prevent,s you from running it if you can,t.
