WOW - Dual 867?

Discussion in 'Games' started by tightbunns, Dec 15, 2004.

  1. tightbunns macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2004
    #1
    I understand that the min requirements are 933, but that is for a single processor. Anyone know if it will run on my dual 867? And if it does, does it run alright?

    Thanks a lot

    Mike
     
  2. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #2
    Well...

    I know little about WoW, but in general system requirements are not absolute; I'll bet it will run on your dual 867 - whether it will run at an acceptable speed is another question. I can play Call of Duty on my Dual 533 (which is well below minimum reqs), but it isn't pleasant, and certain missions would be literally a slideshow. :(
     
  3. BrianKonarsMac macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    #3
    can we just stop with the WoW and my computer threads? if you've read one, you'd know that nobody can agree on what decent performance is, so it's up to you and your own personal preference. to me it runs fine, to someone else it runs like ****. hows about trying it for yourself...?

    o and it's not like WoW is going to tell you you don't meet the min. requirements and just not open...do you think 67 mhz are going to make the game unplayable?
     
  4. tpjunkie macrumors 65816

    tpjunkie

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2002
    Location:
    NYC
    #4
    or, for a constructive post, it plays "acceptably" [as in the game is playable] on a dual 533 with a radeon 9800, so theres agood chance you should be fine, and if you've upgraded your GPU, you should be great.
     
  5. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #5
    From what I've seen of WoW's complex graphics, I'm surprised the 533 did that well, even with the 9800's help. Maybe it's less CPU-bound than CoD.

    "Good Performance" is about as subjective a topic as what constitutes "Good Beer" or a "Good Film" or a "Good Hairstyle" etc., So you'll see a lot of conflicting opinions on this topic, and a bit of invective thrown in for good measure by the less patient macrumors denizens. :D
     
  6. tightbunns thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2004
    #6
    Thanks for the help guys.

    tpjunkie, i've sent you a pm for some additional help.

    Again, thanks.
     
  7. yellow Moderator emeritus

    yellow

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #7
    There aren't many games (any?) out there that ustilize or even care about dual-processors. I don't think WoW is any different.
     
  8. SilversunStreak macrumors member

    SilversunStreak

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2004
    #8
    I have a dual 867 and the game runs fine by my standards. I get 15-25 frames in the game. I love this game and sure I'd love it to play better, but it works fine enough.
     
  9. trose macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    #9
    Runs just fine on my DP 867 with 1 gig of RAM. 20-30fps in most areas, will dip into the teens when in a large capital city.

    Only time I feel like I'm at a disadvantage is the large scale (20+) PvP encounters. Then It can drop into the single digits... being a caster I can still knock off spells ok in the lag, but it's not ideal.

    Big thing to remember is, turn down your visual distance as much as you can. It takes away some of the nice views, but it's a huge performance boost. Besides that, I have all my graphics in the mid-high range.
     
  10. Barham macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2004
    #10
    Yellow, you show your ignorance.

    WoW is multiprocessor aware, but it just offloads a few things like sound to the second proc. OpenGl in OS X is already multi aware.

    I have had WoW running on a single 867 with a Geforce3 and it is playable. It's not great (I wouldn't attemp any PvP), but it will work.

    -Hasta
     
  11. vraxtus macrumors 65816

    vraxtus

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2004
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #11

    UT2K4

    Wow a 9800 in a 533.. talk about a waste of money. Nice job with that bus bottleneck.

    On a DP 867, should be fine. The last patch jumped my FPS rates to almost twice what they were, even with pixel shading on. Mind you every detail is set to low but now I can at least hit 30 FPS.
     
  12. trose macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    #12
    You might wanna play with those detail settings.
    I thought to put them all low, but as happens often in games, it didn't help much.
    I saw *maybe* a 1-3fps gain around Orgrimmar when I went to Low from High on my Radeon 9000 Pro.
    IMHO the performance gain with poor texture quality is negligible.
     
  13. Jimong5 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2002
    #13
    id say depends on what you got in there. is it the 4mx, the 9000 upgrde, a 4ti, or a 9800? I managed to find a 9700 on ebay for my dual 867 (the one with adc, it was an awesome find, I paid about $300 for it) and I can get great settings, everything is cranked(except for distance), pixel effects are on, and I get a good rate. Its usually at 20, big cities are usually fine, to the low teens, and inside caves and houses , it will fly to 50.

    so this is more detailed:
    dual 867
    1GB RAM
    Radeon 9700

    It plays a heck of a lot better than a new iMac G5.

    heck, a 667 Tibook (7500 32MB) plays it better than a new G5 iMac.
     
  14. Rezet macrumors 6502a

    Rezet

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2003
    Location:
    Connecticut, United States of America
    #14

    :rolleyes: I think you need to stop smoking that stuff ;)
    I have no idea why would anyone put 9800 into 533mhz computer.
    I also have no idea how the game performance can be "acceptable" with this config. But then again, maybe 5 fps is acceptable to some people.
    I also have heard ridiculous statements like that when UT2004 just came out. When some dude would claim he can play UT2004 in ONS mode on 800 Mhz G4 ibook or something. So I can't say I'm surprised.

    I know you all love your Macs (maybe a little too much for comfort), but let's be real here.

    Even with 9800Pro and Dual 867Mhz G4 game would probably be performing below desired expectations. Just becuase you can launch the game on your machine, doesn't mean you will want to play a thru a slideshow. See, I'd be less sceptical about this and would give the original poster a green light but paying $40-$80, and then $15/mo for 12fps seems like a horrible idea to me.
    I would not recommend anything less than Dual 1.25 with 9600PRo/XT for this game. Call me picky if you want.
     
  15. Jimong5 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2002
    #15
    I have that config practically, and it is perfectly fine to me, not a 3GHz PC with an x800, but its fine for 2 year old hardware. also keep in mind, this is an MMORPG. not an FPS. 12 FPS for an FPS is bad, because your framerate is vital to how well you can aim and shoot. however, you can play an RPG at 5 FPS, it would be terrible, but you still know whats going on, and could live almost as well as someone at 60.

    Ill post some screenshots to show you what you can expect from my system likeness. i need to shrink them and compress them to fit 100k, but youll get the idea.
     

    Attached Files:

  16. trose macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    #16
    Rezet, I am playing on a DP 867, and like I said, it's perfectly fine in all PvE and nearly all PvP (very large battles do become annoying).

    I would recommend that Tightbunns take advice from actual owners of the said machine & game, rather than those whom are just speculating.
     
  17. Rezet macrumors 6502a

    Rezet

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2003
    Location:
    Connecticut, United States of America
    #17
    Well perhaps we have a different understanding of what "enjoying the game" means. But hey, as long as you like it, the flag is in your hands. ;)
     
  18. tpjunkie macrumors 65816

    tpjunkie

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2002
    Location:
    NYC
    #18
    First of all, graphic cards, as surprising as it may seem, actually have uses <i>other</i> than gaming. Second, 15-20 FPS with not low, but mid level settings IS acceptable. Not great, but not unplayable either. And as far as sticking a 9800 into a dual 533 is concerned...don't knock till you've tried it...it's a lot cheaper than a dual upgrade card or a whole new computer.
     
  19. Rezet macrumors 6502a

    Rezet

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2003
    Location:
    Connecticut, United States of America
    #19
    HAH. This is the best response ever. Sometimes people just make my day.
    I'll let vraxtus to handle that one ;)
     
  20. Jimong5 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2002
    #20
    you do know its not cut and dry as you seem to think it is. a lot of people seem to think that 4x is absolutely needed, but the more i read, the more i see that 8x seems to be just marketing hype. i even read in one place a 9800 cant saturate a 2x yet.

    http://www.lostcircuits.com/video/quadro_980/

    so what im saying is, no one knows for sure wether 2x is not enough.

    after, remember the benchmarks between the 1 GHz quicksilver and 1 GHz MDD? nothing, even though the latter had a faster bus and DDR. another thing: http://www.si87.com/Products/Videocards/agpvspci/details.html
    that table says AGP 2x can do about half a gig a second.

    besides, maybe he cant drop a ton of money on a new G5, and the 9800 offers features like core image and pixel shaders.
     
  21. tpjunkie macrumors 65816

    tpjunkie

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2002
    Location:
    NYC
    #21
    Exactly, with a 4x AGP slot, I actually get all the bandwith that the retail 9800 for mac can provide, because the reail 9800 is only 2-4x AGP. The 8x version is only available as a build to order option on G5s. My bottleneck is my system bus at 133 Mhz, which I am well aware of, but judging from your non-constructive posts and the fact that you don't even use a Mac, you seem not to be.
     
  22. vraxtus macrumors 65816

    vraxtus

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2004
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #22
    Here we go again...

    OWC sells CPU upgrades, albeit SP 'grades for only $299 for a 1Ghz chip.

    Whether or not a 9800 can saturate a 2X slot is without question... if it couldn't we'd be seeing performance caps nearly the same all across the board in a wide range of systems. Secondly, WoW is CPU bound!. Hence, ANOTHER waste of money in putting that 9800 in your comp... hell I'll even tell you my 1.8 bottlenecks with the 9800SE I've got in it... but FAR FAR FAR FAR FAR less than it will in a 533 with a 133mhz (yes kids, 133, I did my research) system bus. Coupled with PC133 RAM you'd got yourself a kick-yourself-in-the-nuts purchase... IMO you should have gone with a minor CPU upgrade (maybe to 1Ghz?) and spent the remaining on a GeForce 3 or 4MX which would have been a much cheaper alternative, or get a 2nd hand 9000 pulled from a newer MDD. But, that's just what *I* would do... since I think I'm a little more concerned about saving money than, well, having the best *named* card.
     
  23. vraxtus macrumors 65816

    vraxtus

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2004
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #23
    And you guys think I'M misinformed!


    Let's call this BTO Rad9800 that 8X enabled, the Rad9800 SPECIAL EDITION.

    Go look it up, I'll be waiting.
     
  24. Jimong5 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2002
    #24
    my Dual 867's 133 bus feeds a 9700 just fine, why would a 533 be any different? AND if WoW was bound by the CPU why would my friend choose to play on a 667 Ti book, when he could also use a 1.8 GHz G5 iMac?

    Its because the Radeon 7500 is a better card than the nvidia 5200. There's no other explanation. a Dual 867 with a 9700 will play this game much better than a one with a Radeon 9000.

    Nice contradiction there. You say first, the BUS is a bottleneck, then you say to upgrade the CPU, but at the end of the day, it will still be 133MHz using PC 133. also, notice the 9000 does not use new stuff coming in 10.4, but the 9800 does. So perhaps it does have some use, even if it isn't fully fed. I also thought it was a G4 with a AGP 2x, but it turns out its a 4x slot. theres no way a 4x slot is not enough.


    So? What's your point? There's a 9800, and a 9800 SE. a 9800 SE wont fit in a G4, and a G4 card will fit in a G5, but he doesn't have a G5, so it doesn't matter. the G5 is 8X AGP, so you make the card 8X AGP. your car can go 100 MPH, do you drive that fast? no, there are circumstances preventing you from ever reaching that speed.

    G4 9800
    G5 9600 (note the pin difference) - also 8x AGP, does that make it better than the 9800 G4?
    9800 SE for the G5, once again, new pins and 8x.

    last but very not least...
    Oh look, that se and "required upgrade" of 8x gets a HUGE FPS GAIN!

    oh wait...
     
  25. tpjunkie macrumors 65816

    tpjunkie

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2002
    Location:
    NYC
    #25
    Thanks jimong5, you mentioned 90% of what what I was about to, the other 10 percent can be summerized as follows:

    At the time of purchase, the videocard was significantly cheaper than a processor upgrade (and MUCH cheaper than a dual processor upgrade would have been, because lets face it, once you go dual, there's no going back [please rip into me for that statement, someone, because i would like nothing more to argue about that for a while.. :rolleyes: ]).

    Second, considering the amount of video work that computer is used for, the 9800 pro was a good choice, it reduced significantly the amount of time needed to edit and produce video with FCP.
     

Share This Page