Grimrock 2 performance compared to Grimrock 1
Re: Grimrock 2 performance compared to Grimrock 1
A little random but I was wondering, how safe am I to assume it will be a 40+ fps ride on High on an Intel i3 @ 3.3 ghz, 4 gb ram, GTX 550 Ti 1 gb?
Re: Grimrock 2 performance compared to Grimrock 1
I'm interested more in the game than its graphics (i would buy it DM graphics as well). Obviously i take all eye candy the dev can add on top through optimizations but which still enables the game to run on hardware which was able to run GR1. Times have changed, on the Amiga it felt great to buy additional 512KB for DM. In early 3D accelerator days it felt okay buying new graphics cards (and mostly a whole new system, CPU/RAM/MOBO/sometimes a new PSU as well) almost every 1-1.5 years.
Then due to the consoles there was no need to refresh your hardware this quickly anymore. First it was annoying but then it also felt like a relief. Graphics cards also continued to turn into these big fat almost absurd monster constructions, loud fans, occupying two slots, insane TDPs, ... no one i know of privately buys such dinosaur hardware for their homes anymore. Performance/per Watt ratio optimized passively cooled designs for notebook/tablets are cool.
There still is a lot of potential for great games running on hardware which might be even up to 5 years old. The performance differences/bugs offered in this area cause some issues though. Anyway i like to run games with a way more relaxed need to buy new hardware. I rather enjoy an enhanced art style than an increased poly count if it ends in itself. Graphics always were and are a driving force in video games and new, significantly more powerful, systems also enabled new designs and pushed things forward but somehow many of the games could have done with less as well.
As long as the majority of the software i'm interested in runs just fine, i feel no need to upgrade. Coming back to this one, i'll wait until release/bug fixes and reports are available and hopefully it will run on my system in some config as well. If not, we might meet some day in the future.
Then due to the consoles there was no need to refresh your hardware this quickly anymore. First it was annoying but then it also felt like a relief. Graphics cards also continued to turn into these big fat almost absurd monster constructions, loud fans, occupying two slots, insane TDPs, ... no one i know of privately buys such dinosaur hardware for their homes anymore. Performance/per Watt ratio optimized passively cooled designs for notebook/tablets are cool.
There still is a lot of potential for great games running on hardware which might be even up to 5 years old. The performance differences/bugs offered in this area cause some issues though. Anyway i like to run games with a way more relaxed need to buy new hardware. I rather enjoy an enhanced art style than an increased poly count if it ends in itself. Graphics always were and are a driving force in video games and new, significantly more powerful, systems also enabled new designs and pushed things forward but somehow many of the games could have done with less as well.
As long as the majority of the software i'm interested in runs just fine, i feel no need to upgrade. Coming back to this one, i'll wait until release/bug fixes and reports are available and hopefully it will run on my system in some config as well. If not, we might meet some day in the future.
Last edited by Neptun on Wed Oct 01, 2014 1:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Grimrock 2 performance compared to Grimrock 1
karadoc wrote: I'd like to be able to play the game on my Surface Pro 2 (with an external monitor)
Well, if you spent money for gadget like SP2 is, then you should to know what you bought
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-Mic ... 769.0.htmlImho it can run LoG 2 on low/mid settings.
I'm the Gate I'm the Key.
Dawn of Lore
Dawn of Lore