System requirement help!

lukew

Hey the new Humble Bundle WB is out, and i'm wondering can I run these games Batman: Arkham Asylum GOTY
F.E.A.R. 2: Project Origin
F.E.A.R. 3
Lord of the Rings:War in the North
My Specs are: toshiba laptop
Model: Satellite C885D
Processor: AMD E-450 APU with Radeon(tm)
HD Graphics 1.65 GHz
installed memory (RAM): 4.00 GB
System Type: 64-bit Operating System

Wossack

check out systemrequirementslab.com (think it still works / is relevant)

lukew

i tired that i said fail but i also have fallout new vegas and it runs perfect on my pc and it fails on systemrequirementslab.com

CastorTroy

Can check this one.
http://www.yougamers.com/gameometer/

And sure it's only a few quid to get them and the other 2. So play it safe and get them. If they work, they work. If not, consider it an investment for when you upgrade.

Mark Hamill

lukew wrote: »

i tired that i said fail but i also have fallout new vegas and it runs perfect on my pc and it fails on systemrequirementslab.com

Which did it fail under? Graphics card, processor etc?

TerrorFirmer

I wouldn't expect miracles. 25-30fps at lowest settings if you're lucky for Fear 2 and War in the North. I sincerely doubt Arkham City or Fear 3 will run at playable framerate even at lowest settings. The E450 is a super low end processor with equally low end intregrated graphics, about as slow as a laptop coud possibly be.

New Vegas is much more hardware friendly than any of those games...

lukew

Fallout: failed under CPU speed
Minimum: Dual Core 2.0 GHz Processor or better
You Have: 1.6 GHz

Agricola

Batman would be graphically intense and the FEAR sequels if they're anything like the original are all about particle effects. You'd need a system with a lot more grunt than that laptop to run these games at any kind of playable frame rate. Thats a dual core 1.7ghz processor apparently. Those series of Toshibas are aimed at basic computer tasks, not gaming.

lukew

so it would be a waste of time to buy them and try run them?

TerrorFirmer

Fallout games are neither CPU or Graphically intensive compared to other games really, Fear would be a lot more demanding, as would Arkham Asylum. It's only 70c to buy Arkham Asylum, both the Fears, and LOTR, so go ahead and try them, it is only 70c after all and it'll be time rather than money you're wasting really. I'd say you might get away with FEAR 2 at lowest settings just about, the others I would think no.

Agricola

IMO it would. You could run them at low resolutions with everything turned down and it might be bareable but I personally couldnt do that. They would look worse than on console I'd imagine.

Oh - I didnt realize they were THAT cheap! In that case go ahead and test them out. If in the future you have a better system, you'll have these games waiting for it.

Lu Tze

I have a similar spec in my laptop. Tried loading tomb raider the last day, dropping all settings, and the resolution to 800 X 600 made it playable... So it might run then at very low settings

TerrorFirmer

Lu Tze wrote: »

I have a similar spec in my laptop. Tried loading tomb raider the last day, dropping all settings, and the resolution to 800 X 600 made it playable... So it might run then at very low settings

Do you specifically have an E450 as well though? The E450 is incredibly low end, a lot of other laptops even at the same price range would be twice as fast. I can't believe an E450 would be able to get a playable framerate on Tomb Raider...

Lu Tze

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

Do you specifically have an E450 as well though? The E450 is incredibly low end, a lot of other laptops even at the same price range would be twice as fast. I can't believe an E450 would be able to get a playable framerate on Tomb Raider...

OK ok i think it was implied but that should probably read barely playable!

Benchmark below (and specs)

cherryghost

You should be ok for FEAR 1 and 2, and maybe the first Batman game. Rest I doubt. Really can't go wrong with the price so I say take the dive anyway, it's for a good cause