Recommended System Requirements - How accurate are they?

SherlockSherlock Join Date: 2012-11-09 Member: 168595Members
edited March 2016 in Technical Support
I'm looking at the Steam page right now for Natural Selection 2, and the Recommended System Requirements it suggests:
Processor: Core 2 Quad Q6600 (2.4 GHz) or better
Memory: 4 GB RAM
Graphics: DirectX 9 compatible video card with 1.5 - 2 GB VRAM (AMD 5770, NVidia GTX 450 or better)

And trying to compare these to my current system's specifications:
Processor: AMD Phenom II X6 1035T
Memory: 8GB RAM
Graphics: NVidia GTX 650

Now, I know very little about computer hardware, but at a glance my PC's specifications look superior to the Requirements. Am I correct in this assumption?
Thing is, I find I need to set everything to "low/off" in the options in order to get a decent 60 FPS - to me that screams Minimum System Requirements, not Recommended.

I know my machine is very dated now (at least seven years old), and I'm really asking to find out what the cheapest PC with modern-day components I could "get away with" is in order to run NS2 at a slightly higher graphics option. I see the following build on-line for £240:
Processor: AMD A6 7400K 3.5GHz Dual Core
Memory: 8GB HyperX FURY
Graphics: AMD Radeon R5 CPU Graphics

And for another £100, this:
Processor: AMD A10 7700K 3.4GHz Quad Core
Memory: 8GB HyperX FURY
Graphics: Dedicated 2GB AMD Radeon R7 250 Graphics

And am curious to know (a) how these match up to my current specification - are either even an upgrade, or are they subpar (I realise integrated graphics are usually a bad idea), and (b) how they match with NS2's recommended system requirements. Any tech-heads able to enlighten me at all?

Here is GPU Boss' comparison page - my GTX 650 against an R7 250 (1GB version) - they look equal, so a 2GB version should be an improvement, right?
http://gpuboss.com/gpus/Radeon-R7-250-vs-GeForce-GTX-650

And then a CPU Boss comparison between processors - a clear winner. How much of a performance increase could I expect?
http://cpuboss.com/cpus/AMD-Phenom-II-X6-1035T-vs-AMD-A10-7700K

Thanks.
Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome

Comments

  • NordicNordic Long term camping in Kodiak Join Date: 2012-05-13 Member: 151995Members, NS2 Playtester, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Supporter, Reinforced - Silver, Reinforced - Shadow
    edited March 2016
    Those cpu's would not be much of an upgrade. They would be better, but not dramatically better. NS2 demands high single threaded performance. AMD cpu's lack single threaded performance. Therefor I recommend you choose an intel cpu and motherboard.

    If you only goal is to have better performance in ns2, I would aim for a 3ghz or greater intel i5. If that is out of your budget consider an i3 or even a pentium.

    I would keep your GTX 650 and spend that on a new intel cpu and motherboard. The stronger cpu would net you the most performance.

    This website might help you. http://www.logicalincrements.com/
    Off Topic Disagree 1Agree 1Awesome
  • SherlockSherlock Join Date: 2012-11-09 Member: 168595Members
    edited March 2016
    Thanks, Nordic.

    I'm not after a huge upgrade - my PC is just getting a little slow and clunky, refuses to boot sometimes, etc. and am looking at purchasing two new machines (one for myself, one for the partner) to replace it. NS2 is currently the most graphics-intensive game we play, so I was looking for something of a similar quality, as a "stop-gap" build before a full, expensive upgrade.

    I'll keep a look out for i5s, thanks. Good information to know! How does the following build look? £380.
    Processor: Intel Pentium G3258 3.2GHz Dual Core
    Memory: 8GB HyperX FURY
    Graphics: Dedicated 2GB NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Ti Graphics
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • ObraxisObraxis Subnautica Animator & Generalist, NS2 Person Join Date: 2004-07-24 Member: 30071Super Administrators, Forum Admins, NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, NS2 Developer, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Silver, WC 2013 - Supporter, Subnautica Developer, Pistachionauts
    edited March 2016
    I would suggest you keep the GeForce 650 and get an Intel CPU/Mobo/RAM. NS2 performance will be much better, as AMD CPUs sadly are very weak on single-threaded performance.

    Once you have the new CPU/Mobo/RAM, you can easily upgrade to a better GPU down the road.

    So something like the Intel i5 6400 then a mobo & RAM.

    Here is a list of parts for £204.98 that would be cheap-ish within your budget but kick-ass for NS2:

    http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/p/dQg3Vn
    Off Topic Disagree 1Agree 1Awesome
  • NordicNordic Long term camping in Kodiak Join Date: 2012-05-13 Member: 151995Members, NS2 Playtester, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Supporter, Reinforced - Silver, Reinforced - Shadow
    edited March 2016
    Sherlock wrote: »
    Thanks, Nordic.

    I'm not after a huge upgrade - my PC is just getting a little slow and clunky, refuses to boot sometimes, etc. and am looking at purchasing two new machines (one for myself, one for the partner) to replace it. NS2 is currently the most graphics-intensive game we play, so I was looking for something of a similar quality, as a "stop-gap" build before a full, expensive upgrade.

    I'll keep a look out for i5s, thanks. Good information to know! How does the following build look? £380.
    Processor: Intel Pentium G3258 3.2GHz Dual Core
    Memory: 8GB HyperX FURY
    Graphics: Dedicated 2GB NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Ti Graphics

    That build there looks pretty good for something really cheap. I happen to have that exact cpu and gpu in my HTPC, which I occiasionally play ns2 on. I typically get over 100 fps with moderate graphics settings.

    Still though, I would keep the 650 and the money saved towards a future build or a better cpu.
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • mansourmansour saudi arabia Join Date: 2016-03-17 Member: 214382Members
    if i wanted to go to a new area the game crash is there any in setting that make me load a larger area
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
Sign In or Register to comment.