well i would suggest you to check out
best games of past years. there are many games came around 2000s
best games of past years. there are many games came around 2000s
What games can I run?
- Thread starter Skeletonboy333
- Start date
Recommended Videos
My current laptop runs MW2 at 2-3 FPS, so an average of 30 is perfectly doable for me. I ain't one of those people who do freaking 360 quick scopes, so I don' think I'll need insane FPS.MercurySteam said:
And again, I can sacrifice quality for performance, I will play BF3 at 800x600 if I have to.
And thanks for the link, I will check it out too.
Basically you can probably run most games, but I'd recommend you steer clear of titles that are graphically heavy (so that'd rule out recent AAA releases and other studios that just can't optimise shit, I'm looking at you CD Projekt RED) unless you want to watch powerpoint presentations instead of play the game.
Well, you didn't buy a gaming rig. Just pay attention to min specs and make sure you are a bit over that. Like you said, the Intel graphics are going to be your real weak point.
You have plenty of ram, and a good enough CPU. The video card is a bit iffy.It's more than good enough for university work,but to run games at my standard it's almost worthless.
If you ever come into some money consider looking at Asus Republic of Gamers. They make expensive laptops that can compete with desktops from a year or two ago.
You have plenty of ram, and a good enough CPU. The video card is a bit iffy.It's more than good enough for university work,but to run games at my standard it's almost worthless.
If you ever come into some money consider looking at Asus Republic of Gamers. They make expensive laptops that can compete with desktops from a year or two ago.
You were rich and intelligent (not saying you aren't) then you'd build your own PC.Skeletonboy333 said:
I'd say you can safely run MOST games from 2009 or earlier without problems though not at max settings (if you go back to 2006 perhaps you can max some) also most all indie titles should be playable, I can't think of any off the top of my head that are GPU intensive.
Low is about the best you will get with that, I hesitate to use the words graphics card, cause it isn't, it's integrated with the CPU. This chart will tell you the expected results in ideal situation. May have to hit up GoG for some older games unless low, maybe medium if you are lucky is ok.Skeletonboy333 said:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-HD-Graphics-4000.69168.0.html
Catch me if I am wrong, but I think we are talking about a laptop, not a desktop PC. I don't really like taking a tower to university everyday.MercurySteam said:
Thanks Strelok for the link.
Cheers.
Generally MOST AAA games should run with that. It'll be absolute lowest settings and you'll be using a lower than native resolution too to pump up the FPS to something playable, but most should run.
There are some games you'll run into issues with though, where it'll only display a black screen as Intel graphics suck. Sadly there's no easy list of these, you've just got to search it up before hand and see if it'll run or not.
So far as everything but the graphics goes, it won't effect anything really at this point. 8Gb RAM is enough for any game, and some decent multitasking too. The CPU will handle any game without being a bottleneck thanks to the fact your GPU is going to be a massive bottleneck, and will probably do alright at multitasking. Not great, don't expect to have like 20 internet windows and a game running at a time like I'm doing right now, but you should be able to manage a couple of windows and a game at the same time without a significant performance hit [Though this will of course depend on how active each window is as well, and what's going on in it].
There are some games you'll run into issues with though, where it'll only display a black screen as Intel graphics suck. Sadly there's no easy list of these, you've just got to search it up before hand and see if it'll run or not.
So far as everything but the graphics goes, it won't effect anything really at this point. 8Gb RAM is enough for any game, and some decent multitasking too. The CPU will handle any game without being a bottleneck thanks to the fact your GPU is going to be a massive bottleneck, and will probably do alright at multitasking. Not great, don't expect to have like 20 internet windows and a game running at a time like I'm doing right now, but you should be able to manage a couple of windows and a game at the same time without a significant performance hit [Though this will of course depend on how active each window is as well, and what's going on in it].
Woof. An intel SoC dual-core... I'd expect it to run just about anything that comes out for another year... just very, very poorly. Less than equivalent to AMD's lowest-grade A4 APU (which is what I regularly put into ~$300 HTPCs).
Still, it should keep up with retro indie games for the most part... just don't expect 'em to run very stably. Intel HD driver compatibility is usually a very low priority for devs.
Still, it should keep up with retro indie games for the most part... just don't expect 'em to run very stably. Intel HD driver compatibility is usually a very low priority for devs.
Not necessarily, I have a gaming PC at home I built, I also have 2 laptops I bought (one is getting older, the other I got for xmas), laptops can be quite powerful and they do have their use but your correct that the desktop gives you more longevity/power per $. I use my laptops for LAN parties, much easier to just put a laptop in a backpack and go than carry a tower and monitors.MercurySteam said:
The GPU is your bottleneckSkeletonboy333 said:
and oddly, Intel is rather blunt about what games you can play
http://www.intel.com/support/graphics/sb/CS-033387.htm
intel sucks at supporting indi games so look those up individually.