Excellent review of how AoC performs with various computer setups:

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/8077-age-conan-hardware-performance-review.html

In a nutshell, the minimal system as expected failed to play the game in any acceptable manner and the recommended system barely got by.  Even a very high end system could not run with all the high settings on with acceptable performance.

As expected AMD graphics cards did not perform well, when they should have been close to the Nvidia ones.  Almost a nobrainer that this game was optimized for nvidia cards.

But they were really wowed by the graphics.

Good and objective read.

I was reading that link and it said AOC was the first MMORPG that had DirectX 10..... I thought LoTRO has DirectX 10????

At this point none of them have it, AoC is supposed to get it in a patch later this year.  It was announced as being in the release, but was pulled because of problems.

I thought LOTRO had it... My bad

LOTRO is DX10

The graphics in AoC aren't even worth the required hardware

I personally would get just as much pleasure looking at L2 graphics *quite good imo* or lotro

meh, they definently need to work on increasing performance for the game though

When I played AoC I played on absolutely maximum settings, with a full 60FPS, no drops, ever.

I don't see what all this performance crap is.

Mind you, the game really isn't all that good, but the performance ive never had an issue with.

I played the game with a minimal computer (Sempron 3100+, GeForce 6600) and I found the game quite playable.

I really don't know what people are doing wrong if I could play the game just fine on that system.

Originally posted by Ozmodan

At this point none of them have it, AoC is supposed to get it in a patch later this year.  It was announced as being in the release, but was pulled because of problems.

Lotro has DX10 for a half a year now..

---

Originally posted by DragonShark
I played the game with a minimal computer (Sempron 3100+, GeForce 6600) and I found the game quite playable.
I really don't know what people are doing wrong if I could play the game just fine on that system.

---

You are just a plain liar, not sure why tho, are you on Funcom's payroll or something?

A friend of mine has an Athlon at 2800 mhz with a 7950GT 512MB and he can barely play the game. Lowering the settings even more helps, but then he doesnt even see anymore textures and the ground just becomes 1 brown area. Also lowering to 800x600 is an option, but it only marginally increases performance.

I checked his computer and OS and hardware are working perfectly. He can play games like Bioshock nicely ( obviously not in max settings tho ).

The game runs like crap, and if you in anyway want to see some of the the nice graphics the game has to offer, you need at least a 7950GX2 graphics card to run a bit smooth.

greetz

More proof from a very legit site:

Spot on summary imo.

Even their minimum testing shows that.

---

Originally posted by Ozmodan
Excellent review of how AoC performs with various computer setups:
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/8077-age-conan-hardware-performance-review.html
In a nutshell, the minimal system as expected failed to play the game in any acceptable manner and the recommended system barely got by.  Even a very high end system could not run with all the high settings on with acceptable performance.
As expected AMD graphics cards did not perform well, when they should have been close to the Nvidia ones.  Almost a nobrainer that this game was optimized for nvidia cards.
But they were really wowed by the graphics.
Good and objective read.

---

You can say alot about AoC and it's steep system requirements, but saying that the game is optimized for Nvidia and not for ATI is just incorrect.

At the time the review took place, Nvidia cards just were better then ATI cards by a large margin.

Things are quickly changing tho, and the 4870X2 hits Nvidia hard.

Look at an UP TO DATE review here :

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3354&p=4

greetz

Originally posted by CyberWiz

---

Originally posted by DragonShark
I played the game with a minimal computer (Sempron 3100+, GeForce 6600) and I found the game quite playable.
I really don't know what people are doing wrong if I could play the game just fine on that system.

---

You are just a plain liar, not sure why tho, are you on Funcom's payroll or something?

A friend of mine has an Athlon at 2800 mhz with a 7950GT 512MB and he can barely play the game. Lowering the settings even more helps, but then he doesnt even see anymore textures and the ground just becomes 1 brown area. Also lowering to 800x600 is an option, but it only marginally increases performance.

I checked his computer and OS and hardware are working perfectly. He can play games like Bioshock nicely ( obviously not in max settings tho ).

The game runs like crap, and if you in anyway want to see some of the the nice graphics the game has to offer, you need at least a 7950GX2 graphics card to run a bit smooth.

greetz

You think I honestly need to lie about being able to play this damned game on a computer that isn't up to snuff? Are you just dense?

I played on high settings with the Sempron 3100+/GF 6600 combination. I turned shadows off, I turned water reflections off. I brought my visual range in fairly close, but I maxed out the LOD sliders so that it would load the higher textures immediately rather than having it constantly loading all different levels at all times. I reduced the shad