Thx for the tip m8!
Much appreciated

You seem to be totally right, plus I DID run FO3 with no problems in native resolution with almost everything on high and AAx2, I just hope Obsidian really just bumped up the CPU requirement and that's all....

even still id rather use a stone mallet than a plasma rifle any day D:. but i get your point, i never delt with geforce cards so i didnt know. i thought geforce 6 series was better than ati amd radeon 5 series. i guess ima noob

Yeah its a common mistake I guess for people to think that. But no, an Nvidia 6xxx card is considerably worse then an ATI 5xxx card. (AMD didnt kill the ATI brand name until September this year)

The whole naming method GPU manufacturers use today can get confusing, so it's not due to the factor that you feel youself a newbie in GPU topic. Sometimes....even cards with higher numbers from the same generation can be slower, than those of the same generation but with smaller numer!...take my 9650m GT for instance, it's a good GPU, but it is weaker than some 9600m....all because often the seller doesn't tell you what memory is mounted on your GPU....so my 9650m is faster, than 9600m, BUT only 9600m's with the same type of memory (DDR2).....the DDR3 9600m's are faster than my 9650m GT (DDR2).....and if your a newbie in GPU topic, then you often get confused by the number in the GPU's name. I however willingly decided to get this lappy with DDR2 card since I knew, that 9650m GT packs a punch even with slower DDR2 memory on it.

Thanks for the responses - glad to hear I can run it well lol. Probably not gonna run max, this thing isn't a super gaming rig I'm pretty sure. I might try it to see how it works, but I can settle with medium-high.

Resoultion is 1600x900 I believe.

Another cool decision on Obsidian's part, was to leave the graphics ingame same as it was in FO3, after all FO3 wasn't about the graphics, but the gameplay. So OBsidian didn't "artificially" and "forcefully" increase the GPU recuirements for no particular reason....For me - the devs don't need to improve the overall graphics in Fallout games, even for the Fallout game, that will (hopefully) come after FO:NV.

Broke down. :P Managed to get a sweet deal on a new Sapphire 5870 1GB for $300. I figure the 6-series Radeons are probably going to cost >$400 for some time after they're released, and I have a $400 rule when it comes to video cards (won't go over). Should be here Monday. Hope I don't end up having GSOD issues...I've heard that problem is fixed from some sources and that it's not from others. I guess I'll find out.

whats the difference between DDR2 and DDR3? the box my card came in says " PCI Express 1024 MB DDR3" i know what the 1024 is but i fail to comprehend the other terminology. thanks in advance

DDR3 is SDRAM that is twice as fast as DDR2. Its the next generation above DDR2.

i7 920@3.4
9 gig ddr 3
5970 OC
120 gig OCZ Vertex 2 SSD
Win 7 64
19x12 ,8 AA, 15 AF, V-sync on, All settings maxed ( All CCC options maxed )...FO3 never budges from 60 fps.

I'm sure it will run New Vegas just fine.

DISCLAIMER : I did have to download and install a 64 bit version of the atimugpld.dll library to replace the games default one....but it only took a second. I had a problem with HDR flickering and water reflections due to Crossfire until I replaced the library. Now it runs even better and looks amazing.
Can't wait...!!!

my friend requested i post his specs and ask you guys if he can run it. he has

OS: Win XP Pro
single core 2.77
Radeon 9800 pro
1 GB system RAM DDR2

It will all depend on factor, whether FO:NV will require Shader Model 3.0 to run.

9800 pro Radeon from 2002-2003 era doesn't support Shader Model 3.0 for sure.

thanks

It's probably not going to run because of that 9800pro. Fallout 3 required a video card that had at least Shader Model 2.0b. The 9800pro only went up to SM 2.0...nothing more. I'd expect New Vegas to keep that requirement or even jump to SM 3.0 for that matter.

You are prohbably right, since in New Vegas there are new graphical features added, like various types of lights and shaders to render all the neons and signs inside New Vegas.

More specifically DDR3 has higher bandwidth, but also higher latency. Buffered and cached properly DDR3 can be faster than DDR2 overall, but it depends on the implementation and what the memory is being used for.


Things like that typically don't affect what types of hardware can run a game unless the game uses newer graphics standards. Anything that can run Fallout 3 will be able to run New Vegas from a graphics API standpoint.

Remember how it was with Call of Duty series - Modern Warfare 1 (CoD 4) ran on 2.0b shader GPU's, World at War (CoD 5) witch used the same exact engine required 3.0 shaders to run, because they added some graphical features.

The same can apply to New Vegas...it might run on the same engine as FO3...it might look pretty alike with it in terms of graphics and looks....but that doesn't mean shader requirement wasn't bumped up due to just a few (maybe even minor) new graphical features.

I'm not saying it's technically impossible, but we know that hasn't happened based on the released system requirements for New Vegas.

Both GeFore 6 series and X1300 Radeon and above have Shader Model 3.0 support. Since those are stated as minimum .... we can assume Shader Model 3.0 GPU is needed to run the game.

Another fact to back that up, is that FO3 in Radeon family of GPU's stated X850 as minimum.....
X850 is way more powerful, than X1300, however as you probabaly know X850 supported only SM 2.0b.....since X1300 is now the minimum (and is actually weaker than X850) we could expect, that the game:

1. will run on even weaker GPU, than X850, but
2. the weaker GPU still has to support at least Shader Model 3.0

I hope that clears this dylema for all the people who wonder, whether they can run the game

Right, just like Fallout 3. Are you arguing with me or agreeing with me...I can't tell.

FO3 ran on 2.0b cards....so it's not just like FO3 :whistling:

Do you have a link to something that says New Vegas requires 3.0? I can't find one that says that.

I use logic simply, whether my assumptions are correct or not will turn out once the game gets released.

I however warn potential 2.0b card owners, to double check whether they can run the game once it's out, before buying it - otherwise they will lose money, by being unable to return it to the store (STEAM registration of the copy of the game). And since this is going to be a very cool game - Obsidian doesn't need to have trolling folk here on forums who rate the game F just because they can't run it and spread false inaccurate reviews of the game they can't play.

I see. I can't find an explicit list of supported GPUs, so it's hard to tell if the x850 actually dropped off the list of supported cards or not. The official requirements just imply that you need a GeForce 6-series or x1300 "and up," but we don't know if they're considering the x850 above or below the x1300. They should really list the shader model requirement or release a full list of supported GPUs.

Yes, Dev's should stated Shader Model requirements aswell. "Some" do, however this is this a minority.