[Guinevere Wood]

I was wondering is i would be able to run skyrim on max settings. My specs are

1.34 GB RAM

Intel Celeron processer (121 k)

Nvida Geforce 8400 GS

Windows ME 98 Operating Syatem

12GB of availible Hard Drive Space

I can play Crysis 2 on max settings with this bad boy so im thinking it will be good for Skyrim, im just
making sure.

If you can play Crysis 2 on max settings with that, I can render Toy Story 2 in real time with mine...surely both running at the same fps. I have a Phenom II x4 2,8 Ghz, 4 gb's RAM, and Crysis 2 ran with moderately good fps with my old 9600GT (max settings).

And Skyrim will run at low-mid settings at most.

[Gavin Roberts]

If you can play Crysis 2 on max settings with that, I can render Toy Story 2 in real time with mine...surely both running at the same fps. I have a Phenom II x4 2,8 Ghz, 4 gb's RAM, and Crysis 2 ran with moderately good fps with my old 9600GT (max settings).

And Skyrim will run at low-mid settings at most.

I thought the 12GB of hard drive space would give it away. Maybe sarcasm really is dead :unsure:

[Stephy Beck]

Don't forget Crysis (1) is already a well-aged game (it was released on 2007), and despite still being pretty impressive, it begins to show it's flaws.

BTW, it'll be nice to see how much stripping-down will Crysis require to run on the 360...say goodbye to the enormous Distant LOD, to begin with

lol i downloaded the demo but when i tried to actually start the first level it says cryengen has stopped working :brokencomputer:

[Steve Bates]

I thought the 12GB of hard drive space would give it away. Maybe sarcasm really is dead :unsure:

If you think "12 GB of avaliable HD space" (Skyrim would fit in there perfectly, and still leave space for disk swapping) is sarcasm, please go back to read "PC Basics for Dummies".

In fact, it's more odd the OS you mentioned. But I don't remember if there is DX 9.0c for Windows 98/ME.

[SexyPimpAss]

Don't forget Crysis (1) is already a well-aged game (it was released on 2007), and despite still being pretty impressive, it begins to show it's flaws.

BTW, it'll be nice to see how much stripping-down will Crysis require to run on the 360...say goodbye to the enormous Distant LOD, to begin with

Well they do have to cut back on polys, particle effects, and textures to get Crysis 2 to run on the X360, but it's still more powerful then what Skyrim is going to be, so if anyone has an computer that is as good or better then an Xbox (which most computers are those days) they should have no problem.

[NIloufar Emporio]

lol i downloaded the demo but when i tried to actually start the first level it says cryengen has stopped working :brokencomputer:

Odd. Update your drivers if you still haven't done it. And your DX 9.0c version if you're in Windows XP.

Well they do have to cut back on polys, particle effects, and textures to get Crysis 2 to run on the X360, but it's still more powerful then what Skyrim is going to be, so if anyone has an computer that is as good or better then an Xbox (which most computers are those days) they should have no problem.

That's why I put it as a reference. It's an aged (2007, remember) game, but still impressive. Skyrim will probably require the same, or a bit lower than it. So if you can run Crysis from Mid to Highest settings, you'll have no problems with Skyrim.

[Julie Ann]

My system:

- CPU: Core 2 Duo E6750 (@ 2.66 Ghz)
- RAM: 3 GB DDR2 PC2-5300 (@ 333Mhz)
- GPU: Geforce GTX 460 1GB (@ 715Mhz)
- OS: Windows-XP pro (32-bit)

Only thing I'm worried about is the CPU. In some games it's becoming a pretty serious bottleneck: especially in Far Cry 2, The Witcher 2 and Bulletstorm.

[Kay O'Hara]

My system:

- CPU: Core 2 Duo E6750 (@ 2.66 Ghz)
- RAM: 3 GB DDR2 PC2-5300 (@ 333Mhz)
- GPU: Geforce GTX 460 1GB (@ 715Mhz)
- OS: Windows-XP pro (32-bit)

Only thing I'm worried about is the CPU. In some games it's becoming a pretty serious bottleneck: especially in Far Cry 2, The Witcher 2 and Bulletstorm.

Well, at Medium it guaranteed it'll run. On High...that's another issue.

[Dean Brown]

But I'm running New Vegas at max settings with 4xAA enabled! Lowest it'll go is 30 fps in parts of Nipton and the Strip, but most of the time it hovers between 50 and 60 fps (VSync enabled). I'm hoping Skyrim will be similar. Fingers crossed.

[Annick Charron]

Will my laptop run it?(copyed from dxdiag)

Operating System: Windows 7, 64-bit
Processor: Intel® Core™ i7 CPU Q 720 @ 1.60GHz (8 CPUs), ~1.6GHz
Memory: 4GB RAM
NVIDIA GeForce GTS 360M(dedicated memory: 978 MB)
DirectX 11

I can run both Crysis and Battlefield: Bad Company 2 on max settings.

Probably solid medium settings with maybe a slight touch of high if your playing on a lower resolution. The 360M is a solid performer so your set too go. :thumbsup:

[John N]

Probably solid medium settings with maybe a slight touch of high if your playing on a lower resolution. The 360M is a solid performer so your set too go. :thumbsup:

Oh good thank you, it is a gaming laptop. Also if the resolution on my screen matters it is 1366 x 768. Maybe that isn't what you mean:P

[FoReVeR_Me_N]

Oh good thank you, it is a gaming laptop. Also if the resolution on my screen matters it is 1366 x 768. Maybe that isn't what you mean:P

Ya 1366 x 768 is your native resolution so you might be able to put a few things on high but we don't know for sure sense system requirements aren't out yet, but it should play on medium for sure. Hope I helped

[Mrs. Patton]

Can my computer run skyrim?
Video: ATI Radeon HD 3200 (Vram: 1.9 gb)
Processer: AMD Athlon II X2 215 (2.7 ghz)
RAM: 4 gb
Directx 10

Note: I can run Oblivion on the highest settings + hdr with a little lag (none, if i turn vsync off)

No chance. You need to get the real thing, at least an HD 4650, bare minimum.

[Cameron Garrod]

Well they do have to cut back on polys, particle effects, and textures to get Crysis 2 to run on the X360, but it's still more powerful then what Skyrim is going to be, so if anyone has an computer that is as good or better then an Xbox (which most computers are those days) they should have no problem.

You haven't paid enough attention. No one buys desktops any more, and the popularity of cheap NetBook micro-mini computers, at very low prices, have diluted the entire retail marketplace's graphics capabilities. An Xbox 360 had the power of the Radeon X1950, and there just aren't any ordinary notebook chipset video chips that good. The Radeon HD 3200 is not that good, nor is the HD 4200 / 4250. The HD 3450 /3470 graphics card isn't that good, nor is the Geforce 210/310/520. I'll have to visit GPU Review, but I don't think that the HD 4350 or 4550 are that good.

(Edited here.) OK, I've done that. The HD 4350 / 4550 pair are not as good as an X 1950, nor is an HD 5450:

http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php?card1=584&card2=466

http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php?card1=625&card2=466

[Dagan Wilkin]

No chance. You need to get the real thing, at least an HD 4650, bare minimum.

What do you mean by the real thing? I'm new to video cards, would a higher number signify a better card (at least in the radeon hd family) ?

[Becky Cox]

What do you mean by the real thing? I'm new to video cards, would a higher number signify a better card (at least in the radeon hd family) ?

You want to look at the last 3 numbers for ATI cards. so pretty much like this.
100-400=not for gaming basic tasks/low end
500-600=mid range cards can play most games on medium settings at medium/low resolutions
700+ high end can usually play all modern games at good quality
The first number is the series number, the higher number = the newer the card is. So a HD 4870 would be faster then say a 5450. Currently the newest series for ATI is the 6 series, you don't want any card older then the 4 series either. if the last same 3 digits are the same like 4870 and 5870, the 5 series will be slightly faster(possibly a tad more depending on the series)

Also I think Gorath is trying to say is you want at least a 4650 for gaming.

[Sabrina Schwarz]

Inverted quote to fit my comments better.

I think Gorath is trying to say is you want at least a 4650 for gaming.

I have to look again, but didn't I mean a physical circuit board with the GPU chip attached, not merely an onboard chipset video chip?

Also You want to look at the last 3 numbers for ATI cards. so pretty much like this.
100-400=not for gaming basic tasks/low end
500-600=mid range cards can play most games on medium settings at low resolutions
700+ high end can usually play all modern games at good quality
The first number is the series number, the higher number = the newer the card is. So a HD 4870 would be faster then say a 5450. Currently the newest series for ATI is the 6 series, you don't want any card older then the 4 series either. if the last same 3 digist is the same like 4870 and 5870, the 5 series will be slightly faster(possibly a tad more depending on the series)

No, let's break it down this way instead:

000 to 299 = not the real thing, only an onboard chips, not for games.
300 to 499 = Basic Low Quality Business Graphics
500 to 599 = Budget Gamer, not quite Mainline, but will handle most games with some features turned down, and only moderately fine resolutions
600 to 799 = Mainline, Medium Gaming Quality
800 to 999 = High End enthusiasts' best quality

OK, after writing this -- I've scrolled back to the question, and I did mean that an onboard chip simply DOESN'T COUNT

[Farrah Barry]

Inverted quote to fit my comments better.

I have to look again, but didn't I mean a physical circuit board with the GPU chip attached, not merely an onboard chipset video chip?


No, let's break it down this way instead:

000 to 299 = not the real thing, only an onboard chips, not for games.
300 to 499 = Basic Low Quality Business Graphics
500 to 599 = Budget Gamer, not quite Mainline, but will handle most games with some features turned down, and only moderately fine resolutions
600 to 799 = Mainline, Medium Gaming Quality
800 to 999 = High End enthusiasts' best quality

OK, after writing this -- I've scrolled back to the question, and I did mean that an onboard chip simply DOESN'T COUNT

Thank you! So http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/graphics/ati-radeon-hd-5000/hd-5570/Pages/hd-5570-overview.aspx would work too? (Within my budget)

[Gen Daley]

The HD 5570 is as close to Mainline as you can get without quite crossing into the class. It's so close to year before last's HD 4670, gets past the HD 4650, which I mentioned already as the least capable card to consider for an upgrade (or a Geforce GT 240, the better, GDDR5, version of the two).

http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php?card1=620&card2=619

While both the GT 240s and the HD 4670 were in first run together, the Geforce was seriously overpriced, and couldn't compete on a frames per dollar basis. I haven't kept up with whether you can even still get the GT 240s or not, but HD 4670s are way down in price, so if you can find the equivalent Geforce without the inflated "Apple Ego" type of price on it, the two bracketed the 4670 on either side. I think that means the better of the two is pretty close to that HD 5570's performance.

[stevie trent]

AMD Athlon2 QuadCore X3-450 3,2GHz
4 GB RAM
500 GB Satall hard disk
nVidia GT520 1024MB DDR5

Would I be able to run Skyrim on high settings if I bought a pc with these specs?

[Stephanie Nieves]

I was here before and someone gave me great advice the last time so im hoping this time my pc specs are better than last lol. im wondering if this is a good gaming pc for games like skyrim or others with graphics like crisis 2. MoBo: 1156 DDR3, CPU: i7 2.93GHz Quadcore 1156. Ram: 12gb DDR3 1600. Harddrive: 500gb 7200RPM 64MB, Video Card: Radeon HD 6870 16B GDDR5, OPTDrive: 2.04x, Powersupply: 800w. I would really appreciate any advice or tips thank you.Im more looking for high settings or medium so if something should be replaced on this list let me know and the SSD is SATA III.

[Rach B]

I didn't buy my PC for this game, I've had it quite a while. I'm pretty sure I'll be able to play Skyrim on 1600x900 screen resolution, not the lowest, as I play other games on that setting. As for max settings, I don't know, maybe medium - high. Just one question though, is my PC set up better than a 360?

Edit your post to cange MB to GB cos people are thinking MB which cant run windows word!

[Jessica Stokes]

AMD Athlon2 QuadCore X3-450 3,2GHz
4 GB RAM
500 GB Satall hard disk
nVidia GT520 1024MB DDR5

Would I be able to run Skyrim on high settings if I bought a pc with these specs?

No. You need a much better graphics card. The GT 520 is strictly business charts, graphs, presentations, and spreadsheets, and not even very good for those. If you have to have a Geforce, now, then you need the GTS 450 or the GTX 550, as the starting point in the middle of Mainline Gaming territory for very good settings, but to reach "High" settings, we aren't that certain just yet. We think it will take a GTX 560 Ti as the minimum for that.

[Hella Beast]

Inverted quote to fit my comments better.

I have to look again, but didn't I mean a physical circuit board with the GPU chip attached, not merely an onboard chipset video chip?


No, let's break it down this way instead:

000 to 299 = not the real thing, only an onboard chips, not for games.
300 to 499 = Basic Low Quality Business Graphics
500 to 599 = Budget Gamer, not quite Mainline, but will handle most games with some features turned down, and only moderately fine resolutions
600 to 799 = Mainline, Medium Gaming Quality
800 to 999 = High End enthusiasts' best quality

OK, after writing this -- I've scrolled back to the question, and I did mean that an onboard chip simply DOESN'T COUNT

Just wondering. Does the Nvidia Geforce series work the same way as the ATI Radeon series?

[Fanny Rouyé]

- CPU: AMD Athlon II X2 250
Socket-AM3, Dual Core, 3.0Ghz, 2MB, 65W, Boxed

- RAM: Kingston ValueR. DDR3 1333MHz 4GB, CL9
Kit w/two matched ValueRAM 2GB DDR3

- GPU: XFX Radeon HD 5670 512MB GDDR5
PCI-Express 2.0, DVI-I, natvie-HDMI, DisplayPort, 775MHz

- OS: Windows 7 Ultimate (32-bit)

I can recall playing Bad Company 2 on Highest/almost last year when I had got the computer but last time I played it had to put it all down to Low, either it's my computer messing or all the updates to the game.
Also I started to notice weird fps drops every each second on two other games after that I had them running for about 5-10 minutes.
Probably gonna reinstall computer in time for Skyrim. What do you think? I'm a bit concerned about the GPU..
If not enough, would a
XFX Radeon HD 6870 1GB GDDR5 "Dual Fan"
PCI-Express 2.1, 2xDVI, HDMI, 2xmini-DisplayPort, 900MHz

Do good enough?
Thanks. //newbie