Advice needed on PC Specs

[Ellfie]

I am looking at a replacement for my old PC and am just not knowledgeable enough to tell which are the best to handle SL. Could anyone give advice on this PC's specs Ive been looking at please? Its about the price I can manage . Its an 

 

ACER Aspire G3-605 

 

Operating System
Operating System	Windows 8
Processor & Chipset
Processor Manufacturer	Intel
Processor Type	Core i5
Processor Model	i5-4430
Processor Core	Quad-core (4 Core)
Processor Speed	3 GHz
64-bit Processing	Yes
Memory
Standard Memory	8 GB
Maximum Memory	32 GB
Memory Technology	DDR3 SDRAM
Number of Total Memory Slots	4
Storage
Number of Hard Drives	1
Total Hard Drive Capacity	1 TB
Hard Drive Interface	Serial ATA/300
Optical Drive Type	DVD-Writer
Optical Media Supported	DVD-RAM/±R/±RW
Controllers
Controller Type	Serial ATA
Display & Graphics
Screen Size	No
Graphics Controller Manufacturer	NVIDIA
Graphics Controller Model	GeForce GTX 645
Graphics Memory Capacity	Up to 2 GB
Graphics Memory Accessibility	Dedicated
Network & Communication
Ethernet Technology	Ethernet
Wireless LAN	Yes
Wireless LAN Standard	IEEE 802.11a/b/g/n
Interfaces/Ports
HDMI	Yes
Number of USB 3.0 Ports	3
Number of USB 2.0 Ports	2
Total Number of USB Ports	5
Network (RJ-45)	Yes
Audio Line In	Yes
Audio Line Out	Yes
Software
Operating System	Windows 8
Operating System Architecture	64-bit
Power Description
Maximum Power Supply Wattage	500 W
Physical Characteristics
Height	438 mm
Width	180 mm
Depth

[Ohjiro Watanabe]

It is all fine except the graphics card which is a bit rubbish. If you upgraded that to a GTX 660 or 760 or something like that with a minimum of 2GB memory then you would be talking. Look at this chart: http://www.nvidia.co.uk/object/graphics_cards_buy_now_uk.html

the 645 isn't listed but the 640 and 650 are. Note the number of Cores 384. Now scroll up to the 660 960 Cores. That is the minimum I recommend together with 2GB memory as a minimum.

It is going to push the cost up a bit but it will be well worth it.

[SaraCarena]

Ummmmm......."rubbish" might be a bit harsh. It`s listed as having 576 cores on the nividia specs site, which is higher than my gtx 650.

http://www.geforce.co.uk/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-645-oem/specifications

I know a 640 user whose happy with the performance they get and I`m happy with my 650 (though a 660 or better would be nice) Maybe there`s a 645 user out there who`ll post.

Another thing to think about is that the 645`s quoted power consumption is the same as the 660 so upgrade at a later date may be an option if the case has enough room to take it.

[Sassy Romano]

The question is "what do you want your SL to be like?"

 

Many people are happy standing on a work platform just scripting, others want settings on full ultra.

 

If you buy a machine with a suitable case and upgradeable power supply, you could always change graphics card later, if you find that one doesn't suit your needs but unless you know what you'll be happy with, you'll just get recommendations of top end Nvidia cards, which isn't a bad thing but equally may exceed your need and budget.

[Ellfie]

Thanks for the advice. All I want is to be able to run SL on higher than now, which is low graphics with draw of 32 and  a desperately low FPS of between 2 and 8 on a good day really. I do go to some busy places but even in empty its not great at the moment. Thats about the max budget ( £700) that i can look at for now too.

[Sassy Romano]

Please Psst the hardware spec that you have right now for comparative purposes.

 

Help, about secondlife

[DKTitan]

That will probably run other games far better than sl does. Youll certainly get better frame rates in the mid range settings just dont go turning on shadows. I'm still fighting with shadows myself and I run a gtx 660 ti. 

[Ohjiro Watanabe]

This would be within your budget and you could up the size of the HD and still come in under £700 inc VAT (no monitor).

http://www.dinopc.com/shop/pc/-b-NEW-b-Shooter-Spartan-GTX-760-94p1888.htm

Of course your FPS is also dependant on your Internet connection speed.

[Orca Flotta]

That is one nice machine, Ohjiro. Particularly for the UK, where everything is a bit more expensive than on mainland. particularly impressive: mobo, ram and the case. With that base OP will have fun for many years to come coz it'll be nicely upgradeable. Of course I could do without that 8.1 debacle of an OS. Dunno why even the small "manufacturers" feel the need to sell stuff with Microsoft crappola included. For me a reason not to buy that PC: 80 bucks wasted on bovine manure. :smileysad:

[SaraCarena]

---

Ellfie wrote:

 .....with draw of 32 and  a desperately low FPS of between 2 and 8....

---

Then the specs you listed would`ve given you a treat when you see sl on it but the one Ohjiro links to would be an even bigger treat!

I can get 25 fps with shadows and all the bells whistles on some very detailed and pretty sims but on others have to even turn alm off on my 650, so performance is very dependant on the region you`re in and quality of connection.

[Frostwish]

It is a lot easier and cheaper to build a desktop rather than buy a pre-built laptop (especially ones that have extra unnecessary bulk in it. The last two computers I built were 200-300 USD less than what it would have costed prebuilt, plus had better/more customizable specs. If you would like assistance in building a desktop, PM me, I'm always happy to help.

[Sassy Romano]

---

Ohjiro Watanabe wrote:

 

Of course your FPS is also dependant on your Internet connection speed.

---

I'm pretty certain that my graphics card rendering capability doesn't care about what it's connected to, i'm not sure what you're alluding to here?

[Crim Mip]

That would run SL just fine with decent frame rates with everything on in most cases with the possible exception of shadows. I don't know what the cost for that system is or where you are located, but you might want to check a few places that build to order to see if you can get a little more bang for the buck. CybertronPC, Cyberpower, etc are all fairly reputable and you can then use money saved in not paying for the generic keyboard/mouse and optical drive (if your current one is working) to put into a better graphics card and such. Building one yourself if you have the skill is the lowest cost in dollars, but in time it often just doesn't make sense.

[Crim Mip]

The data has to get to your viewer so it can get sent to your graphic card to be rendered. If your connection is spotty, it doesn't matter what card you have.

[Sassy Romano]

---

Crim Mip wrote:

The data has to get to your viewer so it can get sent to your graphic card to be rendered. If your connection is spotty, it doesn't matter what card you have.

---

Nope, the card continues to render frames regardless of waiting on data to arrive.  Think about it, if I lose connection, what you've just said would mean that I get 0 FPS, which clearly isn't the case.

If anything, FPS will be inversely proportional to the connection speed.  If I tp to a location and no textures of object data has been downloaded, the render is very simple, high FPS..  As more data is presented to the graphics card, then the load increases and FPS will drop.

The graphics card will simply render the data that it has at the time that it has it and depending on complexity, will do it resulting in a particular FPS.  The overall scene may appear sooner because of the rate at which data is downloaded over a faster connection but the rate at which that is displayed in FPS terms is NOT a function of the connection speed.

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Crim Mip wrote:

The data has to get to your viewer so it can get sent to your graphic card to be rendered. If your connection is spotty, it doesn't matter what card you have.

---

This would be true if you were streaming video, but that's not how SL works. Sassy's got it right. The only thing an SL connection can do is deliver more complexity to any scene you're in. As the complexity increases, FPS decreases. Teleport somewhere and watch your FPS. It'll start out pegged and then drop until it stabilizes. That's because at the moment of arrival, there's nothing for the viewer to render. As geometry and textures arrive, the GPU has more to draw and FPS goes down.

Disable your computers network connection sometime while logged-in. You'll no longer be able to move, as that requires server interaction, but you can still cam around. There is no data being sent to your computer, but the viewer still happily renders the scene as it was the moment the connection dropped.

[Ellfie]

This is what Im working with at the moment:

 

CPU: Intel® Core2 Quad CPU Q8300 @ 2.50GHz (2500.03 MHz)

Memory: 3840 MB

OS Version: Microsoft Windows 7 64-bit Service Pack 1 (Build 7601)

Graphics Card Vendor: NVIDIA Corporation Graphics Card: GeForce 7100 / nForce 630i/integrated/SSE2 Windows Graphics Driver Version: 9.18.0013.0783 OpenGL Version: 2.1.2

RestrainedLove API: (disabled) libcurl Version: libcurl/7.24.0 OpenSSL/1.0.1h zlib/1.2.5 c-ares/1.10.0 J2C Decoder Version: KDU v7.4 Audio Driver Version: FMOD Ex 4.44.32 Qt Webkit Version: 4.7.1 (version number hard-coded) Voice Server Version: Not Connected Settings mode: Firestorm Viewer Skin: Firestorm (High Contrast) Font Used: Deja Vu (96) Draw distance: 32 Bandwidth: 600 LOD factor: 4 Render quality: Medium-Low (2/7) Texture memory: 512 MB (1) VFS (cache) creation time (UTC): unknown Built with MSVC version 1600

[Marishka Ixito]

Ellfie,

Going by the specs you posted for your current compu, you may have an alternative for buying a completely new one, because your processor isn't all that old/slow.

I would suggest finding a local computershop and find out if your current motherboard will allow for more internal memory (you could also download a free little program called Speccy and find out yourself what mobo (motherboard) you have and google it to find out how much memory it supports).

If it does (support more memory) ask for a good all in price for:

1. upgrading your internal memory to 16 GB
2. graphics card to a GeForce GTX 750Ti Superclock w/G-SYNC Support 2GB GDDR5
3. new SSD harddisk (Samsung 840 EVO 250GB) with a fresh copy of Win7 installed from your own CD (keep existing harddisk in the case as a data drive)
4. replace power unit with a new 650Watt one if yours is much less than that (probably is). Cooler Master V650 would be a good choice.

Estimated total cost: about 350 € (275£).  You'd basically have a new compu at half price, blazing fast, and relatively quiet (SSD's don't make noise). If you can get the Graphicscard with a quieter cooler for a bit more money, I'd strongly suggest you do that. With that upgrade, you should be able to run SL at high/ultra, with shadows, fps from 30-ish at a busy sim to 70 or better at a lonely skybox.

If however your mobo doesn't support more memory you may not have much choice. Without the memory upgrade I wouldn't go this route.

 

kind regards,
Marishka

 

[Kwakkelde Kwak]

I'd say 6 years is pretty old for a processor. However I do agree it should be able to handle SL just fine if you don't expect all the bells and whistles.

A 7 series graphics card doesn't sound like a good match though if you ask me. The motherboard won't support PCIe3, so you won't reach the card's full potential. I also doubt the motherboard will support 16MB and even if it does, it doesn't support DDR3 and the question is how fast it will let the DDR2 memory run.

For bang-for-the-buck I'd say keep what you have and get a second hand 5-series card (GTX560-570 for $50-100), with the suggested powersupply upgrade. I wouldn't invest in extra memory until you run such a system and can see if your system runs out of it. (I rarely see more than 3-4GB in use when running SL and that's out of 16, Win7 systems with less memory use less memory as far as I know). It would still only be a patch, so buying a new computer seems a more logical choice to me, especially since you have some money to spend.

£700 is not enough for a new top end computer, so buying a second hand system (i7 3000 or 4000 series, NVidia 600-series) is a valid option. Look on ebay (UK), systems with a GTX660 are easy to find for under £600. I'm sure you can find a nice one with a GTX670 or 680 if you have some patience.

[Ellfie]

Thanks Marishka, thats very interesting and I will check that all out. Though Id have to get help probably lol

 

[Crim Mip]

---

Sassy Romano wrote:

---

Crim Mip wrote:

The data has to get to your viewer so it can get sent to your graphic card to be rendered. If your connection is spotty, it doesn't matter what card you have.

---

Nope, the card continues to render frames regardless of waiting on data to arrive.  Think about it, if I lose connection, what you've just said would mean that I get 0 FPS, which clearly isn't the case.

If anything, FPS will be inversely proportional to the connection speed.  If I tp to a location and no textures of object data has been downloaded, the render is very simple, high FPS..  As more data is presented to the graphics card, then the load increases and FPS will drop.

The graphics card will simply render the data that it has at the time that it has it and depending on complexity, will do it resulting in a particular FPS.  The overall scene may appear sooner because of the rate at which data is downloaded over a faster connection but the rate at which that is displayed in FPS terms is NOT a function of the connection speed.

---

It can only render data is has available. Since SL is mostly user created content, there's a very small amount it keeps at any given time in cache. It's not like say World of Warcraft where every bit of the graphics in the game are actually stored locally. Turn off your connection and you very quickly crash the viewer. What FPS you get during that time is rendering more and more out of date cache information (which as I said is only covering a very small area) Try going anywhere when not connected and you get nothing. You in fact can't tp someplace else without being connected. You obviously have a poor grasp of how SL works.

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Crim Mip wrote:

---

Sassy Romano wrote:

---

Crim Mip wrote:

The data has to get to your viewer so it can get sent to your graphic card to be rendered. If your connection is spotty, it doesn't matter what card you have.

---

Nope, the card continues to render frames regardless of waiting on data to arrive.  Think about it, if I lose connection, what you've just said would mean that I get 0 FPS, which clearly isn't the case.

If anything, FPS will be inversely proportional to the connection speed.  If I tp to a location and no textures of object data has been downloaded, the render is very simple, high FPS..  As more data is presented to the graphics card, then the load increases and FPS will drop.

The graphics card will simply render the data that it has at the time that it has it and depending on complexity, will do it resulting in a particular FPS.  The overall scene may appear sooner because of the rate at which data is downloaded over a faster connection but the rate at which that is displayed in FPS terms is NOT a function of the connection speed.

---

It can only render data is has available. Since SL is mostly user created content, there's a very small amount it keeps at any given time in cache. It's not like say World of Warcraft where every bit of the graphics in the game are actually stored locally. Turn off your connection and you very quickly crash the viewer. What FPS you get during that time is rendering more and more out of date cache information (which as I said is only covering a very small area) Try going anywhere when not connected and you get nothing. You in fact can't tp someplace else without being connected. You obviously have a poor grasp of how SL works.

---

Here's a previous post of mine from this thread...

---

Crim Mip wrote:

The data has to get to your viewer so it can get sent to your graphic card to be rendered. If your connection is spotty, it doesn't matter what card you have.

---

This would be true if you were streaming video, but that's not how SL works. Sassy's got it right. The only thing an SL connection can do is deliver more complexity to any scene you're in. As the complexity increases, FPS decreases. Teleport somewhere and watch your FPS. It'll start out pegged and then drop until it stabilizes. That's because at the moment of arrival, there's nothing for the viewer to render. As geometry and textures arrive, the GPU has more to draw and FPS goes down.

Disable your computers network connection sometime while logged-in. You'll no longer be able to move, as that requires server interaction, but you can still cam around. There is no data being sent to your computer, but the viewer still happily renders the scene as it was the moment the connection dropped.

If you read my post and made the observations I suggested, you'd have proof that Sassy does indeed grasp how SL works. As I type this, I'm logged-in and my network connection is turned off. I'm camming my little heart out, all the way across Forgotten City. My frame rate is about 80fps, and my network traffic is, of course, zero. The automatons that wander the streets are frozen in their tracks, but smoke still billows from chimneys, flames dance in my fireplace, the light in my lighthouse spins around, and the clouds drift by. If your viewer crashes under these circumstances, then your understanding of how SL works may be corrupted by a faulty viewer installation or PC problem. If I wait long enough, I'll eventually be logged out by the servers because they sense the dead connection. But until then, it'll be 80fps for me.

It may also be that you continue to believe that SL is somehow streaming scene video to your PC, which is simply not the case. SL sends your viewer all the required scene textures, geometry and parameters for viewer side animations, and then only updates avatar and moving prim positions, script driven changes, chat and the like. Particle generation, llTargetOmega rotations and texture animations all proceed in the viewer, independently of the SL servers. If you loose your connection, those things continue. Only server dependent activities stop. This is why, though I'm able to cam all over Second Life at the moment, I'm unable to move my avatar, which includes teleportation.

If your understanding of how SL works is correct, come back and offer your explanation for FPS and scene behavior immediately after a teleport, and during a network disconnection.

 

[Sassy Romano]

---

Crim Mip wrote:

It can only render data is has available. Since SL is mostly user created content, there's a very small amount it keeps at any given time in cache. It's not like say World of Warcraft where every bit of the graphics in the game are actually stored locally. Turn off your connection and you very quickly crash the viewer. What FPS you get during that time is rendering more and more out of date cache information (which as I said is only covering a very small area) Try going anywhere when not connected and you get nothing. You in fact can't tp someplace else without being connected. You obviously have a poor grasp of how SL works.

---

Madeline has already explained it but let me try...

Say you have a 150Mbps network connection and you TP to somewhere where there is nothing but sky and a 1 prim cube.  The scene fully renders, that whole 1 prim cube What's your frame rate?  Lets make something up and call it 100fps.

Your network connection now drops to 1 byte per second, what's your frame rate?  It's STILL 100fps because there's no more data needed at this time, the graphics card renders the data that it has, that's what it does, that's ALL it does. 

Someone now stands next to you and rezzes 1000 cubes.  The graphics card will still render at 100fps but because the data for each cube will take a few seconds to arrive at 1 byte per second, every few seconds a new cube will be added to the scene and as Madeline said, things like particles, animations, non physical prim rotation and more are all client side rendered.  I can stand on a platform and watch an animation fluidly at high fps even when disconnected.  The viewer doesn't crash when disconnected by the way, the session times out, that's not a crash but in the mean time, the scene remains rendered.  Again, please explain to me how if you believe that fps is implicitly tied to data rate of the network, why my fps isn't zero when network traffic is zero?  (Clue: it's nothing to do with cache).

It's not like WoW as you said but then WoW doesn't work like that either, even in WoW, it only renders the scene based on the objects that are needed to be displayed.

You're very much confusing frames per second rate of the capability of the graphics card, with the rate of retrieving data which would be required to display the complete scene.  It's completely different.