Jump to content

LagFighter

Members
  • Posts

    11
  • Joined

Posts posted by LagFighter

  1. absolutely nothing, just trying to moderate your expectations of it by giving you the facts.

     

    your card meets them, but barely. dont mistake an apparently much higher number than what is called for as actually being much higher than is called for.

     

    what is your CPU? that will have an effect. also check and make sure there are no power saving things in effect. those normnally reduce performance significantly.

     

    I understand the facts - thank you. No moderation from you is necessary.

  2. i didnt say old, i saide poor. old is not always an issue, poor is.

     

    it was never a great card.

     

    the entire geforce 300 range were budget cards, and the cores in them were nothing more than rebranded chipsets from the geforce 200 range.

     

    unfortunately itys the equivalent of a crappy onboard GPU in a PC. its at the point where it no longer can be assured of playing newer games, even at lower settings.

     

    It meets the minimum requirements, which implies that the game is playable on low settings - that's all I care about. What are you trying to prove?

  3. for the record that graphics card is poor. and from whaqt i have seen the graphics options do not seem to reflect what they say, for example selecting high does not give high textures.

     

    may just be a bug right now, but withthat graphics card you're never gonna be able to max out your settings

     

    I have no intention of maxing out the settings - I'm aware that the card is old and I have a desktop if I want performace. However, if you're traveling a lot like I am, having something playable (>=30 FPS on native res) on a laptop computer is very nice. The 330M should have no problem doing that, I would imagine.

     

    For example, I'm a college student, and I'm soon going to be going back to my hometown for winter break. It is impossible to bring my desktop with me, but it will be nice to have my computer with me so I don't have to go without SWTOR for 3 weeks.

  4. I have a newer MBP from 2011, 1gb vram 6750m, overclocked, 8gb ram and I can run Skyrim with tons of texture mods and everything on Ultra just fine. I can run Battlefield 3 Just fine at a High setting.

     

    This game looks like a wet dog with no legs and runs about as fast. This is no matter the settings I choose.

     

    It must be some special case of mbp vs star wars.

     

    And as an aside to the fool quipping about mac's terrible build quality: You sir are a gentleman AND a scholar.

     

    Here's hoping something changes. As of now I have to get quite drunk to appreciate the blurry and stuttering game. Neither my liver nor my wallet can maintain that for long.

     

    Well said!

  5. MAC works just fine for this game. I am using 2011 iMac with the i5 core. The lowest model sold. Using bootcamp with Windows 7, I am running 1920x1080 @ max settings. smooth as butter.

     

    There's a distinct difference between a MacBook Pro from 2010 and a 2011 iMac, which has a somewhat newer graphics card (AMD Radeon HD 6750M 512MB). This appears to be a software issue with our MacBook Pro models, in particular.

     

    I wonder if it is the MacBook Pro's combination of hardware, or just the 330M? I need to do some more research.

  6. Yes it is its still a mac branded and likely has same low quality. Thats like saying a dell pc will have same quality of parts as building it your self.

     

    Cool story.

     

    This is a help forum, and your comments add no value to the discussion.

     

    --

     

    I'm thinking this will likely have to be a software fix for BioWare to look at. Any way we can make this known?

  7. I have actually managed to fix this, by turning all settings to high, then back down to low. My framerate has practically doubled and I can now play at 1680x1050 on medium settings (without shadows).

     

    And I did this exact fix, and got the same results! I'm now up to about 30 FPS on low, which is a lot better than what I was averaging before (~10 FPS in Korriban). Thanks so much!

     

    This is definitely a software bug in the current game's release. I'm thrilled that I got it actually playable, because my machine is more than capable of running it based on the minimum specs. I've been searching Google for the last couple of days trying to figure this out.

     

    Thanks again!

×
×
  • Create New...