It can if you buy off the shelf. If you can muster up a halfway decent amount of technical know-how between yourself and/or friends you can build that same system for no more than $700 to $1,000 depending on options (a co-worker of mine with nearly no knowledge of computer hardware built one with very little guidance from me), and it doesn't take that kind of a system to run Fallout 3 well. That kind of system would absolutely crush Fallout 3.

Anyway, I see your point, I just wanted to point out that $1,500-$2,000 is a lot more than one needs to pay for a PC that runs games well. I don't really think it's fair to add the price of the monitor on to that unless you add the price of the TV on to the cost of a console.


A video card that is faster than the GPU in the PS3 will run you around $60 - $100 today. You can absolutely put together a PC that performs much, much better than current-gen consoles for under $600.

Mind helping me to see if I can run Fallout: New Vegas on my PC? I've had problems with System Requirements Lab in the past as well (it said that I way surpassed the minimum and recommended, but once I bought the game from Steam it was unplayable on any level of graphics. The areas would just stop loading and the game would end up crashing).

Specs:
2 gigs of RAM
Intel Core Duo CPU @ 2.33 GHz (2 CPUs)
DirectX 9
NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GT
384.5 GB of free memory on C: drive (I've got extra memory on my additional CPU. Don't quite know how much however, but I doubt it really matters since I've got more than enough space for New Vegas)

Need any other specifications, tell me what you need and I'll provide that info as well.

You should be fine. I ran FO3 on 2 gigs of RAM, a single core CPU, and an Nvidia Geforce 6800 GT. I had to run it on low settings, but it ran smooth and fine. What game did Systems Lab tell you could be run on your computer that crashed all the time once you bought it?

I think this is true for most of these cheap computers - there are at least some modes in which Fallout3 can run very smoothly.

I'm impressed with how cheap some of the systems had become, I had no idea! I still think the systems in these links are trash and wouldn't play Fallout smoothly with mods, but I now definitely agree that stock Fallout without mods in a High graphics mode might work out. As a PC user I can't imagine playing stock Fallout without 50+ mods, and I think a high-end system is definitely required for modders. All this evidence clearly concludes the argument that the Gamebroyo engine is "blocky/laggy" on most systems with all these cheap PCs that can run Fallout on ultra-high mode without problems!

[quote name='st frantic' date='01 September 2010 - 06:22 AM' timestamp='1283340149' post='16346386']
Putting things on two discs does'nt matter in my view,whats the big deal....your talking about space,not proccessing power etc.
PS3 & xbox are similar...the xbox has more quality games,its more popular,& its easier to make games for.
There are'nt that many games that use two discs anyway...& even so...its not a big deal.
Saying xbox wont last longer because of that is just idiotic.
Fallout was smoother on the xbox & less buggy,because overall its a better system to make games for...so if one console was to last longer it would be the 360.
And your up against microsoft...that should tell you alot in its self.
I hope both consoles do well....competition keeps things interesting & pushes boundries
[/quote/]


ORLY? There AREN'T That many games that need two disks for the xbox. Since were talking about bethesda games lets look at Bethesda games. Right from the Horses mouth "Xbox 360 versions of rage will ship on either two or three dual-layer DVD discs" It is going to be a MASSIVE problem for the Xbox as the demand for Disk capacity increases they will be left dead in the water on this one. Just to Say FO3 ran wonderfully on my PS3 im looking forward to FNV and FO4.

Yeah, I run FO3 on an ATI HD2600XT / 256mb graphics card. Runs fine at 1680x1050 with low-ish settings.

One thing I've found useful in figuring out how my graphics card stacks up to the various system requirements for games is this:
http://www.overclock.net/graphics-cards-general/502403-graphics-card-ranking-5th-time-last.html

It's a ranked list of many graphics cards - not sure how up-to-date it is, but if you're trying to figure out if you meet the min reqs for a game, you probably don't have the latest card anyway.

(For the record, on that list my card is #106, and the FO3 min req cards are in the 120-130 range. And the previously mentioned 8600GT is 103. You should be fine, on lower settings. Oh, and I play with a number of mods, mostly stuff like more clothes and FOOK2. And FOSE. Runs ok. I do avoid total texture replacement mods, since I don't have the VRAM for them.)

As was said, you should be fine. I have a friend with a Core 2 Duo 2.66, 2GB RAM, and a GeForce 9600GT (not much faster than 8600GT) and the game runs well on medium settings. I believe he's running the game at 1920x1080 as well, so that's pretty good.

Yeah, $400 is a tad low for ultra-high unless you skimp on some of the parts...which is essentially what you'll get when buying off the shelf for a higher price anyway. For the sake of perspective, here's a (quickly assembled at Newegg.com) machine that would run FO3 on ultra-high with mods without skimping and buying any lower-quality parts...all of these components should be pretty solid (and likely better than a brand-name build):

HIS H577FK1GD Radeon HD 5770 (Juniper XT) 1GB 128-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 2.0 x16 HDCP Ready CrossFireX Support Video Card w/ Eyefinity
Item #:N82E16814161338
$10.00 Mail-in Rebate Card
$139.99

ATI Gift - Free Game (Blacklight: Tango Down) Game Code
Item #:N82E16800999246
Free w/ video card

Logitech MK120 Black USB Wired Slim Desktop
Item #:N82E16823126097
$21.99

BIOSTAR TA785 A2+ AM3/AM2+/AM2 AMD 785G ATX AMD Motherboard
Item #:N82E16813138282
$10.00 Mail-in Rebate Card
$66.99

AMD Phenom II X2 550 Callisto 3.1GHz Socket AM3 80W Dual-Core Desktop Processor HDX550WFGMBOX
Item #:N82E16819103847
$85.99

Western Digital Caviar Blue WD1600AAJS 160GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive -Bare Drive
Item #:N82E16822136075
$38.99

PQI TURBO 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800 (PC2 6400) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory Model PQI26400-4GDB
Item #:N82E16820141366
$75.99

Antec Sonata III 500 Black 0.8mm cold rolled steel ATX Mid Tower Computer Case 500W Power Supply
Item #:N82E16811129024
$119.99

Grand Total: $549.93 - $20 rebates = $529.93

Not bad...and with a free game to boot! I'm not including the price of a monitor or speakers as they're not part of the computer. Similarly, we don't include the price of a TV and a sound system in the price of a console...they're not part of the console.

Nice, thanks for the perspective.

I wouldn't use that motherboard in 1000 years, the ram is slow by modern standards, slow hard disk and the graphics card is really on the edge of old (5770 is at least 2 years out now) and to be frank you absolutely have to include the monitor in the price of the computer. Most families already have TVs, and most kids parents buy the TVs, whereas with a computer your stuck in getting a monitor of Some kind - we're talking about the majority here after all. And I'm sorry but Speakers have to be included, TVs have them, computers do not. I think if you add a decent $150 17" flat panel and some speakers, it would get upwards of $700 for that PC that can do Fo3. But thats splitting hairs, your point is strong and valid that a low-end PC can run vanilla Fallout3 in a decent mode.

What I like about this is it proves to point that Gambroyo is not "Laggy" and doesn't svck for performance - as a low-end PC by modern standards can run the game in a high graphics mode, then anyone with a ps/3 or high-end PC is going to have a Smoooth experience with Fo3 and New Vegas. I know mine is smooth with big mods, so I'm actually quite pleased that we're still on Gamebroyo. The graphics are not "the best", but nor do they need to be in a game like New Vegas.

Cheers!

Miax

Hmm.

That's #27 on that card ranking list I use. Vastly higher than the card I play FO3 with.

(It's also about 30 places higher than the FO3 recommended cards. And 20 places higher than the Crysis & Bioshock 2 rec's. Heh.)

Why not? I've had good luck with Biostar boards and I've been building PCs for 18 years.

How about this for the same price:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813138179

...or this for $5 more:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157176


First of all, it's not. Second of all, the effect of RAM speed on system performance depends on system architecture. AMD systems don't run much faster using DDR3 than DDR2. We're talking low single digits as far as framerate differences in games.

If you insist, though, here's DDR3 to go with the alternative MB above:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820134718

Add a whopping $10 to the price.


What? Um, no it isn't...at all.


First of all, it's not (5700 series came out at the end of 2009), but why would that matter? Would you like me to include a video card that is extreme overkill for the application? What would be the point of that?


Not a valid argument. Most people already own a computer, so they own a monitor. It's no different than claiming you already own a TV. Besides, any recent TV will accept a computer as an input.


Again, most people will have speakers (see above), or the computer can be connected to a home theater system or a TV. I do it. It's really simple.


It's not that the setup is all that "low-end," it's that hardware is a lot cheaper than most people think it is. This configuration blows current consoles completely out of the water as far as performance.

Anyway, I'm not arguing your point, just your pricing. The fact is that a PC that can max out FO3 isn't very expensive.

Edit:
Just noticed I didn't include a DVD drive, so add $30 to that, or $70 for a blu-ray.

the havok physics engine bethesda uses is NOT gambryo. not the renderer nor the engine bethesda built(well sort of! as the havok engine they are using is specifically tailored by them). it is a 3rdparty middleware implemented into the engine. Yes they could remove it and start using a different physics engine. lets be honest, you just don't have a clue what is the engine and what isn't. because you probably never worked with the gamebryo sdk, or it's lightspeed package. nor even modded a bethesda game and its version of the engine. Go look at the 200+ other gamebryo games and you may see that you cannot blame any stuttering in bethesdas last 2 games, totally on the gamebryo renderer. really guys.

And btw its the same physics engine used in Halo3, Assassins Creed 2, and Bioshock2... and that's just some of the big games that have used it in the last year.

and btw havok physics engine = 3ds max reactor.


Well considering that Bethesda developed for the xbox, and did a crappy PC port straight with all UI designed to be used on the xbox and everything. so if anything it is more fully optimized for the xbox not the PC. the PS3 just got the brownest end because of its ram, it is harder to optimize for, and because the port wasn't of the best standard.

btw the 5770 is a GREAT card. it is probably the best bang for buck card going. and as long as there aren't any severe bottle necks in the rest of the system, will probably handle every single modern game on ultra high.

Memory speed isn't all that important, in all honesty... And the HD 5750 is still pretty good, though I'd spring an extra seventy bucks and get a GTX 460.

The main place where that build fails is the use of an AMD processor. AMD dual core processors svck massively in comparison to Intel's C2D or especially its i7/i5 quads.



Not really. Nearly everyone has a computer these days, so you can just cannibalize the old monitor. Indeed, many HDTVs these days can double as a monitor.



Some monitors have speakers included. If not, you could always spring for a ten dollar set of headphones. Personally, I prefer headphones. And I'm sure my roommates are glad I have headphones too.



Not necessarily. Graphics aren't the only thing that can cause lag. Processing speed and available memory are also rather large factors. Ditto how well the game code is optimized. I expect NV to be more optimized than FO3 was, and I expect them to have fixed the quad core issue they introduced in FO3 1.1, but I'm just throwing it out there.

I agree there. I wasn't trying to create an all-around well thought-out build. I was just trying to very quickly illustrate how cheap it is to build an extremely capable machine for games. You guys are scrutinizing the details more than I intended.

What's wrong with the video card? I could have included a more expensive one, but the 5770 already runs circles around current-gen console hardware and still has time to stop for a frozen yogurt afterward, so why would I? Besides, if you went up to a GTX 460 you'd have to take a closer look at the PSU, which I didn't want to do.

Nothing's wrong with the video card. I've just had bad luck with ATI anything, so I go Nvidia now.

I might go another round with ATI when I'm in the market for a card again...I haven't had an ATI card since my x1900xtx. My GTX 285 that's going on two years old (and I paid $270 for) can still max out just about everything but Crysis on my monitor, so I'm not even sure when that will be.