Grimrock

When I ran test with all settings low and crappy res the most I can muster is 20fps.
PC is run of the mill store bought Dual Core 3Gig 256Meg video.
With all low the monster looks to move faster but everything else suffers on high and med looks great but moves in slow motion.

Brodie301 wrote:When I ran test with all settings low and crappy res the most I can muster is 20fps.
PC is run of the mill store bought Dual Core 3Gig 256Meg video.
With all low the monster looks to move faster but everything else suffers on high and med looks great but moves in slow motion.

I recall reading somewhere that 24fps is the lowest that a human eye perceives as fluid.

You could use this as some sort of guideline:
- Blu-ray movies: 24fps
- PS3 games 60fps

ie. games running at less than 30fps, is usually not considered acceptable. Of course this is subjective to the kind of game that is being talked about.

Like Crise said.You should have more than 30 FPS,because if will have only 30 FPS the game may be slower in some areas where will be more enemy or graphical effects.


But i do not understand why do you have so low FPS on your HW. My HW is similar.
Core 2 Duo E8400 3 GHz,4 GB RAM, GTX 260 898 RAM.

On Hight settings and 1280x1024 i have 152 FPS.I expected much less.

I can not turn Vertical sync ON is it a bug in HW test?

1) Make sure you have SSAO disabled in the options.
2) Get the latest graphics drivers available if you haven't already.

Can you give more detailed info about your system?

Keyz wrote:But i do not understand why do you have so low FPS on your HW. My HW is similar.
Core 2 Duo E8400 3 GHz,4 GB RAM, GTX 260 898 RAM.

Brodie301 wrote:Dual Core 3Gig 256Meg video

Brodie301's system is nowhere near yours in performance terms. The old dual core Pentium is nothing like as refined or efficient as the Core2Duo, regardless of clock-speed, and even although Brodie301 doesn't say exactly which card he/she has, if it's only got 256MB ram, it'll be nowhere near as "modern" as your 260 w/896MBs. Indeed, Brodie301 may not even have a video card... that 256MB may be shared (onboard) vidram.

Onboard vid
Win7, Intel Dual core E5800 3.2GHZ, 3gb Ram, Intel G41 vid chipset which says will max at 1.3 Meg

I know none really ideal for pc gaming, don't do a lot of pc gaming, but can't pass this one up

Oh, so thats integrated GMA 4500? Pretty no-go GPU chip.

Well if you're serious about giving this game a solid go on an older pc, try checking e-bay or something for an old graphics card. Minimal investment with all the returns because at this point a toaster would run LoG better than that onboard.

Cyriel wrote:Well if you're serious about giving this game a solid go on an older pc, try checking e-bay or something for an old graphics card. Minimal investment with all the returns because at this point a toaster would run LoG better than that onboard.

True, but that better be a 4-slot toaster.

You can pick up a brand new graphics card for £30 or so that would be enough for LoG.

Daniel.