surg23 Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 I have a very similar rig to yours. I have been running Skyrim with everything maxed out and it's fairly smooth, could be smoother, but i just don't want to water down the experience with lower settings. I am not sure of the reason behind it, but in certain area's of the game, it gets really choppy, what i could only describe as (lag spikes) ... my only guess is its related to my CPU. Tends to happen when there are a lot of AI activity in the area. I also believe it could be some bad code, possibly related to spawns, because it always happens in the same area. Another anomaly i have encountered is very rarely, some game sounds will glitch/distort, while this is happening performance is horribly slow and a restart is needed. Thankfully this has only happened twice in 160 hours play time. But i do have a hunch that Skyrim doesn't agree with my sound card and/or drivers. All in all, the game runs nicely 99% of the time. Riften really hurts my frames though, must be all the particle effects because there is so much fog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RitualBlack Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 Yeah, PR4Y has the right idea. A Processor: "Pentium® Dual-Core CPU E5700 @ 3.00GHz (2 CPUs), ~3.0GHz" is really just a pretty terrible processor for any modern computer. With that and Vista, I'm surprised you can run Skyrim at all. Have people been trolling you about this, PR4Y? 3GHz is 2 cores isn't terrible (not 'modern' but far from being a bad processor), especially since Skyrim only uses 2 cores. Having Vista isn't the be all and end all of performance either. It doesn't gobble memory and boggle down your processor to the point of making a computer useless. Windows 7 is much nicer but it only uses a bit less memory. If memory is a concern than XP would be the best by far. I believe I had my back-up computer down to just under 200mb of physical memory usage with xp (32) which was pretty nice. PR4Y had some valid constructive things to say though I partially disagree about the processor. His current one will out perform lower end phenom II and i3 processors and should be fine for Skyrim, though you can cheaply upgrade to a nice newer AMD setup like PR4Y said. LuDux, you shouldn't just jump into a discussion and put someones rig down with an arrogant comment :dry: . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LuDux Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 Huh? Arrogant how? Which part? :unsure: You're even agreeing that his processor isn't modern, and I'm not the only one who thinks that that's the bottleneck. And Vista is well known to be a kludge, especially for gaming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RitualBlack Posted January 8, 2012 Share Posted January 8, 2012 You are belittling his system. People spend a lot of money on their computer and for someone to say its terrible is not needed. The processor was released in 2010 and scores higher than many mid/lower end modern CPU's. The nature of technology is that it advances quickly. What is good today will not likely be seen the same way six months down the road but it doesn't mean its bad, and certainly does not warrant a negative comment. Your OS doesn't have all that much to do with games anyways. I have had experience with vista and would recommend an upgrade, but not for game reasons. The OS in general is a pain to deal with if you move around and install files a lot. I have had people who don't do much with their computer tell me vista was no problem, as hard as that was to believe. I was very tempted to get xp-64 as my current computers OS, except new games are phasing out xp unfortunately. I have no intention of starting an argument but rushing into a comment with nothing positive to say isn't needed. If you said that you think their processor is a bit too slow for Skyrim (which it isn't) and listed a reasonable upgrade than I wouldn't have had any problem with the comment. A forum is to give constructive advice to people who are looking for it :sweat: . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spinner385 Posted January 8, 2012 Author Share Posted January 8, 2012 (edited) Thnx everyone. Edited January 8, 2012 by Spinner385 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spinner385 Posted January 10, 2012 Author Share Posted January 10, 2012 (edited) Just an update. I upgraded to Window 7 64bit and I can run 1920x1800 at ultra comfortably with lots of mods (including HD mod). That extra gig of ram really helps. Also the default settings now sets it to high. So all things are fixed and learned just how much Vista 32bit sucks. Edited January 10, 2012 by Spinner385 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rennn Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 Also, if you cap your fps at something like 30 or 40 with a mod, it'll look better than 50+ fps with stutter. It's the stutter that really ruins the appearance of a good framerate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RitualBlack Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 Just an update. I upgraded to Window 7 64bit and I can run 1920x1800 at ultra comfortably with lots of mods (including HD mod). That extra gig of ram really helps. Also the default settings now sets it to high. So all things are fixed and learned just how much Vista 32bit sucks. Good to hear that its working properly for you now :happy: . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LuDux Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 So glad I could help! :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts