help please

General Chit-Chat is in here... New Members are invited to pop in and say hello!
Post Reply
fenton
Super League Player
Super League Player
Posts: 13792
Joined: 05 Jul 2006, 18:29
Twitter: AFenton90
Location: Pontefract
Contact:

help please

Post by fenton » 26 May 2010, 19:58

hello boys and girls

eventually would like to buy a new gaming laptop to be able to play good quality games on without any problems, but for now im stuck with the one i have.

i have a toshiba satellite a300 and trying to play such games as splinter cell conviction and pes 2010

pes 2010 works no problems at all but splinter cell i can only play for 30 seconds or so before my comuter dies. before i start the game it says i need more that 256mb of virtual memory to play the game (which i apparently dont have) im guessing this is ram? or something similar? is there anyone out there who knows how i can either change settings on my laptop to allocate me more virtual memory to play games or can someone point me in the right direction of how to buy/install more memory?

thanks in advance

User avatar
scottiger
Academy Player
Academy Player
Posts: 867
Joined: 09 Jul 2008, 12:57
Location: castleford
Contact:

Post by scottiger » 26 May 2010, 23:47

ps3 pc's are rubbish for gameing unless your willing to pay real top wack
Image
TM Out

fenton
Super League Player
Super League Player
Posts: 13792
Joined: 05 Jul 2006, 18:29
Twitter: AFenton90
Location: Pontefract
Contact:

Post by fenton » 27 May 2010, 09:56

id happily spend about a grand on a new computer

dont mind if i get a laptop or a desktop

i practically have a desktop now anyway as my laptop screen backlight has broke so i have to use a monitor to be able to use it.

looking for an alianware deskop i think, but i think the cheapest one of them is about 1500

djdave
Academy Player
Academy Player
Posts: 333
Joined: 05 Jul 2006, 21:40
Contact:

Post by djdave » 27 May 2010, 13:30

1. Click Start, right click on My Computer
and then click Properties
2. Click ” Advanced “.
3. At the ” Performance ” section click ” Settings ” .
4. Select ” Advanced ” and in the ” Virtual Memory ” click ” Change ” .
5. Here, Click on your Windows Partition, select ” Custom Size ” and set the Initial Size and Maximum Size to 2000(2gb). Click ” Set ” .
6. Click Ok and restart your Computer.

fenton
Super League Player
Super League Player
Posts: 13792
Joined: 05 Jul 2006, 18:29
Twitter: AFenton90
Location: Pontefract
Contact:

Post by fenton » 27 May 2010, 14:35

Cheers djdave

User avatar
Matt
Verified
Super League Player
Super League Player
Posts: 13936
Joined: 05 Jul 2006, 17:42
Twitter: @invmatt
Location: Leeds
Contact:

Post by Matt » 28 May 2010, 00:04

scottiger wrote:ps3 pc's are rubbish for gameing unless your willing to pay real top wack
Top wack? What are you smoking ... For £300-400 I could build a PC capable of outputting TRUE HD and not a resolution PC's were capable of displaying 8 years ago (1080) Even then hardly any PS3 games even render at 1080 - most are 720 or less (Red dead redemption is 640 for example).

For an extra £100 or so you could probably boost the res to 2560x1600 - most games would easily give 30-60fps (the max you'll ever see on the PS3 is 60fps)

The PS3 is old technology, the cell architecture is outdated and stupidly hard to code for, you can pick up a quad core 2.8GHz Intel which would blow the cell out of the water.

PC gaming isn't expensive, you don't need £200+ graphic cards etc to play the latest games on a much better system than the PS3.
For website related issues or queries please contact the admin account as I no longer own or maintain Casforum.

User avatar
scottiger
Academy Player
Academy Player
Posts: 867
Joined: 09 Jul 2008, 12:57
Location: castleford
Contact:

Post by scottiger » 28 May 2010, 01:00

Matt wrote:
scottiger wrote:ps3 pc's are rubbish for gameing unless your willing to pay real top wack
Top wack? What are you smoking ... For £300-400 I could build a PC capable of outputting TRUE HD and not a resolution PC's were capable of displaying 8 years ago (1080) Even then hardly any PS3 games even render at 1080 - most are 720 or less (Red dead redemption is 640 for example).

For an extra £100 or so you could probably boost the res to 2560x1600 - most games would easily give 30-60fps (the max you'll ever see on the PS3 is 60fps)

The PS3 is old technology, the cell architecture is outdated and stupidly hard to code for, you can pick up a quad core 2.8GHz Intel which would blow the cell out of the water.

PC gaming isn't expensive, you don't need £200+ graphic cards etc to play the latest games on a much better system than the PS3.
if your gunna build it your self maybe i nt your looking at a grand for summat decent
Image
TM Out

User avatar
Matt
Verified
Super League Player
Super League Player
Posts: 13936
Joined: 05 Jul 2006, 17:42
Twitter: @invmatt
Location: Leeds
Contact:

Post by Matt » 28 May 2010, 09:05

scottiger wrote:if your gunna build it your self maybe i nt your looking at a grand for summat decent
Thor Gaming PC alot better specs than the PS3 could ever hope for - £409 and it will play the latest games easily. Support dual monitors at 2560x1600.

On top of that games for the PC are cheaper - take the Steam sale for example over christmas, the discounts were huge - Battlefield bad company 2 was going for £22, even retail you're paying £10+ less.

Community wise free mods, maps (you know the things Sony want you to pay for "DLC")
For website related issues or queries please contact the admin account as I no longer own or maintain Casforum.

User avatar
scottiger
Academy Player
Academy Player
Posts: 867
Joined: 09 Jul 2008, 12:57
Location: castleford
Contact:

Post by scottiger » 28 May 2010, 22:44

Matt wrote:
scottiger wrote:if your gunna build it your self maybe i nt your looking at a grand for summat decent
Thor Gaming PC alot better specs than the PS3 could ever hope for - £409 and it will play the latest games easily. Support dual monitors at 2560x1600.

On top of that games for the PC are cheaper - take the Steam sale for example over christmas, the discounts were huge - Battlefield bad company 2 was going for £22, even retail you're paying £10+ less.

Community wise free mods, maps (you know the things Sony want you to pay for "DLC")
im not sold on it
Image
TM Out

User avatar
Landy
Academy Player
Academy Player
Posts: 650
Joined: 15 Aug 2007, 21:05
Contact:

Post by Landy » 30 May 2010, 15:22

Matt wrote:
scottiger wrote:
Top wack? What are you smoking ... For £300-400 I could build a PC capable of outputting TRUE HD and not a resolution PC's were capable of displaying 8 years ago (1080) Even then hardly any PS3 games even render at 1080 - most are 720 or less (Red dead redemption is 640 for example).
PC's , well more like the OLD CRT monitors we all used were using resolutions far greater than todays HD for the last 10 years, its only the advent and popularity of HD in mainstream TVs thats made this an misunderstood issue, but technically the older CRT monitors were capable of much higher resolutions than todays HD, which isn't actually HD at all (but thats another much more complicated matter)

The Graphics Unit in a PS3 is an variation on the old 7600gt series Nvidia cards, which is about 5 years out of date now, you can pay £50 for some Nvidia/ATI GPUs and get twice the preformance of the GPU in the PS3, so Matt is spot on, Maybe not laptops, but desktops, you can spend 400 and get an awesome gaming machine, Laptops are different 'cos the compressed size, but for a gaming laptop which is going to play games at a resonable level at resonable framerates you need £700+ plus

railway end man
League One Player
League One Player
Posts: 2080
Joined: 20 Apr 2010, 15:26
Location: castleford
Contact:

Post by railway end man » 02 Jun 2010, 00:03

Landy wrote:
Matt wrote:
scottiger wrote:
Top wack? What are you smoking ... For £300-400 I could build a PC capable of outputting TRUE HD and not a resolution PC's were capable of displaying 8 years ago (1080) Even then hardly any PS3 games even render at 1080 - most are 720 or less (Red dead redemption is 640 for example).
PC's , well more like the OLD CRT monitors we all used were using resolutions far greater than todays HD for the last 10 years, its only the advent and popularity of HD in mainstream TVs thats made this an misunderstood issue, but technically the older CRT monitors were capable of much higher resolutions than todays HD, which isn't actually HD at all (but thats another much more complicated matter)

The Graphics Unit in a PS3 is an variation on the old 7600gt series Nvidia cards, which is about 5 years out of date now, you can pay £50 for some Nvidia/ATI GPUs and get twice the preformance of the GPU in the PS3, so Matt is spot on, Maybe not laptops, but desktops, you can spend 400 and get an awesome gaming machine, Laptops are different 'cos the compressed size, but for a gaming laptop which is going to play games at a resonable level at resonable framerates you need £700+ plus
get xbox 360 p.c on the move

User avatar
scottiger
Academy Player
Academy Player
Posts: 867
Joined: 09 Jul 2008, 12:57
Location: castleford
Contact:

Post by scottiger » 02 Jun 2010, 00:18

railway end man wrote:
Landy wrote:
Matt wrote:
scottiger wrote:
Top wack? What are you smoking ... For £300-400 I could build a PC capable of outputting TRUE HD and not a resolution PC's were capable of displaying 8 years ago (1080) Even then hardly any PS3 games even render at 1080 - most are 720 or less (Red dead redemption is 640 for example).
PC's , well more like the OLD CRT monitors we all used were using resolutions far greater than todays HD for the last 10 years, its only the advent and popularity of HD in mainstream TVs thats made this an misunderstood issue, but technically the older CRT monitors were capable of much higher resolutions than todays HD, which isn't actually HD at all (but thats another much more complicated matter)

The Graphics Unit in a PS3 is an variation on the old 7600gt series Nvidia cards, which is about 5 years out of date now, you can pay £50 for some Nvidia/ATI GPUs and get twice the preformance of the GPU in the PS3, so Matt is spot on, Maybe not laptops, but desktops, you can spend 400 and get an awesome gaming machine, Laptops are different 'cos the compressed size, but for a gaming laptop which is going to play games at a resonable level at resonable framerates you need £700+ plus
get xbox 360 p.c on the move
had 2 most unreliable pice of crap ring of death den the other was scratching disks stay away from microsoft
Image
TM Out

User avatar
Landy
Academy Player
Academy Player
Posts: 650
Joined: 15 Aug 2007, 21:05
Contact:

Post by Landy » 03 Jun 2010, 11:53

railway end man wrote:
get xbox 360 p.c on the move
Well, not really, Whilst the 360 is slightly more codable, in terms of Graphics and Processing power theres not really anything to chose from it and the PS3,

User avatar
marshman
League One Player
League One Player
Posts: 3201
Joined: 05 Jul 2006, 18:38
Location: WRE
Contact:

Post by marshman » 06 Jun 2010, 16:11

I'm with Landy and Matt, and lets be honest, you're not going to beat the PC geeks when it comes to geekery. No offence guys, you know what i mean. These guys have been playing games for years on the PC which are the benchmark for console gaming. Consoles are always using technology that PCs have trialled, tested and perfected. As stated, the consoles are using what basically amount to out of date PC processors and video cards.

I've recently just bough a PS3 having been a PC gamer for years before that. The PS3 fits the bill for what i want nowadays in gaming since i don't seem to get much chance to play, so that's why i bought one. But for graphics quality, and value for money, if i was able to play more i'd have bought a decent gaming PC.

Take COD MW2 for example. I just bought it and then had to pay an extra £11 for a couple of maps. Compare to PC where you can download for free, hundreds of maps. Yes i did say hundreds. You really don't get value for money from these console games. I wouldn't say i've regretted buying a PS3, but it has reminded me why i stuck to PC gaming for so long.

User avatar
Matt
Verified
Super League Player
Super League Player
Posts: 13936
Joined: 05 Jul 2006, 17:42
Twitter: @invmatt
Location: Leeds
Contact:

Post by Matt » 07 Jun 2010, 00:00

marshman wrote:I'm with Landy and Matt, and lets be honest, you're not going to beat the PC geeks when it comes to geekery. No offence guys, you know what i mean. These guys have been playing games for years on the PC which are the benchmark for console gaming. Consoles are always using technology that PCs have trialled, tested and perfected. As stated, the consoles are using what basically amount to out of date PC processors and video cards.

I've recently just bough a PS3 having been a PC gamer for years before that. The PS3 fits the bill for what i want nowadays in gaming since i don't seem to get much chance to play, so that's why i bought one. But for graphics quality, and value for money, if i was able to play more i'd have bought a decent gaming PC.

Take COD MW2 for example. I just bought it and then had to pay an extra £11 for a couple of maps. Compare to PC where you can download for free, hundreds of maps. Yes i did say hundreds. You really don't get value for money from these console games. I wouldn't say i've regretted buying a PS3, but it has reminded me why i stuck to PC gaming for so long.
Agreed. I mainly play on my 360 these days however consoles have ruined PC gaming, IWNET which now powers Modern Warfare 2 removed Dedicated servers, community mods and maps all in order to implement DLC, instead of having hundreds of maps we're forced to buy 5 for £11, a total rip off.
For website related issues or queries please contact the admin account as I no longer own or maintain Casforum.

User avatar
scottiger
Academy Player
Academy Player
Posts: 867
Joined: 09 Jul 2008, 12:57
Location: castleford
Contact:

Post by scottiger » 07 Jun 2010, 01:59

Matt wrote:
marshman wrote:I'm with Landy and Matt, and lets be honest, you're not going to beat the PC geeks when it comes to geekery. No offence guys, you know what i mean. These guys have been playing games for years on the PC which are the benchmark for console gaming. Consoles are always using technology that PCs have trialled, tested and perfected. As stated, the consoles are using what basically amount to out of date PC processors and video cards.

I've recently just bough a PS3 having been a PC gamer for years before that. The PS3 fits the bill for what i want nowadays in gaming since i don't seem to get much chance to play, so that's why i bought one. But for graphics quality, and value for money, if i was able to play more i'd have bought a decent gaming PC.

Take COD MW2 for example. I just bought it and then had to pay an extra £11 for a couple of maps. Compare to PC where you can download for free, hundreds of maps. Yes i did say hundreds. You really don't get value for money from these console games. I wouldn't say i've regretted buying a PS3, but it has reminded me why i stuck to PC gaming for so long.
Agreed. I mainly play on my 360 these days however consoles have ruined PC gaming, IWNET which now powers Modern Warfare 2 removed Dedicated servers, community mods and maps all in order to implement DLC, instead of having hundreds of maps we're forced to buy 5 for £11, a total rip off.
thought you were a pc gamer
Image
TM Out

User avatar
Landy
Academy Player
Academy Player
Posts: 650
Joined: 15 Aug 2007, 21:05
Contact:

Post by Landy » 08 Jun 2010, 21:06

battlefield Bad Company 2 is awesome on PC

jenny_ov
New member
Posts: 2
Joined: 30 Apr 2011, 12:37
Contact:

Re: help please

Post by jenny_ov » 30 Apr 2011, 13:00

Thanks for the tip.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests