What you guys think?

Ive got:

pentium 4, 2.8 gig celeron
1.25 gigs of RAM running at 266 MHz, ie PC2100
a Herc Radeon 9600 PRO with 128 mb

I know the celery isnt a gaming cpu, i found it onsite where i work so i just grabbed it and i reckon its better than my AMD 1700+ (ie 1.47 GHz). I also know p4s like thier pc3200 coz of thier 800 MHz FSB, but again, i found the RAM lyin around and i thought why not.

So yeah, its a thing i just chucked together, but looking at official system specs, im HOPING im going to run GW maxed out.

a nice high res would be good too.

What you think? or will the framerate suck? Course i can run it on 1024 with high detail prolly, but hows it run on your machines?

you should be able to play GW decently.

Dude your fine.

1.3 ghz celeron talatin core,
512/133 ram,
1024x768 no anti-aliasing, nividia 5200 fx 128 here.

I get no lag at that res and am running the game at between quality and high quality settings and it looks beautiful. In fact with anti-aliasing I find it gets pasty and the stair step at closer view is amplified.

So I doubt you will have any problems.

The beauty about GW is that you do not need a suped up machine to play it at reasonably high settings.

[QUOTE=m3th]Ive got:

pentium 4, 2.8 gig celeron
1.25 gigs of RAM running at 266 MHz, ie PC2100
a Herc Radeon 9600 PRO with 128 mb

I know the celery isnt a gaming cpu, i found it onsite where i work so i just grabbed it and i reckon its better than my AMD 1700+ (ie 1.47 GHz). I also know p4s like thier pc3200 coz of thier 800 MHz FSB, but again, i found the RAM lyin around and i thought why not.

QUOTE]

if you dont mind swapping the cpu for a benchmark test you might be surprised .
the 1700+ has twice the on die memory which is important. also it has the athlon core instead of the thunderbird core
there is a chance the 1700+ will be faster (not sure so suggested the benchmark if you dont mind swapping for testing)

both should work so no real reason to do it except curiosity