| Author |
Message |
|
Sly-UX1XN
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 9:06 pm
Posts: 125
Location: london
|
 if you have a low spec PC and can run CC post your PC info if you can run CC and have a low spec PC can you please post your specs and FPS here and say how playable it is for you it would help alot thanks
|
| Sun Oct 02, 2011 6:14 pm |
|
|
|
Hunter404
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 8:15 pm
Posts: 2
|
Re: if you have a low spec PC and can run CC post your PC info Laptop Specs:
Compaq CQ71
Intel R CPU 1.66Ghz
3,0Gb RAM
32mb Graphic RAM (mobo)
|
| Mon Oct 10, 2011 8:37 pm |
|
|
|
superstepa
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 9:03 pm
Posts: 45
|
Re: if you have a low spec PC and can run CC post your PC info Cortex command runs on almost every PC, the only thing that lags is physics
Intel Atom 1.6 HZ netbook here, 30 FPS without any events, 20-25 with, 5 with nukes
|
| Tue Oct 11, 2011 1:41 am |
|
|
|
maart3n
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2008 8:04 pm
Posts: 1545
|
Re: if you have a low spec PC and can run CC post your PC info Why do these topics keep on coming up?
It's easy, CC uses one of your processors cores, so the differance in peformance between a 2 ghz dual core and a 2 ghz hexacore will not be noticeable.
Also, CC hates certain processors for no good reason, making any of these questions completly unnecesarry, because you can't compare anything reliably.
Also, Yes it runs on a 1.66 ghz dual core(god I can't believe I had that thing) with 2 gb of ram. At a reasonable FPS without too much going on.
It also runs on a 3ghz quad core with 3gb of ram, at 2000 fps under ideal circumstances.
The point I'm trying to make here is that CC is nearly always playable. It will only run a bit slower/faster depending on what you're using.
|
| Tue Oct 11, 2011 5:18 pm |
|
|
|
Sims_Doc
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2010 4:45 am
Posts: 911
Location: No Comment.
|
Re: if you have a low spec PC and can run CC post your PC info My Old Computer from 2002 could run this game with easies
Celeron Processor
4Gbs of Ram
256mb Graphic RAM
Thats all the Main Specs.
|
| Tue Oct 11, 2011 6:29 pm |
|
|
|
Urch
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 2:15 am
Posts: 720
Location: A fucking desert.
|
Re: if you have a low spec PC and can run CC post your PC info the brand of processor does not say anything for its specifications.
|
| Tue Oct 11, 2011 7:05 pm |
|
|
|
maart3n
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2008 8:04 pm
Posts: 1545
|
Re: if you have a low spec PC and can run CC post your PC info Urch wrote: the brand of processor does not say anything for its specifications. In CC it does, the game GENERALLY runs better on intel processors.
|
| Tue Oct 11, 2011 10:15 pm |
|
|
|
whitty
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2007 2:31 am
Posts: 2982
Location: Texas
|
Re: if you have a low spec PC and can run CC post your PC info maart3n wrote: Urch wrote: the brand of processor does not say anything for its specifications. In CC it does, the game GENERALLY runs better on intel processors. And the newer the architecture the better.
|
| Tue Oct 11, 2011 10:35 pm |
|
|
|
Major
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 5:30 am
Posts: 853
Location: Auckland, NZ
|
Re: if you have a low spec PC and can run CC post your PC info Ye Olde calculatron from waaaaaay back in 2001 could run this here game.
512 Mbs of RAM (There abouts anyway).
256 Mbs of Graphical Whoodads.
Yep, back in yer Grandmammy's day we could play this aslong as the Machine God didn't hate yer guts.
|
| Tue Oct 11, 2011 11:28 pm |
|
|
|
mario972
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2011 5:43 pm
Posts: 29
Location: Piaseczno, Poland
|
Re: if you have a low spec PC and can run CC post your PC info Well, can run on Intel (r) Pentium 4 3GHz 1GB DDR400 Radeon HD3450 On deltatime 0,333333... it have about 0.73 timescale on tutorial  . Help me with setting my cortex command to be lag less please.
|
| Sun Oct 16, 2011 6:47 pm |
|
|
|
mechwarrior
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 3:46 am
Posts: 82
|
Re: if you have a low spec PC and can run CC post your PC info i have a computer that can play games amazingly just i have one of those conditions where cortex command just hates my computer and makes it lag horribly
User was warned for this post. This was a huge, unnecessary bump.
|
| Mon Apr 09, 2012 3:50 am |
|
|
|
