salgado18 :THANK YOU TOM'S!
This was more insightful than these flaming comments want you to believe. Some of us can't even buy a good mid-range motherboard, let alone extreme 2400MHz RAM or i7s. Heck, some of us have to build an entire system, monitor included, with the price of an i7-6700k.
You just proved that anyone with a low-end system (with a high-clock quad-core AMD cpu or better, that is) can play Fallout 4. And that no one with integrated GPUs can play SWB. See? Very useful!
Again, thank you.
Yes, so glad someone got the point of this article.
Look, everyone commenting on the RAM. Everyone knows that the faster RAM you have paired with an APU the more performance you will get. I have yet to see a ceiling on this effect. But, everyone already knows that. Just like the other systems used in the main articles for these games, this system wasn't made from all new parts, it was pieced together with what was available and used to test the game. These are not reviews, they are just quick looks at how example systems will performance while running the game and nothing more.
With that being our goal, we just used what is on hand. This isn't meant to tell you what the max performance you are going to get out of an APU is. We have real reviews of the APU itself which aim to answer that. This is to tell you how this basic budget system will perform. It isn't high-performance, but it is realistically what you would expect to see. For example, it wouldn't make any sense for us to use RAM capable of running at 2000+ MHz. Why? Because higher performance RAM costs more, and very few people are going to opt to buy one of these systems with high performance RAM, because they could just toss that money into a GPU or something else and end up with a completely different system.
So if you actually look at the goal of this article, it does exactly what it was meant to. It tells users that if you have a system with this performance or higher, chances are you can play these games at least on the lowest settings. That's it.
No offense but you should learn which updated APU and motherboard to use. Also 1600MHz memory for an apu...common man?
This article really wasn't worth the effort to write it.
THANK YOU TOM'S!
This was more insightful than these flaming comments want you to believe. Some of us can't even buy a good mid-range motherboard, let alone extreme 2400MHz RAM or i7s. Heck, some of us have to build an entire system, monitor included, with the price of an i7-6700k.
You just proved that anyone with a low-end system (with a high-clock quad-core AMD cpu or better, that is) can play Fallout 4. And that no one with integrated GPUs can play SWB. See? Very useful!
Again, thank you.
APU should honestly be ran with DDR3-2133 or DDR3-2400, not DDR3-1600. Even in Dual Channel mode, that's a MASSIVE difference in bandwidth for an APU, the graphics portion NEEDS that extra bandwidth, CPU not so much.
As for the motherboard, get one that lets you set the amount of memory, not the most generic of generics. Hell, even my mothers HP Desktop dedicates 25% of total system RAM to the graphics chip on an APU, 2GB dedicated out of 8GB, makes for a fairly decent little machine. Granted I have never gamed on it or attempted to.
But please, for the love of god, even if AMD isn't all that great, at least give it a flipping fighting chance with a decent board and RAM.
APU should honestly be ran with DDR3-2133 or DDR3-2400, not DDR3-1600. Even in Dual Channel mode, that's a MASSIVE difference in bandwidth for an APU, the graphics portion NEEDS that extra bandwidth, CPU not so much.
As for the motherboard, get one that lets you set the amount of memory, not the most generic of generics. Hell, even my mothers HP Desktop dedicates 25% of total system RAM to the graphics chip on an APU, 2GB dedicated out of 8GB, makes for a fairly decent little machine. Granted I have never gamed on it or attempted to.
But please, for the love of god, even if AMD isn't all that great, at least give it a flipping fighting chance with a decent board and RAM.