Can my computer handle pcsx2?

[Air]

...

Half of those games people consistently complain about running poorly on high end systems. I can personally vouche for the fact that Naruto 3 is nearly unplayable on a P4 with an ATI 3xxx series (avg less than 15 fps in-game). Oh sure the MENU ran 80 fps, but that doesn't mean much for the key phrase in my original statement:

any reasonable performance

Seriously, I like that you guys think the emulator is so grand that it can emulate demanding games even on crap hardware from 2002. But it's simply not accurate. Most people don't like trying to use an emu that runs 90% of titles at 15fps. It's not their idea of useful, or fun. Oh good, 2-4 titles are sorta playable with lots of speedhacks and framekippings and stuff. That's hardly encouraging, and when you spread misinformation like this it just means more people posting on the forum asking for these magical non-existent configs to supposedly make games run smooth on dated hardware.

[ellachen0417]

Some people may be under the impression that the naruto games are not resource intensive because it looks kind of like a 2D fighter even though it's actually a 3D game with celshading and lots of framebuffer effects. Even if it's 2D, it still doesn't guarantee less resource requirements since some 2D games like Guilty Gear need a decent rig.

I can also vouch for the fact that Naruto Ultimate ninja 3 is not fullspeed on a p4. i don't even think any of the naruto games would be playable on that. i have Naruto 3 and 4, and have tried them on an e4300, an e5200 and an e8400. Both games were slow on the e4300.

[diegochiha]

@ Air @ ellachen0417
So you too are calling me a layer?,then if you dont believe me i can shut both mouths and make a thread about it,listen,im here to help,no to fill this forums with lies and usless stuff,but again you dont believe me then i will post my games + images + specs on a post and i will make sure you both see it.

[Shadow Lady]

It depends on your definition of playable, fighting games running lower than 80% speed for me are not worth it cause you're missing the action as it should be but RPG games specially turn based ones can be playable at even lower speed, (I also prefer smoother gameplay even if slower than seeing frames skipped) but again this is in my definition of playable... also screenshots say nothing nowadays thanx to speedhacks that can show FPS much higher than the speed you get.

[ellachen0417]

I'm not calling anybody a liar, which is why I used the phrase "under the impression". Being mistaken about something (re: under the impression) is different from claiming something to be true even though the person knows it's false (re: lying). I assume you're the former (under the impression). And again, i said "assume", not "accuse". By all means, if you want to prove that a cpu slower than e4300 can run the naruto games at full speed, go ahead and i would be happy to be proven wrong (fullspeed, not 60fps because of VU cycle stealing's tendency to increase the fps while slowing the game down).

And the reason why I (and Air) try to disprove claims that said games would run on old cpus is because we want to help people as well. We don't want random users to get false hopes and then be disappointed because they can't run their games decently even though they heard from some forum that it's possible.

To recap: I am not accusing you of lying. If you felt that's been implied, it was unintentional and feel free to prove us wrong. i would be more than happy to know that PCSX2 is way faster than what I initially thought it to be.

[Air]

@ Air @ ellachen0417
So you too are calling me a layer?,then if you dont believe me i can shut both mouths and make a thread about it,listen,im here to help,no to fill this forums with lies and usless stuff,but again you dont believe me then i will post my games + images + specs on a post and i will make sure you both see it.

That would prove nothing. I don't care what your PC can do, because it's better than the PC of the original poster. Your video card has higher average pixel fillrates and doesn't have the broken SM2.0 of the 6600 (which tends to be *very* slow on certain shader tasks). Your CPU might only be single core but it's still based on the Core2 die which is, on a bad day, a half dozen times better than any Athon XP -- let alone one that's roughly 400mhz less speed. Simply put, your PC is probably going to average twice the fps of this guy's machine.

So you can pretend that I'm just personally attacking you, or you can realize that you're wrong and spreading mis-information about the potential of a user's PC.

[diegochiha]

@ Air

Didnt know that my pc have "that" difference between his pc,anyway im not trying to get anyone mad,besides you do know more than me in this things so i suppose you are right.