[jordancyre]

So I recently built a computer and I am wondering if it was beefy enough to handle ps2 emulation via PCSX2 (and possibly Gamecube via dolphin as well.) Here are my specs... I googled a little and did not come up with a solid answer... and these forums pretty much blow my mind so if you could please help that would be great!


Here they are

2.8ghz dual core AMD Kuma black edition processor (that i can overclock to 3.2ghz and keep it stable.)
2gb DDR2 Ram
Radeon HD 3650 1GB 128-bit GDDR2 video card.
Windows XP Professional SP3

Let me know if you need more details!

(I could care less about quality as long as I get to play my games!)
And maybe, after this question is answered, this could turn into a thread where you show off your computer specs!

Thank you very much!!!!

 

[rama2]

It's a nice gaming pc, for pc games (lol).
With pcsx2 at least, you'll often need to use speedhacks to get fullspeed (50fps pal / 60fps ntsc).
Dolphin... idk, I think its not ready for playing games yet (at least the few I tried all failed in the first 2 minutes of gameplay).
But its also progressing fast, so maybe your games work already

 

[jordancyre]

So in your opinion what would be good specs to play the games w/o speedhacks?

 

[Princess Garnet]

If you overclock it, yes, it'll do nicely, but you really do want to overclock it as far as you will, that is, more than 3.2GHz if possible.

That CPU should do really well, despite the "it's AMD, so it'll just barely nudge in" reaction many people give. That's really a Phenom II (just with half the cores), despite the Athlon name, so it's not the same as the slower, older, original Athlon X2. If it was an original Athlon, said reaction would be accurate.

That's an AMD Athlon 7850 Black Edition (2.8GHz). Here's a user with an AMD Athlon 7750 Black Edition (2.7GHz), and his promising results, even more so when you see he was still satisfied with results despite going to it from a faster Core 2 CPU.

http://forums.ngemu.com/pcsx2-forum/125031-pcsx2-experience-kuma-7750-9800gt.html

It's no Core 2, but it's definitely acceptable results in PCSX2 from AMD on the cheap. Before, it was just Core 2 (or better from Intel) you optimally wanted, or pay less to get something from AMD that will get you less (results). Now, you can pay less and get close (to a Core 2) results. Those things are supposed to go to ~4GHz, give or take, just like the Penryn Core 2s. If you do that, you'll be flying, but even if not, ~3.5GHz would be nice.

Edit: For your question in post three, it depends on the game, but to give some rough numbers, either a Core 2 @~4GHz or Kuma Athlon @~4GHz would be ideal (though I'm not saying you couldn't ever get away with less, or that you would never need more, but this is the ideal sweet spot).

 

[rama2]

Lord Zedeck:
Yeah, I don't have any numbers yet on how well the Phenom II does, compared to a wolfdale core2.
But if it does 4ghz, I guess that should be enough.
Well, depends on the speed hit from not having fast daz (denormals are zero).. Maybe amd even fixed that?
I'd need some benches..

 

[Princess Garnet]

Well, admittedly, I'm going on user feedback. I obviously don't have one, and we have no numbers or descriptions of what games, settings, and so forth were used.

I doubt it does as well as a Core 2 either way, but the reports sound good.

The only big question mark is, do they go as far as it's said in regards to overclocking? The Phenom II does go to ~4GHz and more, and since this is the same thing with just half the cores, I'd hope it goes at least as far, yet a Google search shows up little, with the results being much lower on average...

We already know it's a Phenom II (just with half the cores, so it should, in theory, overclock further, or at least as far), and those get to ~4GHz or more. If these do as well, it seems we'll have new recommendations on the cheap, not that the Phenom II was expensive to begin with.

Results on the Phenom II are somewhat uncommon as it is, so this may be why these CPUs being so good (if they overclock nicely) may surprise some people.

 

[Lumis]

Hm Maybe my Phenom II could be overclocked to over 4 Ghz but just now I don#t see any sense in that because my last try to get 2 of my cores enough work was yesterday while I tried 2 PCSX2 games at once.

Could it be that PCSX2 uses dualcore cpu's better when they are from Intel?

or are there secret options for dualcore cpu in an ini of it?

 

[jordancyre]

So basically, Minimum specs to play ps2 games is 3.5ghz....and that's it? No graphics card is necessary? also it may be possible for me to unlock the other two cores in my processor. if that's the case i would have 3.2ghz quad core processor. would that be sufficient?

if some one could please lay out the specs like i laid out mine that would be great! You guys are amazing btw!

 

[Princess Garnet]

No, the "minimum" specifications are lower (much), but that would be to just get the game running. For fullspeed, 3.2GHz (Core 2, I'm assuming) is what the team recommends as the starting point (do note that that although I say "starting point", it's still a recommendation that'll do okay, but they do advise more if possible). Since this is still a work in progress (hasn't reached version 1.0 yet), and many games aren't even able to run, while others need more than others, it's hard to give a recommendation. The recommendation is "throw the most speed at it as you can".

For PCSX2, "speed" means the most, well, speed. The best combination of IPC and frequency (which, currently, a Core 2 @4GHz and over is about at the top of) is the ideal solution, and it's better (essentially a requirement) that said CPU is also a dual ore CPU. No, PCSX2 does not benefit from quad cores, and if/when it does, the gains won't be big. It has to do with the way The Playstation 2 and PCSX2 is written that what they'd branch out may not net big gains. As it is, going from single core to dual core didn't net double the speed (though it was quite large a gain still).

So, as I said, having a quad core doesn't hurt, especially if/when support for them is added, but just having one at stock in the 2.xGHz range is no match for a dual core in the mid to upper 3.xGHz range, or worse, beyond. The dual core will smoke it.

Here's the recommended specifications I see going around.

CPU: Intel Core 2 @3.2GHz+ or similar/AMD equivalent
Ideal: Core 2 Penryn class @3.6GHz+/4.0GHz+ or similar/AMD equivalent
RAM: 1GB RAM (ungh, I think even 512MB may be okay, but any PC with that little RAM will likely not have the CPU for PCSX2 anyway)
GPU: nVidia GeForce 8600 GT/ATi equivalent or better (this is probably namely for DirectX 10 use, since the video plug-in goes faster in DirectX 10, as GPUs "lower" than it can do fine, so note that it's a recommendation)

Hm Maybe my Phenom II could be overclocked to over 4 Ghz but just now I don#t see any sense in that because my last try to get 2 of my cores enough work was yesterday while I tried 2 PCSX2 games at once.

Could it be that PCSX2 uses dualcore cpu's better when they are from Intel?

or are there secret options for dualcore cpu in an ini of it?

From what I see in your signature, I see you like to claim overclocking isn't needed, but you're spouting stuff that makes no sense.

First of all, two instances of PCSX2 would not only take up two cores (unless you had them running in single core mode, in which case they would not be running full speed unless it was a joke of a game requirements-wise). It matters not how many instances you have running if they're all less than full speed.

Secondly, as I said above, PCSX2 uses two threads, and two threads only. You gain nothing from having two extra cores, so don't think it's helping in "the overall speed". It doesn't work to that mentality. You are, however, being hurt by having a lower speed. If you can get it to 4GHz, it's advised to do so and drop the charade. I'm sure it's a fast CPU. I know mine is still plenty fast at stock, but it's (your CPU) not a master of PCSX2, let alone two instances of it, without breaking a sweat or anything, like you're sounding.

 

[jordancyre]

So i am at a decent starting point! It might be time to think about upgrading my processor to one that's alot more beefy but i will try overclocking first. You guys rock! Thank you so much!

 

[Danneh]

I'm running i7 and I can say it definitely doesn't use more than 2 cores. At 4GHz, it's more than enough to cope, but I don't get usage out of all 4 cores/8 threads.

So I'd say a dual core at 4GHz (should be easily obtained on an E8400 with a good heatsink, don't know about AMD), or even a tri core (2 cores for PCSX2, 1 core for background tasks), would be ideal.

From what I read, the 2.8GHz Athlon BE can hit between 3.4-3.8GHz, depending on how good the chip is, and how good your cooler is. It's worth a shot.

 

[Squall-Leonhart]

I'm running i7 and I can say it definitely doesn't use more than 2 cores. At 4GHz, it's more than enough to cope, but I don't get usage out of all 4 cores/8 threads.

So I'd say a dual core at 4GHz (should be easily obtained on an E8400 with a good heatsink, don't know about AMD), or even a tri core (2 cores for PCSX2, 1 core for background tasks), would be ideal.

From what I read, the 2.8GHz Athlon BE can hit between 3.4-3.8GHz, depending on how good the chip is, and how good your cooler is. It's worth a shot.

use GSDX Dx10 software it scales well over more then 2 threads.

 

[Danneh]

use GSDX Dx10 software it scales well over more then 2 threads.

FFX doesn't play nicely with DX10 for me, but FFX-2 does (besides the messed up FMV's), and there's definitely an improvement there. Non-limited it runs at about 200fps

 

[bkwegoharder]

The Kumas are based on the Phenom 1 not the phenom 2s. The penom 1s usually max out at about 3GHz so even though it is black edition, it is not guaranteed a great overclocker. I also think that the Phenom 2s are better clock for clock than the 1s. The Kumas are still decent enough though. The Athlon II X2 are based on the Phenom 2s, the recent Athlon X2 Kumas are based on the phenom 1s.