Posted - 2007.12.06 12:06:00 - [2]

 

Edited by: LvxAeterna on 06/12/2007 12:06:54
Edited by: LvxAeterna on 06/12/2007 12:06:06
I would say MAYBE, but leaning towards no.

I've got a desktop AMD 64 2800+ with 1gb RAM and a Nvidia 6800 (vanilla). I run EVE in Ubuntu, and EVE nets around 30fps, with effects and sound turned off.

EVE in Windows, on the same system, nets around 75-100fps.

Your laptop with its microfootprint will probably have a hard time running it.

Posted - 2007.12.06 13:03:00 - [4]

 

Originally by: LvxAeterna

---

Edited by: LvxAeterna on 06/12/2007 12:06:54
Edited by: LvxAeterna on 06/12/2007 12:06:06
I would say MAYBE, but leaning towards no.

I've got a desktop AMD 64 2800+ with 1gb RAM and a Nvidia 6800 (vanilla). I run EVE in Ubuntu, and EVE nets around 30fps, with effects and sound turned off.

EVE in Windows, on the same system, nets around 75-100fps.

Your laptop with its microfootprint will probably have a hard time running it.

---

Using cedega or wine?

Because (pre-patch) cedega got about 25/30 fps, whereas wine was closer to 80.

Posted - 2007.12.06 13:30:00 - [6]

 

Short answer:
If you're an EVE junkie, dont bother, give it a couple of more months.

Long answer:

Official client, I seriously doubt it, minimum GFX requirements are Geforce FX. I have Geforce 4 MX and I managed to get it to load, but the graphics are completely hozed and it crashes trying to update the client.

Via Wine, you might eventually get lucky enough to change skills, maybe high-sec mining, but I doubt you'll be able to do any shooty shooty.

No idea about Cedega since I quit using it ages ago after Wine ran EVE way better.

Posted - 2007.12.06 13:48:00 - [8]

 

Edited by: Sevarus James on 06/12/2007 13:52:36
Edited by: Sevarus James on 06/12/2007 13:49:49

Originally by: benzss

---

Originally by: Sevarus James

---

Edited by: Sevarus James on 06/12/2007 13:30:19
Edited by: Sevarus James on 06/12/2007 13:29:17

Originally by: benzss

---

Originally by: LvxAeterna

---

Edited by: LvxAeterna on 06/12/2007 12:06:54
Edited by: LvxAeterna on 06/12/2007 12:06:06
I would say MAYBE, but leaning towards no.

I've got a desktop AMD 64 2800+ with 1gb RAM and a Nvidia 6800 (vanilla). I run EVE in Ubuntu, and EVE nets around 30fps, with effects and sound turned off.

EVE in Windows, on the same system, nets around 75-100fps.

Your laptop with its microfootprint will probably have a hard time running it.

---

Using cedega or wine?

Because (pre-patch) cedega got about 25/30 fps, whereas wine was closer to 80.

---

Yeah, right.

I test with both clients. I optimize both. (config via official and registry via wine). 80? Not a chance in hell...unless you are running cedega in a window/windowed and wine on a completely 'uber' computer at low rez.
Statements like this are utter smackage and without merit, and appear purely designed to toss fecal matter at Transgaming vs. the wine package. I normally don't say this kind of thing, but proof or STFU.

---

Someone woke up on the wrong side of the bed this morning huh?

And yeah it was close to 80 on full screen at best (i.e. normal travelling) but obviously this dropped in combat etc. It is still lower than what windows achieves but much better than anything cedega could manage (yes I followed every tutorial about optimising eve in cedega that I could find, and I even subscribed to cedega for a month so I could get their engine updates as often as possible. This is before you start mudslinging again ).

I would prove it to you but, uh, I can't run trinity.

---

Color me a skeptic. I'm on a dual core amd 3800 / nvidia 8800GTS 640meg ram superclock + 100.23 drivers (as well as testing the latest beta nvidia) and as of yesterday WINE had 80fps IN STATION. In space it normally topped at 45-55 fps in "solo" travel, but averaged much less with NORMAL usage.

Today, Cedega is getting 80-90fps in stations and 28-60fps in space and fairly smooth performance. This is a decent 15-20% fps increase from pre-trinity.

Wine as of .9.50 yesterday was getting fairly similar results, but occasional gfx hitches (odd exlposions and tearing). Cedega, from my experience has been the better client overall.

Today its the ONLY one for the moment. wine will get fixed, yes, but performance hits from machine to machine/ distro to distro are a fact of life, and it IRKS the hell out of me to see Cedega get brush painted as utter crap...when it obviously is NOT.

Sorry for the prior post's tone, but I see this over and over in the linux threads, and its usually a "political" motive rather than a technical one, as there is still blood in the water (after 5 frickin' years) between some folks and Transgaming.

Posted - 2007.12.06 13:51:00 - [10]

 

Edited by: Sevarus James on 06/12/2007 13:51:35

Originally by: Frenzei

---

Hmm, i may try, at least then. My hardware is unusually well supported in linux :p

If it does not work, no biggie, new pc in house within 6 months anyways.

---

Dude, sorry to derail there. Your video card is an integrated intel card. The official client doesn't support that card, and although you "may" get it running, the integrated laptop cards performance is usually atrocious at best and unusable at worst.

Sorry to say.