<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.5" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Opposing Fronts Min Spec (Tentative)</title>
	<link>http://www.relicrank.com/bloggo/2007/07/26/opposing-fronts-min-spec-tentative/</link>
	<description>The personal blog of Buggo, a.k.a Allie Henze, Relic Community Manager.</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2010 20:36:14 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.5</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: Jackqueline Rebollar</title>
		<link>http://www.relicrank.com/bloggo/2007/07/26/opposing-fronts-min-spec-tentative/#comment-131823</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Feb 2010 04:37:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.relicrank.com/bloggo/2007/07/26/opposing-fronts-min-spec-tentative/#comment-131823</guid>
					<description>I saw your page on Yahoo. I will certainly be bookmarking this blog so I can stay updated on the latest developments. _________________________________________________________________________ &lt;a&gt; Quit Smoking&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I saw your page on Yahoo. I will certainly be bookmarking this blog so I can stay updated on the latest developments. _________________________________________________________________________ <a> Quit Smoking</a>
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Philman</title>
		<link>http://www.relicrank.com/bloggo/2007/07/26/opposing-fronts-min-spec-tentative/#comment-8160</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jul 2007 05:37:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.relicrank.com/bloggo/2007/07/26/opposing-fronts-min-spec-tentative/#comment-8160</guid>
					<description>Hey, Ajfax.....I hardly think its buggo's tool.

Why should dual core be recommended.  They want to run the beta on a wide spectrum of machines, this will give them a great beta test.

If they wanted to run it on all top of the line machines, they would say "anyone who has not bought their comp in the last 6 months, take a step back, we don't want you here."</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey, Ajfax&#8230;..I hardly think its buggo&#8217;s tool.</p>
<p>Why should dual core be recommended.  They want to run the beta on a wide spectrum of machines, this will give them a great beta test.</p>
<p>If they wanted to run it on all top of the line machines, they would say &#8220;anyone who has not bought their comp in the last 6 months, take a step back, we don&#8217;t want you here.&#8221;
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Ajfax</title>
		<link>http://www.relicrank.com/bloggo/2007/07/26/opposing-fronts-min-spec-tentative/#comment-8149</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jul 2007 00:25:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.relicrank.com/bloggo/2007/07/26/opposing-fronts-min-spec-tentative/#comment-8149</guid>
					<description>Dear buggo

Your tool is crappy. The effective CPU speed says nothing about power of a CPU.
Nevertheless, I can play the game in high details, I think.

DualCore should be recomennded in the tool and be given "great" - also if the CPU speed (in MHz/GHz) is lower than the recomended spec. This is mostly for single core PCs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear buggo</p>
<p>Your tool is crappy. The effective CPU speed says nothing about power of a CPU.<br />
Nevertheless, I can play the game in high details, I think.</p>
<p>DualCore should be recomennded in the tool and be given &#8220;great&#8221; - also if the CPU speed (in MHz/GHz) is lower than the recomended spec. This is mostly for single core PCs.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Finaldeath</title>
		<link>http://www.relicrank.com/bloggo/2007/07/26/opposing-fronts-min-spec-tentative/#comment-8058</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Jul 2007 13:03:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.relicrank.com/bloggo/2007/07/26/opposing-fronts-min-spec-tentative/#comment-8058</guid>
					<description>Hahaha, why on earth are Relic using Ghz of a processor to determine whether that passes or is okay?

Most of the new processors no where near get near the recommended 3.0Ghz. Mine is only 2.40 because it is a flashy new core 2 duo.

Noting that of course its more efficient then a 3.0Ghz pentium 4, it will likely fail and be "okay" instead.

Rather arbitrary there, the other things are fine but that is a really odd one to have now.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hahaha, why on earth are Relic using Ghz of a processor to determine whether that passes or is okay?</p>
<p>Most of the new processors no where near get near the recommended 3.0Ghz. Mine is only 2.40 because it is a flashy new core 2 duo.</p>
<p>Noting that of course its more efficient then a 3.0Ghz pentium 4, it will likely fail and be &#8220;okay&#8221; instead.</p>
<p>Rather arbitrary there, the other things are fine but that is a really odd one to have now.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: David B</title>
		<link>http://www.relicrank.com/bloggo/2007/07/26/opposing-fronts-min-spec-tentative/#comment-8047</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Jul 2007 06:27:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.relicrank.com/bloggo/2007/07/26/opposing-fronts-min-spec-tentative/#comment-8047</guid>
					<description>To Andy?: 

Yes. You should be fine for CoH:OF. the Minimum spec should not change.   However the minimum spec for the beta is a bit higher as the code is not fully optimized</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To Andy?: </p>
<p>Yes. You should be fine for CoH:OF. the Minimum spec should not change.   However the minimum spec for the beta is a bit higher as the code is not fully optimized
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Andy?</title>
		<link>http://www.relicrank.com/bloggo/2007/07/26/opposing-fronts-min-spec-tentative/#comment-8041</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Jul 2007 03:00:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.relicrank.com/bloggo/2007/07/26/opposing-fronts-min-spec-tentative/#comment-8041</guid>
					<description>So...If i can run vanilla CoH I should be fine for CoH:OF?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So&#8230;If i can run vanilla CoH I should be fine for CoH:OF?
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Skunker</title>
		<link>http://www.relicrank.com/bloggo/2007/07/26/opposing-fronts-min-spec-tentative/#comment-8001</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2007 12:21:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.relicrank.com/bloggo/2007/07/26/opposing-fronts-min-spec-tentative/#comment-8001</guid>
					<description>256 mb of video memory is required, other than that you better have at least shader model 2.0.  Google it if you don't know what it is.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>256 mb of video memory is required, other than that you better have at least shader model 2.0.  Google it if you don&#8217;t know what it is.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: purpose</title>
		<link>http://www.relicrank.com/bloggo/2007/07/26/opposing-fronts-min-spec-tentative/#comment-7998</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2007 10:57:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.relicrank.com/bloggo/2007/07/26/opposing-fronts-min-spec-tentative/#comment-7998</guid>
					<description>What about GFX? Any minimum req when it comes to that?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What about GFX? Any minimum req when it comes to that?
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Corsix</title>
		<link>http://www.relicrank.com/bloggo/2007/07/26/opposing-fronts-min-spec-tentative/#comment-7989</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2007 08:56:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.relicrank.com/bloggo/2007/07/26/opposing-fronts-min-spec-tentative/#comment-7989</guid>
					<description>SSE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streaming_SIMD_Extensions) is included with Intel Pentium III and later processors, and with AMD Athlon XP and later processors. If you're still not sure if you have SSE, a program like WCPUID (http://hp.vector.co.jp/authors/VA002374/src/download.html) can usually tell you: http://www.corsix.org/wcpuid.png</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>SSE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streaming_SIMD_Extensions) is included with Intel Pentium III and later processors, and with AMD Athlon XP and later processors. If you&#8217;re still not sure if you have SSE, a program like WCPUID (http://hp.vector.co.jp/authors/VA002374/src/download.html) can usually tell you: <a href="http://www.corsix.org/wcpuid.png" rel="nofollow">http://www.corsix.org/wcpuid.png</a>
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: z1ggy</title>
		<link>http://www.relicrank.com/bloggo/2007/07/26/opposing-fronts-min-spec-tentative/#comment-7987</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2007 07:19:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.relicrank.com/bloggo/2007/07/26/opposing-fronts-min-spec-tentative/#comment-7987</guid>
					<description>alright, after some googling i can say i have sse. yay. turns out its quite an old thing, made by intel back in 1999, so probabyl every pc after that suports it. so unless 1.9 cpu speed is problem, then ill be able to play of. its not a problem with coh, but this is beta afterall. well see</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>alright, after some googling i can say i have sse. yay. turns out its quite an old thing, made by intel back in 1999, so probabyl every pc after that suports it. so unless 1.9 cpu speed is problem, then ill be able to play of. its not a problem with coh, but this is beta afterall. well see
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
