ARK: Survival Evolved

ARK: Survival Evolved

View Stats:
Zanzooly Dec 1, 2015 @ 3:19pm
Will my computer run it?
I am planing to get a computer here is a part picker list.

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/pXXtzy
< >
Showing 1-15 of 72 comments
moriyokiri Dec 1, 2015 @ 3:30pm 
No computer runs this game well.
Zanzooly Dec 1, 2015 @ 3:43pm 
Originally posted by acopsdecolze:
No computer runs this game well.

But will it run it ok?
Zanzooly Dec 1, 2015 @ 3:53pm 
TruthDemon Dec 1, 2015 @ 3:59pm 
it should run fine. my PC is pretty bad for this game and I run it
Desertworld (Banned) Dec 1, 2015 @ 4:11pm 
i would really consider your cpu choice. i bought an intel i5-4570 2 years ago for 150€, your cpu is 1 year older and costs about 115€ at the moment. the performance differences are HUGE!

just look at this for example: http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i5-4570-vs-AMD-FX-8320
my cpu gets 8.8 out of 10 points, your cpu gets only 5.8 !
also: the i5 has 35% less power consumption and saves you (according to some statistics of this website) up to 10$ energy costs per year. so just use the cpu 4 years at least and you even saved money! not sure why you would consider an amd cpu anyway. they produce really much heat, eat so much power and have a really bad manufacturing (intel cpus are nearly 50% smaller nowadays..)
i play it on i3 / gtx950 / 8gb ram - on non-low-memory mode i get about 30fps on medium/high
on low memory mode i can play it at around 45fps on settings maxed out. but it looks not so good on low memory mode. i actually have no idea what exactly low memory mode does, but it runs pretty smooth with that.
Karathkasun Dec 1, 2015 @ 4:21pm 
An FX CPU @ 4.6ghz can dip into the 20's with all of the settings that are GPU oriented turned to low, so at stock it will definately be holding back performance a bit. This game can only take advantage of ~3 cores while playing, so those extra 4 cores will not help performance.

960 should be OK for medium/high/ultra settings mix, detail sliders at 50%, 720p resolution and no distant shadowing. Probably in the 30-40 FPS ballpark.

And for an FX 8 core system, you need a good motherboard or it will seriously hamper performance. Good voltage regulation is key to getting consistent performance out of those chips.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813130790&ignorebbr=1
Would be a good choice.
Last edited by Karathkasun; Dec 1, 2015 @ 4:30pm
Zanzooly Dec 1, 2015 @ 4:32pm 
Zanzooly Dec 1, 2015 @ 4:34pm 
Originally posted by karathkasun:
An FX CPU @ 4.6ghz can dip into the 20's with all of the settings that are GPU oriented turned to low, so at stock it will definately be holding back performance a bit. This game can only take advantage of ~3 cores while playing, so those extra 4 cores will not help performance.

960 should be OK for medium/high/ultra settings mix, detail sliders at 50%, 720p resolution and no distant shadowing. Probably in the 30-40 FPS ballpark.

And for an FX 8 core system, you need a good motherboard or it will seriously hamper performance. Good voltage regulation is key to getting consistent performance out of those chips.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813130790&ignorebbr=1
Would be a good choice.

So you recommend that I get a 4 core?
Zanzooly Dec 1, 2015 @ 4:37pm 
So how can I make it cheaper and still run this game on medium-high at 30-40 fps?
Karathkasun Dec 1, 2015 @ 4:39pm 
Eh, the FX 4 core chips are pretty bad on other things. Perhaps a 6350 and a better motherboard? FX chips are not that great unless you overclock them to at least 4.4ghz, and I would not want to OC on that Asus board. Main reaason is that the voltage control circuit lacks any form of cooling, and FX chips tend to be brutal on voltage regulation circuits.

My overclocked FX 4100 will cause an motherboard with no VRM heatsink to throttle or release magic smoke. And that is just a quad core.
Last edited by Karathkasun; Dec 1, 2015 @ 4:40pm
Zanzooly Dec 1, 2015 @ 4:43pm 
Originally posted by karathkasun:
Eh, the FX 4 core chips are pretty bad on other things. Perhaps a 6350 and a better motherboard? FX chips are not that great unless you overclock them to at least 4.4ghz, and I would not want to OC on that Asus board. Main reaason is that the voltage control circuit lacks any form of cooling, and FX chips tend to be brutal on voltage regulation circuits.

My overclocked FX 4100 will cause an motherboard with no VRM heatsink to throttle or release magic smoke. And that is just a quad core.

What should I get then? Is there anything that I have on the list that is not needed?
Karathkasun Dec 1, 2015 @ 4:44pm 
swap the MB for the one I linked and swap the 8320 for a 6300 or 6350.
Desertworld (Banned) Dec 1, 2015 @ 4:45pm 
get an intel cpu. look for i5-4xxx and you're fine. amd is just bad. they have plenty of cores but most games can't even use all. intel cpus have better architecture, more singlecore performance and overall better power management. the cpu you're ordering is 3 years old!
Karathkasun Dec 1, 2015 @ 4:47pm 
You can hardly get an i5+MB for less than 190, and an i3 will start struggling once DX12 rolls around. =/
Last edited by Karathkasun; Dec 1, 2015 @ 4:48pm
< >
Showing 1-15 of 72 comments
Per page: 1530 50

Date Posted: Dec 1, 2015 @ 3:19pm
Posts: 72