[im_noahselby]

I saw the game at the store today and couldn't decide whether or not to get it. I decided to read some reviews of the game online first, but I couldn't find any when I got home. I'd also like to know how the final version of the game runs on a setup similar to the one I have. Can any users here share their thoughts at this early stage of the game?

Also, how much ram is enough to play the game smoothly? Does anyone recommend more than the minimum 512MB?

Thanks,
Noah

[The Placid Casual]

Now and again when I am on the move, I run WoW on my 1Ghz G4 iBook... Even though it is inferior to your Powerbook, the game still runs very passably.

I have 750+ MB RAM, and although it does get bogged down in high population areas (big cities, large raids etc), I average at about 10-25fps which is pretty passable for most of the game.

Overall, I'd say that although performance would not be stunning, it would be eminently playable...

Peace,

TPC

[Deicide]

I have a rev. b 1Ghz with 1.2GB of ram. I play it in a window at 800x600 and it runs better then i thought it would. It does get choppy in high populated areas but isn't that bad.

[cSurfr]

Originally posted by im_noahselby:
I saw the game at the store today and couldn't decide whether or not to get it. I decided to read some reviews of the game online first, but I couldn't find any when I got home. I'd also like to know how the final version of the game runs on a setup similar to the one I have. Can any users here share their thoughts at this early stage of the game?

Also, how much ram is enough to play the game smoothly? Does anyone recommend more than the minimum 512MB?

Thanks,
Noah

I beta tested the game partly on a Rev. C 12", and it ran like a champ. As long as you have at least 512mb of ram, you'll be fine. The game is much more ram hungry and it is cpu. That said I wouldn't mess with the clip plane (how far you can see in the distance) or the machine will chug.. On the default settings, the game will look great and run well to boot. Enjoy!

cs

[Xidius]

I played on the following:

17" Powerbook
1.5Ghz G4
128mb ati 9700m
1gb ddr sdram
80gb 5400rpm

And it is the minimum spec I would consider it playable on. I played it also on my brother's:

15" Powerbook
1.25Ghz G4
64mb ati 9600m
1gb ddr sdram
60gb 5400rpm

And I considered it to be nearly unplayable at many times. =\

I have heard suggestions just to wait for the G5 Powerbooks, as the G4->G5 makes a huge difference.

- Xidius

[The Placid Casual]

Originally posted by Xidius:
I played on the following:

17" Powerbook
1.5Ghz G4
128mb ati 9700m
1gb ddr sdram
80gb 5400rpm

And it is the minimum spec I would consider it playable on. I played it also on my brother's:

15" Powerbook
1.25Ghz G4
64mb ati 9600m
1gb ddr sdram
60gb 5400rpm

And I considered it to be nearly unplayable at many times. =\

I have heard suggestions just to wait for the G5 Powerbooks, as the G4->G5 makes a huge difference.

- Xidius

It may be the minimum spec for you, but it is by no means unplayable on lower hardware.

As long as you don't expect stunning performance, you will not be disappointed on a Rev C 12"...

[Athens]

ok whos tried it below the min specs, im thinking of getting it but I have a 32MB GeForce 2, 800Mhz G4, I am going to up my ram to 768MB.

[brianb]

I ran the Final beta on a Quicksilver 867mhz. with a GeForce3 and 1gig of ram and the game ran just fine. I have a friend that is running it on a emac with specs that are about the same little less ram and Graphics but he says it is still playable. I did get the Splash screen that says I did not meet minimum spec but just clicked right past it

[AKcrab]

Originally posted by Athens:
ok whos tried it below the min specs, im thinking of getting it but I have a 32MB GeForce 2, 800Mhz G4, I am going to up my ram to 768MB.

Yeah, it runs OK on my G4 867, GeForce 2MX, with 896MB RAM.
Performance isn't great, but it is extremely playable.
I never went on a raid, and I'm guessing if I tried the lag would be terrible, but for general play, I think you'll be satisfied.

[a2daj]

RAM is very important as is turning down Texture Distance all the way. Even with my Dual 2.5 G5 and Radeon 9800 Pro I turn it down all the way just so I can get the best performance.

[im_noahselby]

Originally posted by a2daj:
RAM is very important

I don't want to buy more than I need as I'm already getting by with only 256MB, but I do want to get the best performance out of this game, if I do decide to buy it. With this said, would I really notice that much of a difference with 768MB of RAM? I've been planning on upgrading to 512MB of RAM for awhile now, but if I'd notice that much of a difference in OSX and this game by upping it to 768MB, than maybe it would be worthwhile to spend a few extra dollars.

Noah

[Drakino]

Originally posted by im_noahselby:
would I really notice that much of a difference with 768MB of RAM?

Yes. Not only in WoW, but in OS X as well. Consider this, more and more PC games are being released with 384 MB minimum, it's only a matter of time before that requirement is moved over to Mac gaming. And at minimum, things aren't going to run well at all.

[wuzup101]

You definitely should go for and extra 512 right off the batt... 512 is probably the minimum that you should be using in OSX anyway. Ram is cheap now... you can get a 1gb stick of pc2700 for $159 from outpost.com...

[Athens]

Originally posted by im_noahselby:
I don't want to buy more than I need as I'm already getting by with only 256MB, but I do want to get the best performance out of this game, if I do decide to buy it. With this said, would I really notice that much of a difference with 768MB of RAM? I've been planning on upgrading to 512MB of RAM for awhile now, but if I'd notice that much of a difference in OSX and this game by upping it to 768MB, than maybe it would be worthwhile to spend a few extra dollars.

Noah

Go 768 no matter what, the price difference is very little between the 2, and you only have one slot for a upgrade. If you find you need more later you will have a 256MB paper weight.

[Bookie]

WoW's graphics are very scalable - you should be able to run it with some options turned down and get great performance. The distance is the biggest performance killer, so just turning that down will make a huge difference. I played in the beta on a 1.2 gig iBook, and it ran great.

[Paco500]

I've been playing on a PB G4 1.33 15" w/ 1.5 GB RAM, good performance, not great but quite good. My 1GB chip started throwing errors and I'm now down to 512MB- difference is quite noticeable. Can't wait to get my replacement RAM back from Viking.

Moral of the story- get RAM.

[Zubir]

I recently loaded WoW up on my old Powermac just to see what it would run like, as was pleasantly surprised. Running on:

G4 Digital Audio 533
Radeon 9000 128mb 4 X AGP (275/275)
1gb PC133 RAM
SATA 120gb Hard drive

Settings:

1024X768@85hz
Terrain Distance: low
Terrain Detail: low
Environment Detail: low
Texture Detail: high

FPS average from 7.5-10 in towns, to 15-20 in the wilderness. Granted it's slow, but it's definitely playable. The problem with other 1ghz plus G4 machines such as Imacs and Emacs is probably due to the anemic video chips with 32mb RAM.

The guy who's running it on a 1.4 w/9700 and saying it's unplayable is most likely used to gaming an a PC, which most definitely has the advantage when it comes to games.

I'm going to upgrade the processor to 1.2ghz soon, and I'll post the results.

[RMXO]

its very playable on my PB 12" 1.33 768 60 SD.

i get about 20-30ish in the wilderness. i havent had time to go to a city yet.

[Crusoe]

Runs like a champ on my Rev A, 17", 768MB Ram in 1440 x 900 resolution.