I got the new 4870 512 mb GDDR5 ati card.
                         an intel dual core processor E6600 2.40ghz
                            2 gig of ram
                          1900x1200 res
                            

Although I'm not really sure,

from what I can gather is that it's completely dependant on each person's system. It may run perfectly for someone then work terribly on someone else's with nearly the same spec.

I run on

x1800 256mb ATI

amd 4000+ x 2 2.1 x 2

1gb ddr2 ram

1680x1080

and I seem to run fine. I get decent FPS, but I get hitches just like everyone does, and loading each chunk is like a mini loading screen :) Nothing I can't handle, you should be able to run easier than me.

Window mode, 1360 something x something. Having 55-60fps.

3870, 4GB mem, Vista 64b.

Don't knoe how that would translate for you running at 1920x1200 fullscren though. But I would assume that running fullscreen would make up for some of the resolution increase compared to window mode.

I play at 2560x1600 with everything cranked to max, it's about the worse case scenario in terms of system stress.  I get close to 30 outside, and down to 5-10 in raid fights.  I know this is too low to be acceptable, but it's so darn hard to give up the eye candy.  I'm currently going through various setting to try to tweak myself up about 15 fps.

Did... did you just say... "vangy"?

Originally posted by Perception

Did... did you just say... "vangy"?

hahahahah : )

There's no such thing as running Vanguard with no lag. It's a server/client issue, so it doesn't matter how powerful of a system you own.

Originally posted by Nikepwns

I got the new 4870 512 mb GDDR5 ati card.
                         an intel dual core processor E6600 2.40ghz
                            2 gig of ram
                          1900x1200 res
                            

As someone said above, lag is nothing to do with your system's graphics capabilities.  For some bizarre reason people have started using "lag" as a catch-all to describe graphics sluggishness.  This is as annoying as people confusing "its" and "it's" and other apostrophical horrors :)

That new ATI card is an absolute beast by all accounts, so your system will fly in Vanguard- UNLESS there's some weird incompatibility with the ATI card for some reason.  But in theory, in terms of sheer poke, youre system will easily run it on highest settings. 

You might look into overclocking the E6600.  Get a cheap but decent air cooler like the Arctic Freezer 7 Pro and play around with it (be cautious though, and read up about overclocking before trying it out).  It would be good if you could bump up the cpu speed up to at least 2.6-3.0Ghz to get the most out of the card.

 If you are using Vista I would recommend 4 gigs of ram.

 You will probably have a bit of lag in cities and crossing chunks, but it is not exacly a system issue.

...

Originally posted by Umbral

 

 If you are using Vista I would recommend 4 gigs of ram.

 You will probably have a bit of lag in cities and crossing chunks, but it is not exacly a system issue.

 

 

...

If you're running vista and playing Vangaurd, I would recommend a lot more than 4 gigs of RAM.

I'm running 3 gigs of RAM on XP professional with a 3.0 Ghz dual core processor and a 8800 GTX card, and I still got serious lag in cities and crossing chunks. And this was in a game world that lacked any sizable population.

Vanguard's lack of client optimization makes this game almost unplayable, even if you ignore the bugs.

I don't pretend to be a computer know-it-all but some of the comments people make as to what piece of hardware/software causes what problem does make me laugh sometimes - especially the know-it-all way in which people make these basic errors.

Anyway, back on topic.

OP...your system is great and you should get good performance on max settings. I would advise you  that, as have others, 4g of RAM would be nice and a 10,000 rpm or SCSI hard drive.

Games IMO are about throughput of data, mainly graphics. Any bad link in the chain, any bottleneck, will cause the end-product to appear 'laggy'. Everything you've got is great except you don't mention how quickly your machine can read/write to the hard disk, which can be extremely important when you enter new chunks/areas/buildings etc i.e. when there are a lot of graphics and shaders to load up.

Enjoy the game. It really is good fun and very good looking esp. on hardware like yours :)

I guess you missed the part where I posted some of my system specs, which are higher than the OP's, yet I still get lag in the cities and during crossing chunks.

Vanguard is a poorly optimized game. That's what you get when your development staff is less than 10 people and it takes more than a year to implement simple things like animations for head gear.

I'm not going to go into all the reasons why Vanguard is a black mark on MMO history, but suffice it to say, it doesn't matter if your daddy is Bill Gates and you have a super computer; Vanguard will NEVER run without lag on ANY machine because it's a problem with the client and the servers.

Oops sorry Daedalus. I just realised that the beginning of my post looks like it referred to your one. It didn't - it was one further up that caught my eye but I didn't want a fight and so instead I just annoyed you unintentionally :P

Apologies.

As far as lag goes for me...

Server latency usually about 100ms. Not amazing but totally unnoticeable.

Graphical lag - none except I get only about 10-15 fps in raids during fights (max settings). I can double this if the whole raid uses a group illusion to all look the same. Seeing as character models seem to be the biggest GPU hogs, I'm hoping the new models (GU6?) will sort a lot of this out.

Hitching - some, but little, in scenes with lots of buildings/npcs but a 10k drive has really helped.

EDIT: Yea, crossing chunks can take a couple of seconds the first time but is only a blip if I cross back and forward.

Having said this, I am lucky enough to be able to afford a very fast computer. Even without 'daddy's' help ;)

your system should be able to run the game great - you will still see some "hitching" (where ti microfreezes) because they aren't done cleaning up the mess that was the resource manager - it's hanging waiting for the resource manager to load stuff.  It should be VERY playable for you.

Originally posted by Daedalus732

Originally posted by Umbral

 

 If you are using Vista I would recommend 4 gigs of ram.

 You will probably have a bit of lag in cities and crossing chunks, but it is not exacly a system issue.

 

 

...

 

If you're running vista and playing Vangaurd, I would recommend a lot more than 4 gigs of RAM.

I'm running 3 gigs of RAM on XP professional with a 3.0 Ghz dual core processor and a 8800 GTX card, and I still got serious lag in cities and crossing chunks. And this was in a game world that lacked any sizable population.

Vanguard's lack of client optimization makes this game almost unplayable, even if you ignore the bugs.

You get lag in XP because you have 3 gigs of ram and an 8800gtx with 768mb of video ram which equals a total of 3768mb of ram.

While windows XP will see 4 gigs of ram (usually), it will only effectively use 3 gigs, video memory also fits into this equation.

Try a 64bit os (XP or vista), and you should see your system ram and video ram being used more efficiently.

I run on a amd opteron 1212, 4gigs of ddr2 800, 8800gt, on vista x64 ultimate on high settings with an average of 35-50 fps.

video ram does not share an address space with main memory so it does not count in the equation for total available ram on a system that the windows memory manager can use

don't talk out of your ass - leave technical details to people who know what the fuck they're talking about

there are some regions mapped that the system can treat as both simultaneously and some that are mapped to be used by the video card to fetch stuff from main memory - these regions don't have to be used that way but they're mapped to be "i can use it this way"

that makes their address spaces overlap, not become one

Originally posted by Daedalus732

Originally posted by Umbral

 

 If you are using Vista I would recommend 4 gigs of ram.

 You will probably have a bit of lag in cities and crossing chunks, but it is not exacly a system issue.

 

 

...

 

If you're running vista and playing Vangaurd, I would recommend a lot more than 4 gigs of RAM.

I'm running 3 gigs of RAM on XP professional with a 3.0 Ghz dual core processor and a 8800 GTX card, and I still got serious lag in cities and crossing chunks. And this was in a game world that lacked any sizable population.

Vanguard's lack of client optimization makes this game almost unplayable, even if you ignore the bugs.

3gb of ram??? honestly I'd rather be running 2 or 4, duel channel. what clock speed? you ram will be auto set to your slowest speed.

The only city I've been has been fine, and im on x1800 256mb, 1gb ram, 2.1 4000+ x 2 cpu.

Any predictions as to how I'll run it?

P4 Dual Core 3Ghz

1024MB RAM

GeForce 7300 512MB ()

Windows XP Pro

Me needs an upgrade!

Originally posted by Lydon

Any predictions as to how I'll run it?

P4 Dual Core 3Ghz

1024MB RAM

GeForce 7300 512MB ()

Windows XP Pro

Me needs an upgrade!

going by how mine runs, I would say you'll run it alright, if not then you will run it good.

depends how your settings are set up =p

4fps

that's a business card - not a gaming card it shouldn't EVER be used to run games (yes WoW will run on it because WoW was written to work on 9 year old hardware)

get another gig of ram and get a radeon hd 4850 and you should be gravy