Development PC Specs
by Alex Stittle · in Hardware Issues · 12/08/2008 (8:40 pm) · 9 replies
Hi all,
Wasn't sure where to post this question, but I'll try here.
I'm am designing and building a game to run on the Xbox360 and was wondering what kind of computer specs are recommended for developing a demanding, high-end game?
Currently, I am running on a 4 year old machine with decent specs: 2GB RAM, 3.2Ghz P4, GeForce 6800.
With a more demanding game in development however, I fear that I may lag my computer, especially in debug modes. I was thinking of just creating a special debug rendering mode to minimize load on the computer, but I don't know how far I'll have to take that kind of idea. So I figure maybe it's time for an upgrade.
Does anyone have any recommended specs for a dev box? I'll need to run all the usual software (IDE, Game itself, Game Tools).
Thanks
Alex
Wasn't sure where to post this question, but I'll try here.
I'm am designing and building a game to run on the Xbox360 and was wondering what kind of computer specs are recommended for developing a demanding, high-end game?
Currently, I am running on a 4 year old machine with decent specs: 2GB RAM, 3.2Ghz P4, GeForce 6800.
With a more demanding game in development however, I fear that I may lag my computer, especially in debug modes. I was thinking of just creating a special debug rendering mode to minimize load on the computer, but I don't know how far I'll have to take that kind of idea. So I figure maybe it's time for an upgrade.
Does anyone have any recommended specs for a dev box? I'll need to run all the usual software (IDE, Game itself, Game Tools).
Thanks
Alex
#2
But, like you said, it's an excellent excuse for me to upgrade so I started looking into building a PC... and got addicted. >:) In the end I'll probably drop a few pay checks on a decent new machine that will last me awhile, and also look into remote debugging on the xbox360. The remote debugger may come in handy for things like 4-player stuff. Crowding around the computer screen is not as fun as debugging from the couch :)
Cheers
12/09/2008 (12:48 pm)
Hey Ronny, thanks for the advice. I was totally unaware of remote debuggers, maybe that's something I'll look into. But, like you said, it's an excellent excuse for me to upgrade so I started looking into building a PC... and got addicted. >:) In the end I'll probably drop a few pay checks on a decent new machine that will last me awhile, and also look into remote debugging on the xbox360. The remote debugger may come in handy for things like 4-player stuff. Crowding around the computer screen is not as fun as debugging from the couch :)
Cheers
#3
I use the Racing Starter Kit found over at the XNA site. The stock kit runs very differently on my work PC than my home PC.
Work: AMD Athlon 64x2 Dual Core 4200, 2 GB RAM, ATI Radeon 256MB X1300Pro
Not bad...but the game stuttered a lot on the PC and some graphical issues.
Home: Intel Core2 Duo, 2 GHz, 2 GB RAM, nVidia GeForce 512MB 8800. Runs beautifully. The video card seems to make all the difference.
12/09/2008 (2:37 pm)
@Alex - To put in perspective:I use the Racing Starter Kit found over at the XNA site. The stock kit runs very differently on my work PC than my home PC.
Work: AMD Athlon 64x2 Dual Core 4200, 2 GB RAM, ATI Radeon 256MB X1300Pro
Not bad...but the game stuttered a lot on the PC and some graphical issues.
Home: Intel Core2 Duo, 2 GHz, 2 GB RAM, nVidia GeForce 512MB 8800. Runs beautifully. The video card seems to make all the difference.
#4
AMD64-3000 2GHz, 786MB RAM 256 FX5500 main windows development box.
AMD Duron 1.3GHz, 128MB RAM, 32MB S3 630AGP Fedora Linux 9
P4 1.4GHz, 128MB RAM, 64MB MX440 Server for network needs (http/fpt/mysql/dns/email).
PlayStation 2 Linux Development Kit <-- eek, tis a pain and slow but rewarding enough.
PlayStation 3 soon to have Fedora 9 installed on it for other psx testings.
Silicon Graphics O2 for 3D modelling, this and the main PC.
+ misc other PC's (MMX/AMD) for anything else I need like printer servers for example. I also have access to an XBox (need some pads) if needed and an XBox360 (but don't tell my son ;))
01/13/2009 (8:29 am)
Nice specs, mine are nowhere near those, although I do have more than one computer I use for developing things on.AMD64-3000 2GHz, 786MB RAM 256 FX5500 main windows development box.
AMD Duron 1.3GHz, 128MB RAM, 32MB S3 630AGP Fedora Linux 9
P4 1.4GHz, 128MB RAM, 64MB MX440 Server for network needs (http/fpt/mysql/dns/email).
PlayStation 2 Linux Development Kit <-- eek, tis a pain and slow but rewarding enough.
PlayStation 3 soon to have Fedora 9 installed on it for other psx testings.
Silicon Graphics O2 for 3D modelling, this and the main PC.
+ misc other PC's (MMX/AMD) for anything else I need like printer servers for example. I also have access to an XBox (need some pads) if needed and an XBox360 (but don't tell my son ;))
#5
and compile times dropped to about a third or a quarter of their previous.
however, i purposefully have an under-powered graphics card in the dev box so that i feel the pain of users with modest machines.
01/13/2009 (9:22 am)
I switched to a solid-state drive on my new devbox,and compile times dropped to about a third or a quarter of their previous.
however, i purposefully have an under-powered graphics card in the dev box so that i feel the pain of users with modest machines.
#6
I ended up investing in a new machine with fancy schmancy core i7 and all that jazz. It pretty much made me broke, but hell, if I'm going to take the plunge I'm going in with both feet... and my nose plugged.
I agree with Michael that for running the games, the video card seems to make all the differenceHowever, for having all the dev programs open and switching and using them, I think it's the processor and RAM that shine.
With my old box, I set it up as a server for source control and general file sharing around the network.
@Orion - I was looking into solid state drives but ended up not being able to afford it. It's good to hear from someone that uses one though that is does in fact make a considerable difference.
01/13/2009 (10:41 am)
Just FYI, I ended up investing in a new machine with fancy schmancy core i7 and all that jazz. It pretty much made me broke, but hell, if I'm going to take the plunge I'm going in with both feet... and my nose plugged.
I agree with Michael that for running the games, the video card seems to make all the differenceHowever, for having all the dev programs open and switching and using them, I think it's the processor and RAM that shine.
With my old box, I set it up as a server for source control and general file sharing around the network.
@Orion - I was looking into solid state drives but ended up not being able to afford it. It's good to hear from someone that uses one though that is does in fact make a considerable difference.
#7
@Alex. It depends on what you want to develop for. For me the target is Next Gen games, so need something pretty stout to test with.
Desktop:
Asus Striker II Extreme M/B (Republic of Gamers)
Intel Q9550 Quad Core @ 2.83GHZ (Overclocked from 2.5)
OCZ DDR3 1333 8GB Memory 1.7v (Basically overclocked)
Vista Ultimate 64
2 - Nvidia GTX-280 running SLI 1GB DDR3 2450mhz (overclocked from 2214mhz)
1- Asus 24" Widescreen HDMI Monitor
2 - 19" DVI monitors
Liquid Cooled - Everything CPU\Video\Chipsets
Beach Rig:
Sager w/Intel Q9550 Quad Core
4GB DDR2 Memory
Nvidia 9800M GTX 1GB DDR3
Vista Ultimate 64
Xbox Elite Rig:
Running on a 42" Plasma
I have no problem running anything on these machines:) Granted way more powerful than TGEA needs since it will still utilize only one core(stock). But I can crank out an Atlas terrain, run TGEA and compile all at the same time. Most of the guys on the team I am on are running this type rig but not liquid cooled. So you can imagine the money I have invested just for development (well, the fact I can run Crysis on MAX at 60+FPS is just a bonus).
Keep in mind dual monitors are almost a plus now. If you plan on supporting PhysX on Vista you have to have a second GPU assigned to a monitor so the physics engine can run. Apparently a bug in Vista, but Nvidia has recently released an updated driver so you can SLI mode as well as have one GPU support the Physics engine. So plan accordingly.
For me, I just hate to wait on anything...:)
01/13/2009 (2:55 pm)
Hmm Just found this forum. Guess I had a bunch hidden and did not realize it.@Alex. It depends on what you want to develop for. For me the target is Next Gen games, so need something pretty stout to test with.
Desktop:
Asus Striker II Extreme M/B (Republic of Gamers)
Intel Q9550 Quad Core @ 2.83GHZ (Overclocked from 2.5)
OCZ DDR3 1333 8GB Memory 1.7v (Basically overclocked)
Vista Ultimate 64
2 - Nvidia GTX-280 running SLI 1GB DDR3 2450mhz (overclocked from 2214mhz)
1- Asus 24" Widescreen HDMI Monitor
2 - 19" DVI monitors
Liquid Cooled - Everything CPU\Video\Chipsets
Beach Rig:
Sager w/Intel Q9550 Quad Core
4GB DDR2 Memory
Nvidia 9800M GTX 1GB DDR3
Vista Ultimate 64
Xbox Elite Rig:
Running on a 42" Plasma
I have no problem running anything on these machines:) Granted way more powerful than TGEA needs since it will still utilize only one core(stock). But I can crank out an Atlas terrain, run TGEA and compile all at the same time. Most of the guys on the team I am on are running this type rig but not liquid cooled. So you can imagine the money I have invested just for development (well, the fact I can run Crysis on MAX at 60+FPS is just a bonus).
Keep in mind dual monitors are almost a plus now. If you plan on supporting PhysX on Vista you have to have a second GPU assigned to a monitor so the physics engine can run. Apparently a bug in Vista, but Nvidia has recently released an updated driver so you can SLI mode as well as have one GPU support the Physics engine. So plan accordingly.
For me, I just hate to wait on anything...:)
#8
Definitely get a quad core, or even dual quad cores if you can. My compile time was cut by 70% when I turned on Multi Process compiles with my quad core box:
www.garagegames.com/community/forums/viewthread/76117
01/15/2009 (1:57 pm)
@Alex:Definitely get a quad core, or even dual quad cores if you can. My compile time was cut by 70% when I turned on Multi Process compiles with my quad core box:
www.garagegames.com/community/forums/viewthread/76117
#9
01/16/2009 (4:17 pm)
@Randy, I think you're rig is slightly better than what is available to NASA! Beach rig!?[/envy]
#10
:) I have a permit from the local power company to run (1200Watt PS).
Beach Rig - Taking online classes so when I go on vacation, err I mean a business trip I need something to take to the beach and relax with:)
@Jaimi
Will post a comment on your other thread, seems the /MP has no effect on my machine, it always compiles 2.2 minutes flat.
01/16/2009 (10:06 pm)
@Steve:) I have a permit from the local power company to run (1200Watt PS).
Beach Rig - Taking online classes so when I go on vacation, err I mean a business trip I need something to take to the beach and relax with:)
@Jaimi
Will post a comment on your other thread, seems the /MP has no effect on my machine, it always compiles 2.2 minutes flat.
Torque 3D Owner Ronny Bangsund
Torque Cheerleaders
I think there are remote debuggers that should work brilliantly in VS+XNA (if that's your environment), so you might be fine with the current system and debugging it remotely while running on the 360.
But it IS an excellent excuse to get yourself a sweet gaming system ;)