These are my basic System specs:
Intel Core i5-2537M with 4 threads and a maximum clockrate of 2.3 Ghz
Nvidia GT 620M with 1GB of memory
4 GB of DDR3 RAM
Will it be enough ro run smoothly Sonic Colors and Super Paper Mario?
Nope.com
CPU is too slow for those games
Well YES.COM , I just finished extracting the game iso (Sonic Colors) and I am able to run it at 30 fps on full screen at a resolution of 800x600
My CPU got 2 cores and 4 threads...
i3 330M is also 2 cores 4 threads . Did you even read the benchmark ?
My CPU's slightly better (i5-2557M, 1.7 GHz, turbo 2.6 GHz on two cores [I think?]) and it runs most less-demanding games at nearly full speed (half the time I'm GPU-limited, though). Maybe Sonic Colors just ain't that demanding?
Yes , your CPU is clearly better
But no freaking way he could get Sonic Color running full speed ingame with a 2.0GHz Sandy Bridge (not mention a ULV Sandy Bridge @ 2.0GHz is not as fast as a normal SB - i3 @ 2.0GHz)
Even with Vbeam hack , i only get 23FPS (stage 1) with a 2.5GHz Arrandale - 1x IR (Tried 2.5x IR , same speed)
The game only reach full speed when i turn CPU back to 2.9GHz
Maybe he was talking about 30FPS on menu and cut-scene
Newsflash to OP, More MHz != better speed. Architecture, instructions, voltage, etc are more vital than MHz. Take a good look at my PC specs for example.
I can run most games, even F-Zero GX, at full speed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MHz_myth
(03-26-2013, 12:52 AM)nintendo_nerd Wrote: [ -> ]Newsflash to OP, More MHz != better speed. Architecture, instructions, voltage, etc are more vital than MHz. Take a good look at my PC specs for example.
I can run most games, even F-Zero GX, at full speed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MHz_myth
What does voltage have to do with it? Also when did the OP ever mention anything about higher Mhz equaling better speed?