pc performance

[Religolibri]

Same for me. Well my HDD was really tired, but when switching to ssd, no more little freeze while big things happen in Jhebbal, and I can move my character way faster when joining a new heavy zone like Shaulun.

[Aell]

As other people mentioned, you're going to need at least 4 GB RAM if your OS is 32 bit. If your Windows is 64 bit, then max the RAM out.

wat

A 32bit OS - ANY 32bit OS, not just Windows - can address a maximum of 4GB of RAM. This, by the way, includes any RAM on your graphics card. If you have 1GB of RAM on your graphics card, your OS will report a maximum of 3GB available. Adding any more is literally a waste of money.

The best thing you can do is put a 64-bit OS on there and no, NOT XP64 because a) it's old, sow and crufty and b) it end-of-life's next April so it's going to be insecure as all hell as well.

[Banto]

I disagree. I run a quad-core system with hyperthreading (so 4 real cores and 4 virtual cores) and I see all 8 cores being utilized well by Age of Conan. They could definitely do some optimization when it comes to 20+ players fighting within 50m of eachother, as that will definitely bog down the game due to bad coding (the problem seems partially tied to displaying name/guild/health/detail tags above players and NPC's and is brutally apparent when 50+ players and NPC's are on the same screen) however, CPU multi-core usage is looking good on my end.

I believe this game is slightly more CPU intensive than other large games. This means upgrading CPU + RAM (specifically, you will notice a huge boost from a system using DDR3 RAM) will do more for AOC than upgrading only the video card. To clarify, many games out there will get a massive boost from only upgrading the video card, but AOC is a little more CPU/RAM intensive as well as graphically intensive.

Your wrong or your pc is a miracle.
Game uses about 10-20% of my Quad Core HT with 8 "Cores"
And only like first core rest is at like 5% usage and not for the game.
Only first core and very little third is actualy used.
The game is not realy cpu intensive its just that its bad optimized for multicore i hope you monitor how much your game uses your CPU becaus your wrong here.

I wish you was right but sadly your not.
Normaly in games you see all cores running realy high % but conan only one.
I dont think you monitor correctly if you get these results.

You cant say thats its a users Pc when they have i7 920 @ 3.7ghz & AMD 7950
Game using AVG 51% of my 7950 Game using Average 20% of my Cpu and only 1 core realy.
Its the game not the Hardware.

You might see some people with 4-5ghz cpus you know why they run it good?
Becaus game uses 1 core and 4-5 ghz prolly 4.5ghz means 1 core is alot stronger than it would been at like 3.5 ghz and will benefit game alot and make GPU possible to run fully.
If Game was optimized any at all atleast good for 2 cores this problems would not exist

[Invino]

That graphics card is being castrated by the CPU and RAM and MoBo since you have that CPU and RAM in it, it is quite old.

[Banto]

That graphics card is being castrated by the CPU and RAM and MoBo since you have that CPU and RAM in it, it is quite old.

Me? You cant be serious if you mean me there is no logic in that. There have not realy happened anything FPS improving on intels side since i7 920 aslong as its OCed in FPS just check benchmarks.

The ram is Corsair Dominator 1600mhz its DDR3 its nothing improving with new ram over it in FPS.
The Game uses low % of cpu and not using multicore and game not using GPU is due to the game.
Most other games that are heavily CPU / GPU runs super fine and uses all cores + GPU @ 90-100%

Dont even try to blame it on peoples hardware if they have good hardware and game not even using it.

If you dont have any knowledge please dont reply tbh
Not trying to be rude against you just tierd of people who think they know something and fools other people