• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

COD4 on a p4 2.6?

P

pbucch

n00b
Joined
May 5, 2008
Messages
6
Hey Guys, I am trying to play CS:S and COD4 on my old pc, bad Idea I know, but I am wondering if I will be able to get decent performance, with a few upgrades, here is what I am tworking with:


description: Motherboard
product: 'P4SD-LA'
vendor: ASUSTeK Computer INC.
2gb PC3200
128mb ATI Radeon 9200 pro
2.6GHz p4
Windows XP Performance edition

Now I put this all on last night, ran CS:S this morning and was dissapointed with my 50fps =/. Although I did not go through and lower any of the graphics settings but I doubt that will net me much. I will be running a Geforce 8800gt, that I am getting from a friend in a week or two, which should help out.

I am wondering if there are any better options for the 478 socket? or should I look for a new mobo/proc?

I am trying to do this on as much of a budget as possible and I am wondering if I have a prayer at playing COD4, at the lowest settings?

Thanks for the help.
 
With the 8800GT I would definitely give it a shot on low settings.... start at 1280x1024 no AA/AF and go from there. No harm in trying!
 
8800gt shouldn't work as it's PCIe. You are using an AGP board right?

There was a 3870 on newegg that was AGP also you can find an 8800gs as well.
 
I'm not as optomistic as these guys are. When I had my X2 4400+ @ 2.6GHz, COD4 had no problems maxing out both cores or very very close to it. It played fine, but that showed me that it was maxing out that CPU which is WAY more powerful than a single core P4 2.6GHz, especially when it comes to gaming. I think anything higher than a 10-12 player map and you'll see some major slow downs.

Contrary to popular belief and what most benchmarks say, it isn't ALL about the graphics card.
 
give it a shot.

save up and get the following:

mobo : http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128059
cpu : http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115037
memory : http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231047
psu : http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817139003

those paired with the 8800gt you getting is a bomb for the games you play... I added a psu because i thought your psu is too old?

but oh well.. all of those would be like 445$ ? save up my friend

if you kept that pc so long, this one can definately go as long also...
 
RamonGTP said:
Contrary to popular belief and what most benchmarks say, it isn't ALL about the graphics card.
Click to expand...

You're absoultely right, but nobody benches games with anything other than Core 2 Duo's and Quads, you rarely see even a Phenom, and nothing even as recent as two year old Athlon X2. So when you're talking only about the latest and greatest CPU's it really doesn't matter for the most part, especially at high resolutions and settings.
 
i played the demo version of COD4 with a 2.66 P4, 1gig of ram, 7600gs(512mb) overclocked to 450mhz, on medium settings, worked just fine. Granted i would have liked to have it on high, but there wasnt any lag on medium settings.
 
Another question, if I end up going with that mobo suggested above, should I look into Quad Core procs?
 
its 20 pin , most mobos use 24 pins nowadays...

i would strongly recommend the corsair psu , 450 watt .. 450 might not sound a lot but it is enough for what you will have ... there is a 520 watt from corsair also.. if you want to be safe (er)..

regarding quadcore ... the Q6600 would be an excellent choice .. if you don't plan upgrading in the next 2 to 3 years, i think the q6600 will do good.. if you're into overclocking ..3.6 ghz is what most people get out of it (stable,without a lot of tweaking) ...
 
vict0r said:
3.6 ghz is what most people get out of it (stable,without a lot of tweaking) ...
Click to expand...

Not quite. 3.6GHz is at the upper end, certainly not what most people get stable. I've build several Q6600 rigs now, both G0 and B3 and I'd say only about half the G0's were able to hit 3.6GHz stable, and about half of those ran too hot for comfort, even with good cooling.
 
pbucch said:
Vict0r, thanks for the effort, my PSU failed like a year or two ago, so i upgraded to:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817192002

Will that suffice?
Click to expand...

No. It only has 15A on the +12V rail and costs $30. That PSU or your system won't last too long with a new system. I highly recommend getting the Corsair 450VX 450W PSU since it has 33A on the +12V rail and is a well-known high quality PSU. It'll be more than enough for the 8800GT.

I recommend going with vict0r's buuild BUT switch the RAM to DDR2 (vict0r made a mistake in recommended DDR RAM for a DDR2 motherboard):
A-Data ADQVE1B16K 2 x 2GB DDR2 800 RAM - $78
 
a crap .. i made a mistake in both Memory and Mobo

but you got the point right? I hope i was of a help good enough...

so for ~$450 .. you will rock my friend...
 
vict0r said:
oh well 3.4 Ghz then man... wow 200 mhz , still 1 ghz OC
Click to expand...

I'm not saying they are not good OCers, they are, that's why I've got one. Sadly, mine only gets up to 3.2GHz stable. I'm simply pointing out that your previous statement was not accurate. Nothing personal, but even if you're off by 200MHz, you're still off, and we don't want people spending their money expecting to get something that they could well possibly not get. Afterall, 200Mhz is a lot in terms of what we're talking about here. It's the difference between soemthing you have a decent chance of getting (3.4GHz) versus something that's a coin toss at best. (3.6GHz) ;)
 
Right now, I'm playing on a 3.2GHz P4, 7600GT, 2GB DDR 400, and I can play with everything on low (except AF) at 1280x1024 pretty smoothly. It will drop to 20-30 fps when sniping on occasion, but otherwise it runs well.
 
hmmm, yeah 20-30 FPS is too low, I need constant 100 min.

I just put xp performance on this old piece with the Radeon, and with no options on and a config I downloaded, im still only getting ~60 frames in CS:S. I will probably just build that box victor posted over the next month or two, thanks a lot!
 
a friend of mine has a C2D E8400 , 4 gigs of ram , a 9600GT on the Asus Rampage x48 ...

he has a constant 150fps in CSS with everything on high, on a 24inch monitor with high settings en resolutions etc etc ..

some might say "why 150 fps, your eye won't see it" ... but I must say, I am 100% sure , you won't SEE the difference between 70 and 150 , but you definately will FEEL it ... the game just runs smoother and quicker...

so yes ... it is worth it...

Im a CS veteran , I been playing CS since beta 7 and am still playing CSS now ...so I know what I am talking about
 
Vic, can you copy you config.cfg for me here? or at least give me a link to the best fps config you can find...

thanks for all the help.
 
me?
on my pc?

i use everything on medium , simple reflections ... 2x aa ... @ 1280x1024 ... i get around 70 fps, it drops to like 30 or 40 on dust2 , when you have like 8 ct's going long A to the bunker and you have like 6 other T's coming to long A throwing like 100000000 flashbangs, lol ... and all start shooting and so ... the fps drops to like 30 ...

i'm on a geforce 6800 , x2 4200+ s939 @ 2.4 ghz , 1 gig of ram ...

I bought a 9600gt superclocked but it wasnt much help because my system kind of sucks ... im saving the 9600gt for a new build, that im building really soon.. and am back on the 6800...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top