How much does a video card affect my play

K

---k---

n00b
Joined
Mar 29, 2004
Messages
2
Stupid question time, but after searching forever, it doesn't appear that a good awnser is out there. So,

I have a crappy computer, AMD 1800+ on an Nforce Integrated Graphics board. It was not bought with the intent to game on, but I've been sucked into Call of Duty and AA.

I'm usually an okay gamer. When we used to play Unreal, I was always like 3-5 out of 10 players. But in CoD and AA, it seems like I'm getting whooped, badly. When I watch the kill cams, it seems like I'm always looking the other direction of the person shooting me and just lagging behind. (I got a good DSL connection, and always try and play on servers w/ everyone pinging below 100).

Would a better video card/system really improve my play, or do I just suck?

Really, how much does a video card/system affect someone's ability? Are people really getting fragged because their system is doing 30fps while everyone else on the server is doing 60fps?

I'm on a budget and thinking about getting a refrubed 256mb 5600XT from Newegg for like $75. Will this help, or do I really need to spend $200 to be competive (at which point, I'll probably just stop playing.)


thanks,

---k---
 
of course it hurts if you cant even see whats going on, but a really fast system isnt going to make you any better if you can see the guy but you just cant hit him.
 
for that system I would just get something like a GeForce4 Ti 4200

as long as you can play a game decently you should be competative
 
You know, for some reason I read your title and immediately thought, "Despite the seemingly commonly-held belief here, your video card really has no bearing on how much play you're getting." And then I read your post.
 
get a ti4200 or a 9600XT
a 5600XT is a piece of crap and barely an upgrade.
 
Originally posted by V0ltage
get a ti4200 or a 9600XT
Click to expand...

Agreed, I used to have an 1800+ (back in the day) with 512MB of single channel PC2100 and a Ti4200 and it rocked. The 9600Pro I upgraded to was actually a tad slower at stock speeds with normal IQ in games so the XT would be a very direct competitor. One place you're really gonna be gaining with the XT over the Ti4200 is any game that you play with any kind of AA or very high IQ.....seeing as the GF4's sucked ass at AA.

That's my honest opinion.....speaking from experience.
 
I think how fast the card plays has alot to do with getting killed. If you have some server lag and, then add system lag, it equals high probability for death. By the time you turn around your dead. Woops!
 
Originally posted by Joves
I think how fast the card plays has alot to do with getting killed. If you have some server lag and, then add system lag, it equals high probability for death. By the time you turn around your dead. Woops!
Click to expand...

Exactly, but your system can only help you so much. Even if your game is running 200fps.....if you suck, you suck. ;) :p
 
Originally posted by truffle00
You know, for some reason I read your title and immediately thought, "Despite the seemingly commonly-held belief here, your video card really has no bearing on how much play you're getting." And then I read your post.
Click to expand...

Dude, that was funny as hell. Thanks for the good laugh :)

Deep voice "Oh yea, chicks dig video cards...."
 
in BF1942 untweaked and unclocked system compared to Oced and all tweaked up.... the speed difference was the difference from being below average to being in top 15% everygame! HUGE difference for me just going from 30FPS ave to 55 FPS ave made the world of difference to me :)
 
Originally posted by RM_Bulldog
in BF1942 untweaked and unclocked system compared to Oced and all tweaked up.... the speed difference was the difference from being below average to being in top 15% everygame! HUGE difference for me just going from 30FPS ave to 55 FPS ave made the world of difference to me :)
Click to expand...

I look at overclocking more so in the sense that I'm raising the minimum FPS.....therefor cutting back on the amount or "strength" of the sluggishness.
 
Originally posted by RM_Bulldog
less lag = faster fingers ;)
Click to expand...

Not really, but it's rarely any good HAVING fast fingers if you're lagging like hell and chuggin' away at 30fps. ;)
 
Okay, did some reading and I turned on the fps ticker last night in CoD. I was usually getting around 35-45fps, but when a lot of people were moving around me, it would drop to ~20fps.

I'm not a big gamer, so it looked fine to me. I really didn't notice my system lagging like I do network lag. I figured that TV was only 30fps, so I'm better than tv, it must be all good.

Am I just an idiot for thinking that 20-35fps was okay in normal game play? Is this part of the reason I suck?

So, I guess the bottom line question, what is the minimum fps before your ability is affected?

thanks all,
---k---

btw, right now in my house, Linux/BSD outnumber 2:1 Windows, therefore I only buy Nvidia cards because they are much better supported, and it is very likely that something I buy for the windows machine will end up in the Linux machine.... but lets not go there. that is a much differnt thread.
 
No offense to you but I honestly have no idea how people play FPS games at anything less then 60fps.....I NEED it to be that smooth. Not because I suck, just 'cus it's freakin' annoying when games chug.....that and I'm insanely spoiled with my comp the way it is. ;)

---k---, just because you might be happy with your rigs level of performance (or lack thereof) doesn't mean that it's ok. Maybe I'm wrong here but I still think that an 1800+ setup like that (even with the integrated GF4MX) should be putting out more then 20-40 fps in COD.

I'd strongly recommend that you go for a new card. Assuming that everything is setup properly in your setup right now you will see some insane gains with even that 5600.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top