i have an x800 xt and i just played cod2 demo on all 1280x1024 with aa and af and everything on normal i think? i was getting like 40 frames tops!!.......i might just need a real sound card cuz i can tell there are many realiztic noises going on...but dang!!! how can my rig be obsolete so fast?....and the fear review on anandtech.com looks like if u have the new generation cards u have to play it on a low resolution (not inclucing sli).
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
is it just me or does last generation cards not keeping up in fear and cod2
- Thread starter tvdang7
- Start date
- Status
My x800xl does a fine-enough job for me in FEAR. 1024x768, AFx8 AAx2, most all graphics options turned up except for soft shadows.
Lowering your resolution a bit will help tremendously, and assuming you put a little AA in there will look just fine in most cases.
Lowering your resolution a bit will help tremendously, and assuming you put a little AA in there will look just fine in most cases.
tranCendenZ
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2004
- Messages
- 3,844
The 1.01 patch for FEAR helps performance a lot.
Did you READ the article?tranCendenZ said:
Seems like not.
They *used* the 1.01 patch. AND beta release drivers from ATI and nVidia (both said to improve FEAR performance).
The numbers they got were still completely unacceptable. I have an LCD, so gaming at the native res is the only option. And if you think 'no' or '2x' AA is acceptable in a shooter, you are crazy.
At 1600x1200, 4xAA, 8xAniso, game settings maxed, there isn't a card out today you can buy that would provide acceptable framerate in that game.
Heck, even with NO AA or Aniso applied, at 1600x1200, with soft shadows, the game is unplayable on any card at all.
What kind of crackhead releases a game that's playable on NO CARDS AT ALL?? Or, rather, only playable to people with lower standard.
This is what happens.
1. A developer releases a new engine/game that is compatible with lots of systems, including the slightly older ones.
- People btch and moan about how developers are lazy and are not releasing new software that really pushes the boundaries.
2. A developer releases a new engine/game that is resource intensive, playable best on only the newest hardware.
- People btch and moan about how developers are lazy and did not optimize the game enough for older hardware.
Take your pick.
1. A developer releases a new engine/game that is compatible with lots of systems, including the slightly older ones.
- People btch and moan about how developers are lazy and are not releasing new software that really pushes the boundaries.
2. A developer releases a new engine/game that is resource intensive, playable best on only the newest hardware.
- People btch and moan about how developers are lazy and did not optimize the game enough for older hardware.
Take your pick.
tvdang7 said:im with this guy......i think they could have made it more optimized and consumer friendlyi would hate to think of the numbers for the agp generaton cards such as 9800 pro and 5900 xt they probably SUCK
tvdang7 said:
85+ FPS for me 1280x1024 Max settings. Stock clock settings. I am waiting till I need to to overclock things.
ABIT Fatal1ty AN8-SLI Socket 939 NVIDIA nForce4 SLI ATX AMD Motherboard
eVGA 256-P2-N538-AX 7800GTX 256MB GDDR3 PCI Express x16 Video Card 1200MHZ Clock 450MHZ Core
AMD Athlon 64 X2 4400+ Toledo 1GHz FSB Socket 939 Dual Core Processor
OCZ 2GB (2 x 1GB) 184-Pin DDR SDRAM DDR 400 (PC 3200)
Western Digital Caviar SE WD1200JS 120GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s Hard Drive
Maxtor 80GB 7200RPM SATA Hard Drive
TOSHIBA Black IDE DVD-ROM Drive Model sd-m2012c
SONY Black IDE DVD Burner Model DWQ28A
LINKSYS WMP54G PCI Wireless-G Adapter
Thermaltake CL-P0114 120mm Cooling Fan/Heatsink
ASPIRE ATX-AS520W BLACK ATX 520W Power Supply
Monitor HP F2105 Widescreen LCD 1680x1050
Sorry buddy, not picking you out of a crowd on purpose. I was just describing the scenarios that programmers face when they release a game. How well the game runs on my system has nothing to do with my original post. I'm getting 30-40fps on this game at medium settings, and I'm fine with that. I only paid $700 to build this system to play HL2, so I'll get around to making another one in a bit after things calm down with hardware releases.
tvdang7 said:
Project_2501
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2005
- Messages
- 1,170
Interesting. CoD:2 runs about 25-45 fps for me, yet seems for some reason as smooth as 50-60 fps...
I run:
Max Details on everything
1280x1024
4x AA
I have:
DFI NF4-Ultra
1gb Mushkin Redline @ 1.5-2-2-11, 230 mhz
A64 3200+ @ 2.3ghz
M-Audio Revolution sound card
I haven't tried F.E.A.R. yet. I haven't decided if I want to. How's the game play?
I run:
Max Details on everything
1280x1024
4x AA
I have:
DFI NF4-Ultra
1gb Mushkin Redline @ 1.5-2-2-11, 230 mhz
A64 3200+ @ 2.3ghz
M-Audio Revolution sound card
I haven't tried F.E.A.R. yet. I haven't decided if I want to. How's the game play?
well there's a difference between pushing the limits with uber stuff and just making a game that runs like crap. from what i've seen, the CoD2 engine does nothing that really sets it apart and yet it runs like shit even on higherend systems. FEAR is a nice looking game,but i haven't seen anything that sets it apart from doom3 or hl2. the greatest example of a poorly coded engine is halo1 for pc. i mean can that thing run any worse? also, when [H] does its videocard reviews and uses the NFSUnderground2 game, why does FPS stay below 60? the engine doesn't have anything fancy, yet the fps isn't sky high. another example of a crappy engine. so programming really makes a big difference in frame rate
I don't know what you guys are talking about. I just installed the cod2 demo and it ran great, all settings max 1280x1024 4xaa. Specs in sig. Of course, I pay more attention to the game than the fps counter. I swear people are just too obsessed with numbers these days. Just play the game and enjoy it.
Project_2501 said:
It's a great game, the SP is really awesome.
- GFX are top notch
volumetric Lighting and soft shadows really make a world of difference!
- Story is solid and makes you want to learn more.
It's scary, and action packed, and you want to find out each new bit to the background!
- The A.I. of the enemy is unreal!
There isn't a game out today that has A.I. that are as smart and tactical as these guys. They will set up ambushs, drive through windows to avoid grenades, call in back up.
Its really worth buying!
Well this is why i love consoles,even if they're sub-par compared to high end PCs. I love the fact that I can just play the game and not have to worry about settings. If I'm playing a PC game like F.E.A.R., I'll be tweaking settings all night rather than enjoying the game. I have high expectations for PC games mainly because of all the money dumped into my systems. I remember being more impressed with Doom3 on XBOX than I was with my 6800vanilla. Yeah I know noAA & the game ran at 640X480 on XBOX, but the system is half the price of the damn video card.
kubebot said:
You don't have to tweak settings all night to play a game on pc, it's just that you can so you take advantage of it. I spend all of 2 minutes setting up a new game, then I just play it, no different from a console really. If anything, I'd rather have the option to tweak stuff if I want to, but saying it's necessary is not true.
UoMDeacon said:
they're doing this, because they want us to buy newer generation cards.
In a way this is good for rich and plentiful people and high end enthusiast. But leaves the poor in the dust
If the developers really cared about gamers, they'd acually release two types of patches, one optimized for older generation and one optimized for the latest one. But I have yet to seen that in any games so far.
I love how a few years ago you could hardly play most games with max setttings and some AA and AF, with 1280 by 1024 res.Netrat33 said:
Learn to adjust your settings. I have had just about every new game to come out running on my MX440 with no lag. Same with my 9800 Pro. So quit your bitching. Also there not going to release new patchs for new gen and old gen. You have no clue how diffcult it is to program and how long it takes and how much money it takes also.
Now people bitch because there card wont play new games just as good as the old. Theres a reason for that. You get what you payed for and no more. I bought a 9800 Pro and I dont expect it to play games with max settings and full AF AA with high resolution. Its funny how people have to play with 1600X1200 also when most monitors dont support that nativaly. I wish time could freeze just so my hardware could play games maxed out full aa and af for 10 years from now. But this is life. No one asks you people to buy new hardware for your computers everytime they wont run games at max settings with max res and max AA and AF. If you think you need to replace your hardware everytime this happens than its most likely you dont know the value of money and if you do this than your taking your computer for granite.
bigbadgreen
Gawd
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2003
- Messages
- 680
It is interesting that people knowingly buy these games with the intent of playing on older or budget systems and then complain about not being able to run everything maxed out at a high resolution. there is a give and take here. We all know what we can expect out of our systems. I say congratualtions for them making games that press new hardware. If your machine isn't running how you want it to you have 2 options, first you can go out and spend some money to get the top of the line hawrdware, second for the majority of people, you have to use common sense and turn down some settings. BooHoo you bought a card that's a year old and can't max out the settings on a brand new game. Were you expecting your hardware to be immune from technology advances.
Where do we draw the line, should programmers dumb down engines so that most people with their dells or gateways or compaqs can game as full settings and 1200x1600, and then the high end cards would be worthless. Becuase the fact is the general public believe that onboard graphics is enough and aren't sure what a video card is even for. so if they are coding for the majority a 7800GTX would be good for another 5 years.
It's fact that as new things are released they will make the older things look bad. you either deal with it or buy new.
and you have to realize that we are computer enthusiats by youe theory they should be coding for %90 of computer owners which would mean onboard graphics. Your 6800 is looking pretty good about now isn't it.
Where do we draw the line, should programmers dumb down engines so that most people with their dells or gateways or compaqs can game as full settings and 1200x1600, and then the high end cards would be worthless. Becuase the fact is the general public believe that onboard graphics is enough and aren't sure what a video card is even for. so if they are coding for the majority a 7800GTX would be good for another 5 years.
It's fact that as new things are released they will make the older things look bad. you either deal with it or buy new.
LeviathanV
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- May 25, 2005
- Messages
- 247
Fear is a great looking game, and Ive seen it run o.k., not great, on a X600PRO which is how you would expect it to run...in my X800PRO it runs great, at 12x10 with setting at medium, which is what I espected...And if you build a top-of-the-line pc with current hardware, you can run smoothly FEAR maxed out, just that you wont get 300 fps...that´s just quake 3 ... 40 -50 fps are ok considering you are maxing everything.... and the game does feature demanding stuff like a hell of a lot of particles... nothing better than enjoing a particle-rich gun fight in FEAR ...
its funny how people are obsessed with fps... when what really matters is that the game feels smooth for you... whether thats at 40 fps, or at 70 or even 30 at certain games...
its funny how people are obsessed with fps... when what really matters is that the game feels smooth for you... whether thats at 40 fps, or at 70 or even 30 at certain games...
AltTabbins
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2005
- Messages
- 20,401
HOLY OFF TOPIC BATMAN! IF I COULD ONLY..... REACH.....THE...... BACK ON TOPIC SPRAY ON MY UTILITY BELT!
Co2 is processor hungry. If you have having problems, its probably due more to your processor than your videocard.
Co2 is processor hungry. If you have having problems, its probably due more to your processor than your videocard.
USMC2Hard4U
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2003
- Messages
- 6,157
Thats why they are "Last Gen" cards
Of course they are not gonna do that good. These Games comming out now arent even meant to play good on current hardware. These games are stressing the best of the best, thus making hardware makers push new and better hardware.
I bet Fear and COD2 will run great on Next Gen Cards. I beleive thats their purpose.
Of course they are not gonna do that good. These Games comming out now arent even meant to play good on current hardware. These games are stressing the best of the best, thus making hardware makers push new and better hardware.
I bet Fear and COD2 will run great on Next Gen Cards. I beleive thats their purpose.
- Status