So I want to buy FarCry to test out my new 2001fp, but would my GF2MX400 be able to handle it? I've tried to compare the GeForce2MX400 to a GeForceFX, finding the ratios between the benchmarks, and then carrying them over to FarCry (since no one has reviewed a GF2 with FarCry), but I keep getting 3-4fps per second. So, would anyone care to take a guess? Obviously, it would have to be 800x600 w/ no AA/AF...
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
-
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.
No really, how many frames would I get.
- Thread starter rayman2k2
- Start date
computerpro3
LightningRod
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2003
- Messages
- 8,702
I would think more like 1-2 seconds per frame.
Look at my card in sig. Running faster than any card out there except for the fx6800 obviously. I still dip to 29FPS sometimes and if I turn the flashlight on in certain sections I can hit single digits. Its one hell of a pretty slideshow
.
Thats with 1280x1024 no aa/af. IF I drop down the resolution to 800x600 it hardly helps framerates at all. Besides, I don't think the geforce2 meets the minimum requirements.
Look at my card in sig. Running faster than any card out there except for the fx6800 obviously. I still dip to 29FPS sometimes and if I turn the flashlight on in certain sections I can hit single digits. Its one hell of a pretty slideshow
.Thats with 1280x1024 no aa/af. IF I drop down the resolution to 800x600 it hardly helps framerates at all. Besides, I don't think the geforce2 meets the minimum requirements.
hmm, thats a shame. well, might as well upgrade then...would it help to let you all know that BF:1942 is quite playable, as is America's Army and W:ET? Or is FarCry just that Far ahead?
EDIT: Just looked at the specs for Farcry, the have a GF4MX listed, arent they just as powerful as GF2MX's? Atleast thats what I heard when I wanted to upgrade to a GF4MX...
EDIT: Just looked at the specs for Farcry, the have a GF4MX listed, arent they just as powerful as GF2MX's? Atleast thats what I heard when I wanted to upgrade to a GF4MX...
computerpro3
LightningRod
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2003
- Messages
- 8,702
far cry is waaaaaaaaayyyyyyyy more demanding than bf1942. I can play bf1942 with 1280x1024 all settings max 6xAA 16x AF and still pull mid 60FPS.
BillLeeLee
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2003
- Messages
- 13,486
The Geforce 4 Mx4xx series is better then the Geforce 2 MX series from first hand experience. I've seen the GF4 mx series play games much more smoothly and with better settings than geforce 2 cards.
I'd say it's about right that Farcry is unplayable with that card even though bf1942 and W:ET are. I use a Radeon 32 in one of my systems, and while it can play bf1942 pretty well, it gets it's ass kicked by newer games because newer games are more graphics intensive.
If you want to play FC, you'll have to look at getting a modern vid card.
I'd say it's about right that Farcry is unplayable with that card even though bf1942 and W:ET are. I use a Radeon 32 in one of my systems, and while it can play bf1942 pretty well, it gets it's ass kicked by newer games because newer games are more graphics intensive.
If you want to play FC, you'll have to look at getting a modern vid card.
Why not just nab the demo and try it out? Though if you don't have broadband, that wouldn't be pleasant.
The demo ran well on my tbred @ 2.1ghz with 1gb of memory and a Ti4200, at 800x600 with medium detail. Playable at 1024x768 but I don't like slowdowns very much.
Haven't tried it since the barton went in, but I doubt it got worse.
Erik
The demo ran well on my tbred @ 2.1ghz with 1gb of memory and a Ti4200, at 800x600 with medium detail. Playable at 1024x768 but I don't like slowdowns very much.
Haven't tried it since the barton went in, but I doubt it got worse
.Erik
Originally posted by Dem
Why not just nab the demo and try it out? Though if you don't have broadband, that wouldn't be pleasant.
The demo ran well on my tbred @ 2.1ghz with 1gb of memory and a Ti4200, at 800x600 with medium detail. Playable at 1024x768 but I don't like slowdowns very much.
Haven't tried it since the barton went in, but I doubt it got worse
Erik
thats a pretty good idea...
now, upgrading my vid card is a slight problem...you see, i was planning on upgrading completetly this summer, or the next; pending on 64bit P4s. as of now, it seems that 64bit P4s will be coming out after this summer, so I would be building the summer after next.
My options [for this summer] were buy new vid card, second hdd, and more ram for this rig, or get a new one completely, im now leaning towards the former...
just get a decent DX9 card. i have a gf4 ti4200 128mb which is DX8.1 and it doesnt run farcry that well, and i also have an ati radeon 9500 pro which is a DX9 card and it runs farcry alot better (while it loses to the gf4ti4200 in benchmarks on this comp for some reason). so get a hold of a decent DirectX 9 card
D
Deleted member 79192
Guest
Go nVidia!