Should it be slow?

T

taylorwilsdon

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 21, 2006
Messages
2,286
I've had my Counter-Strike account for 4 years now and when I got a new computer, I expected to be able to play games. I used to be able to play SOURCE version on a laptop with integrated geforce 6100, this was a single core, circa 05 laptop.

I rarely play games, but I like to play Counter-Strike for a week in summer, so I'm not up on the latest things.

With my new computer, when playing single player (NOT ONLINE, so no internet latency) it lags hard. What would the cause be? My drivers are up to date. When I turn Anti Aliasing down, it gets way smoother but I assumed I would be able to crank it. All settings are maxed except AA now.

Help!

edit - probably help to add specs
core 2 duo 2.4ghz
4gb patriot ddr2 667
evga geforce 8800
320gb 7200.10 hd

I do have a high res monitor (gateway 24'') so that may contribute. Its much smoother when I play at 720p on my projector.
 
~GoaT~ said:
weren't when I posted :eek: anyway, gts or gtx? I think you should be able to run 1920x1200 with at least 4xaa if my [email protected] and 7900gs could do 1680x1050 all high 4xaa 8xaf not dipping below 60.
Click to expand...

GTS not the fastest one. Yes its pretty good on 4xAA but 16 gets slow. If I overclock my CPU will that help? I was able to get it stable at 3.4GHZ but I thought it would be pointless to put extra stress on the chip when I don't do anything that necessities it.
 
Your frame rates may go up some but not enough to keep it from being choppy because your gpu is what is having the problem keeping up, not the cpu. Source is very processor dependent so I'd say at least give it a try but I don't think it will bring fps up too much.
 
So you're saying this $400 graphics card isn't enough to play a game that I could pay (albeit at a lower resolution) on a single core laptop with 512mb RAM and integrated graphics?

Yowza. I got shanked :mad:
 
Guys, guys, guys.

Obviously, his GPU isn't the problem. Neither is his CPU. If my computer can play CS:S at 120 FPS full settings (6xAA) at 1280x1024, his computer should be able to do at least that at that higher resolution no problem. And my friend with an integrated GeForce 7900 Go can play CS:S at full settings at 1680x1400 just fine. He gets way over 100 FPS. Even if Source is processor dependent, the best processor out there when it came out was the A64 3200+. So really.

Are you running Vista? If so, is it the 64-bit version? Good things to know.
 
Yes vista, no 64 bit. I am planning on moving over to 64 bit if/when I decide to upgrade to 8gb RAM so that I can take advantage of it.

To the last poster - that was kind of my thoughts. It was a new game back when hardware couldn't hold a candle to today's stuff.
 
There's definitely some kind of problem - you should be getting well over 100 FPS at those settings with that rig.

Maybe it's a driver problem? Try uninstalling your video card drivers and re-installing them. I'd say use the official WHQL driver for 32-bit Vista (instead of some Beta driver, if you're using one).

Also, what power supply are you using? And are you video card temps okay? If it's overheating or not getting enough power, that could be causing your problems too.
 
Joga said:
There's definitely some kind of problem - you should be getting well over 100 FPS at those settings with that rig.

Maybe it's a driver problem? Try uninstalling your video card drivers and re-installing them. I'd say use the official WHQL driver for 32-bit Vista (instead of some Beta driver, if you're using one).

Also, what power supply are you using? And are you video card temps okay? If it's overheating or not getting enough power, that could be causing your problems too.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply. Do you know how to measure FPS in the game? I'm just going by my eyes.

I'm using the official driver because the STEAM program gave me an error when using the beta driver. I will do a uninstall/reinstall though.

Temps are good as far as I can tell. I have lots of fans (Antec 900 with everything at full speed). My Power supply is the one recommended by the guy at Frys, Antec TRIpower 550 watt. He said it was "better" then the corsair 520 I had picked out (not sure I buy that, but whatever). I think its powerful enough to handle everything. I've only got 1 optical drive, 1 hard drive, 1 video card.
 
Holy crap! I installed the newest forceware and that did something crazy! Now its like butter. My framerates never dip below 200 using cl_showframerate 1
 
Damn I'm excited

I was getting 30-50fps in source at 1920 x 1200 everything MINIMUM

With

AMD X2 4200 @ 5200 speeds (2.2 vs. 2.6)
eVGA 8800 GTS 320mb SC @ 950 mem and 650 core
2GB of Patriot 667
2 x 36.7 Raptors in Raid 0

I was very :( but hopefully these new drivers fix that...
 
taylorwilsdon said:
Yes vista, no 64 bit. I am planning on moving over to 64 bit if/when I decide to upgrade to 8gb RAM so that I can take advantage of it.

To the last poster - that was kind of my thoughts. It was a new game back when hardware couldn't hold a candle to today's stuff.
Click to expand...

Just so you know, you can't take advantage of the 4Gb you have now, chances are the maximum amount of system RAM being allocated is in the region of 2.5Gb to 3Gb
 
your initial post says you had the latest drivers...:rolleyes:

...a prob on that hardware ONLY means 1 thing..PEBCAK!
 
G'ßöö;1031218359 said:
your initial post says you had the latest drivers...:rolleyes:

...a prob on that hardware ONLY means 1 thing..PEBCAK!
Click to expand...

Well, I installed them less then a week ago so I assumed they were the latest. Still, performance difference shouldn't have been so much. I think I must have accidentally installed one set of drivers over the other, the old ones from the CD and the new ones from the internet and they didn't mesh.

And :(

Re:Frosteh
I'm using a trick somebody posted here and it recognizes 4GB ram, but it won't go higher.
 
Oh BTW I'm running vista ultimate, I've been editing HD Video so I haven't had a chance to install the new drivers, I will later tonight (after running a driver cleaner) and let you guys know how the results are, I prefer Vista over XP for some reason... (just the feel of it) otherwise I'd stick with XP
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top