I keep wondering what would my performance be

[Wildboyz]

My hardware
Intel Pentium 4 2.66c
512mb ddr
Radeon 9600xt 256mb

I was wondering how would it work in HL2 when my settings will be on High

 

[mezz]

I have a 9800 pro, AMD 64 3000+ and 512MB ddr ram and I have some frame rate probs in CSS, occasionally jitters but too bad to play happily. I can just about manage (v occasional frame rate drops) with all on medium other than textures on high and max resolution, but for most comfortable play I just go for all on medium and max resolution.

I'm guessing on your system that HL2 (assuming performance is similar to CSS) will be unplayable with all on high, but it still looks great on medium

 

[Inanimate]

On high settings with that machinery.. you´d get like 10-15 fps at most..
Thing is, that you should play a singleplayer-game in at least 1024 res.
800x600 and below is for multiplaying only..
I recommend 1024 and some misc medium-settings that will make your fps be held at a steady 30 or something..
I recommend that you DONT use ATI´s Catalyst drivers since they slow everything down.
Use either Omega drivers or DNA drivers.. they´ll work fine with your card and increase fps with a probable value of 5-15 fps.

You can also overclock your GFX card since its only a 9600XT.
I´ve got 9800XT and I overclock abit, but not much since they get warm.
You should be able to clock it at least 30mhz on both core and memory..

/Daniel

 

[Wildboyz]

My anticipations were too high then. ;(
Most new games only look good on high display setting.s
I want to be admired by the graphics as I play :|

Dear daniel!
Would 30Mhz make much of a difference?

 

[[sl@yer]]

My brother has the same specs except a 3.06 as opposed to a 2.66 processor......however he can run CS:S with all on high with a pretty good framerate (40s). You should be able to run with medium-high options and get a good performance.

 

[Wildboyz]

[sl@yer], I know. I ran source and it worked just fine under 1024x768, with almost every detail in display settings on maximal
It ran between 40-50 FPS

 

[Solver]

The thing is just that ATI cards suck, and Catalyst too .

I think you'd do fine with medium-high settings. Depends on what resolution you want to use of course, and also if you'll be doing any tweaking.

 

[Wildboyz]

I honestly thought 9600XT was made especially for HL2 since it came with the HL2 voucher ( I didn't get a voucher though, I got a crappy Tomb Raider game :angry: )

 

[Arrowhead]

you'll be fine. you may want to scale things back a little, but don't worry, it'll still look and play great!

 

[Wildboyz]

im psyched

 

[RacingGun]

Um wtf??? My System: AMD Barton 2500+, 512MB PC 2700, Radeon 9600XT. I play CS:S at 1024*768 with all option on high, with no FSAA, and 4xAF. Framerates barely drop into the 40's... typically in the 50's and 60's. Using Catalyst 4.10.

*edit: I have no idea how all these other people have their computers setup, or what they have running in the background, or whatever. But CS:S runs sweet, and I know HL2 will also be perfect.

 

[wilka91]

My hardware
Intel Pentium 4 2.66c

It doesn't exist

There's only a 2.66 P4-B

and a 2.6 P4-C

 

[nagual678]

i run very decently CS:S with all on high, vertical sync disabled (ok, aztec slows down a bit, but only that map) with a :

athlon xp 2000+
512 RAM
(that's the cool bit) : Geforce 5600XT

 

[Bait]

I got a p4 2.4ghz, 512mb ram and a Radeon 9100 128mb OCed. And I run the game on all high (except for water), at 1152x864 res and only on extreme occasions does the FPS drop under 20. Anyone who thinks this game is useless without 50 FPS or useless without everything being on high really should go try to play HL with a 533mhz machine with a TNT2.

 

[KagePrototype]

Athlon XP 2600
512 MB PC2100
Radeon 9600 Pro

1024x768, all high detail, 2x AA and Trilinear filtering. I get a 40fps average in the stress test. You'll be fine on high settings, dunno what everyone else is on about.

 

[Wraithen]

Didn't the XT card have some sort of easy in built overclocking feature? I was a little disapointed by the performance of mine with Doom 3... OK so I wasn't too disapointed until I read what PC Gamer (I think) claimed to get from their £500 rig. Maybe going to a full gig of RAM wouldn't be a bad thing. Anyone wanna give me money? :monkee:

 

[iamaelephant]

The thing is just that ATI cards suck, and Catalyst too .

I think you'd do fine with medium-high settings. Depends on what resolution you want to use of course, and also if you'll be doing any tweaking.

Yeah okay buddy....

 

[Warbie]

My anticipations were too high then. ;(
Most new games only look good on high display setting.s
I want to be admired by the graphics as I play :|

Dear daniel!
Would 30Mhz make much of a difference?

Don't worry about it.

If HL2 is as great as the reviews say you'll have excellent fun even without the highest settings. (games rarely become more enjoyable just because of a higher res, or uber gfx settings - a tiny bit at most. As long as it looks 'good enough' it's all good)

 

[nexsta]

my system
p4 3ghz 1024mbram radeon 9800 pro
i play on 1280x1024 everything on high
2xaf no aa
and i only get 40-60 fps! is it normal?

 

[Hectic Glenn]

I have the exact same system as you Wildboyz...thanks for asking a question for me. I use cataylst drivers for my XT, does anyone else think this will be a bad idea to run CSS/ HL2?

i also found this post on the steam forums and saved it in case it helps...can anyone here tell me if it will help boost the 9600XT?

http://www.steampowered.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=154042

 

[CrazyHarij]

Yo, check the 1337 thread!
http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showthread.php?t=1337

I heard dis from da hood, dat's tha place for doin all yer bling bling performance issues, brotha! :afro: