Is your comp ready for HL2?

Atm i have a:

Intel Pentoum 4 2.0Ghz
512MB SDR
Sapphire Ati Radeon 9700 128Mb DDR
80GB Maxtor
19" IBM G97 Monitor

Getting:

Antec LANBOY-EC Aluminium 350W True Power ATX (AMD&P4 OK)
Abit NF7-S rev 2.0 !!! nForce2 5PCI 1AGP8x 3DDR-DIMM ATA133 LAN Firewire USB 2.0 6CH-Audio SocketA ATX
AMD Athlon XP2500+ Barton 1833MHz/1.83GHz 128/512Kb 333MHz 0.13 bulk SocketA
Thermaltake A1607 Volcano 11 Xaser Edition SocketA (max XP3400)
Standard 512Mb DDR PC2700/DDR333 184pin 333MHz cas2.5 (AMD OK)
Maxtor DiamondMax Plus9 6Y120P0 120Gb 7200rpm Special Edition (OBS! 8Mb cache!) UDMA133 Fluid IDE

Should probably start HL2 :p
 
Originally posted by Curator
For instance, Unreal 2 can run at 50 fps with all the graphical options turned up on a Geforce 2 MX400.
Click to expand...



Yeah you keep telling that to yourself. Unreal 2 is the most demanding FPS you can get, 'running' it on a GF2MX is a joke. Actually every Unreal Warfare powered game I tested (Unreal 2, UT2K3, Raven Shield...) *requires* a monster of a PC to play smoothly with the settings turned up.

I'm guessing Half-Life 2's case will be better, since the engine is not such a clunky POS (at least I hope so, hehe). I agree with you that no one currently needs a Radeon 9800 to play games smoothly - it's all in the tweaking, but if you think the newest games will run on an MX series card you're just kidding yourself.
 
Mine will, but im savin up for a new mobo/cpu/vid card. Im gonna buy in september though.
 
Originally posted by Kleptomaniac
Yeah you keep telling that to yourself. Unreal 2 is the most demanding FPS you can get, 'running' it on a GF2MX is a joke. Actually every Unreal Warfare powered game I tested (Unreal 2, UT2K3, Raven Shield...) *requires* a monster of a PC to play smoothly with the settings turned up.

I'm guessing Half-Life 2's case will be better, since the engine is not such a clunky POS (at least I hope so, hehe). I agree with you that no one currently needs a Radeon 9800 to play games smoothly - it's all in the tweaking, but if you think the newest games will run on an MX series card you're just kidding yourself.
Click to expand...

lol, would you care to make a wager on that?

Here is a shot of me playing it on an MX400 at fairly high detail and little slowdown.
unreal2shot.jpg


mx400.jpg
 
Consider yourself lucky then, heh. Every PC that I tested had serious problems running Unreal 2 above 15 FPS, other than those equipped with Ti 4600 and Radeon 9500 and above.
 
that's probably because you pumped the resolution and details
 
also, peoples perceptions of FPS is different.
If you've been playing lots of smooth games on a smooth computer then you play a not so smooth game, it will seem terrible.

But if another person sees that FPS after playing low FPS games they will think it's great FPS.

And average FPS is just whatever you usually play on.
 
Originally posted by Kleptomaniac
Consider yourself lucky then, heh. Every PC that I tested had serious problems running Unreal 2 above 15 FPS, other than those equipped with Ti 4600 and Radeon 9500 and above.
Click to expand...

How can I be lucky if it works on a low end card? I think something was wrong with your system/s.
 
OK, maybe Wesisapie is right. I consider 15-20 FPS unplayable. Maybe our perceptions of 'running' are totally different.
 
Originally posted by Curator
lol, would you care to make a wager on that?

Here is a shot of me playing it on an MX400 at fairly high detail and little slowdown.
unreal2shot.jpg


mx400.jpg
Click to expand...

How could we be sure that u run at a decent framerate there.. It's just a pic showing the game...

Anybody could max the details and take a screenshot.
 
Originally posted by Wesisapie
also, peoples perceptions of FPS is different.
If you've been playing lots of smooth games on a smooth computer then you play a not so smooth game, it will seem terrible.

But if another person sees that FPS after playing low FPS games they will think it's great FPS.

And average FPS is just whatever you usually play on.
Click to expand...

I know what you mean. I allways hear people at IGN, PC Gamer and others say that some games are very "twitchy" and slow on high end systems, but I play them on my GF4 Ti 4600 Athlon 800 mhz and the framerate is compleatly aceptable at around 30 fps. I guess they see acceptable as a constand 100+ fps. Most people who dont pump thousands of dollars into their systems would probably not complain about playing a game that ranges from 15-30 FPS (I don't atleast) and only think of upgrading when it drops to below a constant 5.

Like with Unreal 2 someone at Pc Gamer was reviewing it with a monster system and said that he'll "have to wait 2 years until he gets a game fast enough to play it" when it was goin at about 60 fps while my said system playes it just fine at 30fps.
 
XP2000, GeForce3, 256PC2100

But guess what, new mobo, ram, cpu, vid in September!
 
How bout this?

XP2200+, Radeon 9200, 512 pc 2700, ASUS A7V8X-X

GOOD ENUF?
 
Originally posted by jhero
How bout this?

XP2200+, Radeon 9200, 512 pc 2700, ASUS A7V8X-X

GOOD ENUF?
Click to expand...
should be fine, through i did see a 9500 for $119. on pricewatch.
May want to do alittle searching when ur ready to upgrade. By sept. Im sure theres going tobe r9700's alot cheaper by then.

edit:
Heres my specs:
AMD 1700@ 2. JIUHB 0302 (166/12)air
Epox 8rda+ 1.1
2/256 Corsair xms3500 (11-2-2-2)
ATI 9700pro
Antec 380ps
Sony 24/12/48
LIan case
Sony e540/b 21.
 
Not for me, but for my dad. He wants to order from this place and not online. www.shoprbc.ca (local store near us) 9500 is expensive...
 
My specs:

Athlon T-Bird 1.33GHz
512MB PC133 RAM
GeForce Ti4200 64MB
SoundBlaster Audigy

Based on what I've read, that's around Valve's mid-range target system, so the game should play fine. I'm not too worried about it.
 
I bet nobody here can tell the difference between 60 FPS and 300 FPS.

I think 30 is just fine.
 
Well 30 seems a little weak for me while 60 is perfect. Ankalar, BTW your avatar is insane.
 
yea its impossible to see the differance between 60+ unless there are certain sprites on the screen a lot, like rain.

people have said its possible to see 1 frame outta 200 well im not saying some people cant but thats not the same as video games. that airforce test is totaly differeant. it tells if you can see a single picture going at blazing speeds. (like the blazing speeds that fighter pilots fly at) in a game though, its differant, its a constant picture on your screen something is always there. i garuntee no body could tell the differance between 60 (with vsync) and fps over 100.
 
For HL2 I'm going to wait til its out to buy the machine(parts get cheaper in time) Than buy the highest power machine I can, maybe a 64-bit machine if its supported upon release. Than i'm going to set up a Dolby THX surround sound system in my computer area and hook it to the computer.
Than buy the highest resolution projector I can find with out costing more than 2000 dollars for it, hook it up to the video card. Aim the projector at the biggest/empty wall in the room.
Put down a nice couch infront of that wall, and play half life 2 with a wireless mouse/keyboard on the couch.

Maybe I could make it a big couch and charge people to sit in and feel the expeirence of the ultimate gaming room........

Of course before I even load up HL2 on this setup I just gotta play some NES roms on it first =]
 
Imo 30 fps is crappy, but it does depend on the game how much u feel the slowdown, in HL u can relly feel when the fps is lower than 60, but in some games u don't. But imo 30fps is way to low to relly enjoy a game. Should be atleast 40fps all of the time.
 
yes, in hl1 terms i agree radeon.

oh, weirdo, you know you shouldnt do anything with big projecter screens except watch movies, because when u play a game on a projecter screen it ruins it. stationary things like the HUD will burn right threw it after a couple of hours. It because things like a HUD and a crosshair never move. they are always in the same spot, so they start to burn the screen and do non-fixable damage.
 
Mine should be ok. It was a bargain and it's got everything.
Pentium 4 2.6Ghz
256 MB RAM
GeForce4 Ti 4200 128MB with AGP8x (dunno if the AGP8X is important, what is it?)
5.1 Surround Sound Card

Was reluctant to buy it at first because it was a commercially ready built machine by Medion and I'd never heard of them before and for what it's got it's very cheap.
£700 for all the 5.1 speakers, everything i mentioned so far, shit loads of free software, 120GB HDD, it's got all these removable media drives on the front (for Sony Memory Sticks [for mp3 players etc], Smart Media, SD/MMC etc), Windows XP Home, CDRW and DVD ROM. Been running like a dream.
 
It is now. I just recently purchased the mobo/cpu/ram in my sig. Before I only had a 1.4ghz P4 with the 400mhz FSB, and 512 rambus. I'm gonna hang on to my TI4400 for a while, it should do fine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

colson
Is this a possible upgrade for my comp?
Replies
9
Views
812
SFPL1
S
colson
Is the GeForce FX 6800 GT AGP card any good?
Replies
3
Views
568
JNightshade
JNightshade
Ti133700N
Need advices for new comp
Replies
24
Views
1K
sinkoman
sinkoman
I
  • Poll
Is your PC ready for Half life 2?
9 10 11
Replies
410
Views
25K
Daegon
Daegon
iamaelephant
Worth upgrading motherboard?
Replies
5
Views
677
iamaelephant
iamaelephant
Back
Top