my system sucks... or what? plz help

D

Dj Cutter

Guest
hey...
ihave...

geforce fx 5200 128 ram
intel celeron 2000 MHz
256 ddr sdram
windows 98

and the game is lagging (everithing on low detailes)... why??
plz help
 
Your system is very similar to mine. I have no trouble even with a lot of the stuff set on High detail, as long as I stick to low resolutions (640x480 is relatively flawless...800x600 has its choppy spots).

Only thing I can think of is Windows 98. Why on earth are you still using that? That's archaic technology and really unstable and inefficient.

I bet you good money the reason it's not running well is because you're on Windows 98. It does not manage system resources well at all. Windows 98 is older than the first Half-Life, for cryin' out loud. =)
 
Choppyness also comes from a fragmented Harddisk. Do a defrag, best would be if your HL2 was on a different HDD than your system. This helped me a lot, the stuttering is less now. Remember HL2 has a lot of atmosphere and all those small effects must be loaded so a fast Harddisk makes - to quote the G-Man - "all the difference in the world"...
 
I'd say try getting a little more ram if you have space for it or can afford it. The only difference between my system and yours is windows xp and higher ram and mine runs perfect on 1024 rea and high detail
 
Guarnere said:
I'd say try getting a little more ram if you have space for it or can afford it. The only difference between my system and yours is windows xp and higher ram and mine runs perfect on 1024 rea and high detail
Click to expand...

and perhaps run it in dx 8.1 if it's not already defaulted to that
 
Guarnere said:
I'd say try getting a little more ram if you have space for it or can afford it. The only difference between my system and yours is windows xp and higher ram and mine runs perfect on 1024 rea and high detail
Click to expand...

Wow, I have:

Athlon XP 2500+ (runs at 1.47Ghz)
GeForce FX 5200 128 MB
512 MB of RAM
Windows XP SP1

And as I said above I can run it at lower resolutions but there's no way I could run it flawlessly at 1024x768 with everything turned up. Would 500MHz really make that much of a difference even if everything else is the same?

Oh, and do I understand some of the other people here correctly in interpreting that this would actually run better on my GeForce FX with DirectX 8 installed than DirectX 9 installed?
 
I run flawlessly on 1024x768 with everything turned up and my specs are:
Radeon 9800 pro
1 gig RAM
AMD 2800
80 gig HD
 
its not the cpu, its the gpu. go out and buy something decent, like a radon 9800pro(and perhaps some ram). ive played hl2 on a 2.4+, 768mb(sdram, lol) and a9600xt, and it was absolutely smooth(except of those sound-stutters, which i reduced by extracting the gcf's), with every option on high (except reflections, here hl2 suggest "world") @1024x768.
 
It's the RAM. 256MB of RAM is a very low amount, the game is most likely swapping with the hard disk almost constantly. Even at low detail the levels, plus your operating system, would be using more than 256MB.

If you can get your hands on another 256MB stick you should be sorted.
 
People people people. This kids running a CELERON. That is probably running equivalent to a P3 800 MHz. Not only that, he has 256 megs of RAM. It's his entire system. The 5200 is a terrible card. A Geforce 4 Ti4200 would be better than that card. Kid, you first thing to do is to get some more RAM. After you get some more RAM, you'll probably need a new motherboard and CPU. After that, get yourself a 9600XT or 9800pro.
 
DarkSonic said:
People people people. This kids running a CELERON. That is probably running equivalent to a P3 800 MHz. Not only that, he has 256 megs of RAM. It's his entire system. The 5200 is a terrible card. A Geforce 4 Ti4200 would be better than that card. Kid, you first thing to do is to get some more RAM. After you get some more RAM, you'll probably need a new motherboard and CPU. After that, get yourself a 9600XT or 9800pro.
Click to expand...

The motherboard and CPU are fine, as is the video card. I don't think he's looking to run it on max settings, he just wants it to stop stuttering on low detail, which I don't think is too much to ask.

That system, with a little more RAM, is well capable of running the game, and with reasonable settings.

Some people actually can't afford, or aren't willing to spend all their money on the latest and greatest technology. I actually have a better system than you do, but I don't go around rubbing it in people's faces. Please, don't be such a condescending snob.
 
I wasn't. I used to have a system exactly like his. Celeron 2.6GHz, 5200 video card, with 512Megs (I put the extra 256 in). Do you think I care I have a better system? No. I want to help the guy out. I didn't say buy everything at once. I know what it's like to not be the richest person around. The only reason my system specs are in my signature are so I don't have to say them everytime I run into a technical issue. I'm by no means rubbing them in anyone's face. Anyway, I'm ranting. Your post really angered me, though. If anything, you were the snob, as I never tried to say "I actually have a better system than you do," so yeah.
 
You say it by putting it in your sig. And it's the "People people people. This kids...", "Kid, you first thing to do..." that really gets me, that's condescending, like it or not.

Also, "The 5200 is a terrible card"? Since when? It's actually a very capable card. Sure, it's not quite up to yours or mine, but then he doesn't want it to be. Is it enough to play this game? Most certainly.
 
It IS a terrible card. The entire FX line of cards, beside the 5900's, were terrible. A Geforce 4 Ti4200 would be better suited for the game. Want to know how I know this? I owned a 5200 for about 6 months before I upgraded to my current system. Also, I'm a snob because I put my system specs in my signature? No. I put them in there for a few reasons - 1) I already said. Everywhere I go (besides my UT clan forums), my signature is my system specs. I do this so I don't have to go "K, I've got a problem. I've got this, this, and this, and this, oh and that in my system." It's to help others help me when I need help. It also could be for comparison. Let's say that I say I got 70 frames in this game. Without asking, someone else can compare his system to mine, and make a quick judgement on how the game or whatever may perform on his rig. Also, sorry if I came off harsh, it's just that everyone is like, "Oh it's the RAM, no it's the CPU, no it's the GPU, no it's his harddrive, his OS, his this, his that." When in total it's the entire package. Eh, whatever. Sorry that I couldn't help, apparently I'm just a big assed snob who can't contribute what-so-ever to a conversation.
 
Your best bang for your buck would probably be a defrag and then slam another 256 megs of ram in there... Upgrading your OS would help too...I'm not sure how well 98 will manage 512 megs of ram.... considering 128 was alot back then.....but if your going up to xp you defintaly want that other 256 stick, XP will take 128 or so from you right out of the starting gate. I shouldn't talk though, I'm on ME ;p.
 
Firstly high all at HL2, i was a regular poster for a while but haven't been here for almost a year, (yes i lost faith in the release dates and it was a world of pain and misery.

Anyhoo its here now and i have yet to buy, but saw this post on specs, i was wondering if i will be able to run well, (Read smoothly) at 1280*1024 or 1024*768 with my specs


Athlon xp running at 2.2GHZ
GeForce 4 Ti4200 64MB
256DDR
60GB HD
win XP service pack 2

Bear in mind i will be upgrading to 1024 MB RAM soon

will game run with the 256 meg, doom 3 runs at 800*600 with options up, if a tiny bit jerky and long load times!

If i get the Gig o ram with currentGraphic card should it run ok!

cheers all and glad to be back on the board! ;)
 
DarkSonic said:
It IS a terrible card. The entire FX line of cards, beside the 5900's, were terrible. A Geforce 4 Ti4200 would be better suited for the game. Want to know how I know this? I owned a 5200 for about 6 months before I upgraded to my current system. Also, I'm a snob because I put my system specs in my signature? No. I put them in there for a few reasons - 1) I already said. Everywhere I go (besides my UT clan forums), my signature is my system specs. I do this so I don't have to go "K, I've got a problem. I've got this, this, and this, and this, oh and that in my system." It's to help others help me when I need help. It also could be for comparison. Let's say that I say I got 70 frames in this game. Without asking, someone else can compare his system to mine, and make a quick judgement on how the game or whatever may perform on his rig. Also, sorry if I came off harsh, it's just that everyone is like, "Oh it's the RAM, no it's the CPU, no it's the GPU, no it's his harddrive, his OS, his this, his that." When in total it's the entire package. Eh, whatever. Sorry that I couldn't help, apparently I'm just a big assed snob who can't contribute what-so-ever to a conversation.
Click to expand...

You make some good points, I may just rethink my pholosophy on specs-in-sig people. But really that's beside the point. I can't comment on you as a person, I don't know you. I'm not trying to be insulting. But seriously, you seem reasonable enough to be able to reread your initial post and admit it sounds snobby and condescending.

Anyway, I don't agree the the FX 5200 is that bad a card. Sure, there are tons of better ones, it's lower end, and he could do with something better. The point, however, is that it's not the cause of the problem he's having here.
 
What is the actual MINIMUM spec PC to run H-L2 in low resolution 640 x 480 and in low texture detail as the spec's on the back of the box are normally incorrect ????

as on this website it claims I could run H-L2
http://www.half-life2.org.uk/check.php

Half-Life 2 : System Test Results

Processor:
OK for minimum specification, upgrade for better

performance Graphics :
You should be able to play in a low resolution. Upgrade this as a priority.

System Memory:
You have enough RAM

Operating System:
You will be able to play on Win XP.

Architecture:
No Problems

Please don't forget that you need a DirectX 6 compatible card to be able to play Half-Life 2, a DirectX 9 card will however give much better graphics.

i'm running an 800 Athlon, geforce 2 mx 32mb, 512 mb ram
(I know its s**t)
i'm not much of a gamer though I really enjoyed H-L so I want to play H-L2. i'm upgrading when the next gen-consoles come out but thats a long way off.
 
I think you might be able to pull this off without upgrading you hardware (kinda sorta). First you have to defrag you hard drive and do anything else you can think of to clean up your system (deleting temp files, etc.) Next you have to tweak Half-life 2 itself. I would reccomend turnning everyhting you possibly can to the lowest possilbe (if you havent already). I would also reccomend running in directX 7 mode (type mat_dxlevel 70 in the console). It makes things look much uglier, but the performance boost should be considerable. Also, this site will give you info on reducing stuttering. Basically it tells you to use the -heapsize 128000 tag, (you might be able to use 192000 since you have win 98) set sound quality to medium, and type these commands into the console (or a .cfg file):
snd_mixahead 0.7
cl_forcepreload 1
sv_forcepreload 1
cl_smooth 0
That's all I can think of for now, good luck!

EDIT
hehe 69th post :naughty:
 
I run flawlessly at 1280x1024 with everything on
9800pro
p4 2.8
1gig ram
700gig hd
 
I feel sorry for the ones that are haveing problems running HL2. I have a freind that runs a GF2 400 video card & his game play is smooth. He is running a athlon xp 2.0 GHz processor, 256 mb ram,40 gig 7200 rpm hd & he has yet experienced this problem. His load times are long but this is to be expected with his system. The only tweak we did was add -heapsize 131072 to the console. His resolution is 800x600 & every other setting within HL2 is at normal. He has the retail version as well.

From what I have been reading from here & other hl2 sites from the looks of things many of you dont remember or never played hl1 when it 1st came out. If you did then most of you should remember similiar problems then. Man I sure miss the days of won, when it 1st came out, all the patches that seemed to come out 2 every month & such (not!)
 
hi, I run the following

dell laptop
p41.7ghz
geforce440go 32mb
256mb ddr :(:(
5400rpm HD

ok I get a playble frame rate on almost everything on high. and at 1400x1050 resolution.

the main problem with my system is the ram 256 is NOT enough it can sometime cause my system to crash when saving(if too much else is happening at the same time)

so my recomendation is the ram is the weak point, im personally not upgrading because in about 6months time ill be buying an entirely new system, as this laptop will be 3 years old by then lol and I can struggle on till then hehe

The FX aint bad cards, its just there are beter value for money cards out there.

Hope you get it running smoother

EDIT: I would like to point out that my system crashs when saving irelevant of the graphics options I have set(be it 640x480 everything at low or 1400x1050 everything at high)
 
wtf!! i have an athlon 2400 + 768mb of ddr 333 a 80 gig barrucuda hdd and a 9600xt fek sake and i get choppy ness unless i have it on lowest of the low gfx settings !!! why ?:(
 
right now 640 480 with low texture detail high shader detial low shadow detail and refelections on the middle one

However what hl2 suggests me to run it at is everything on full with 800 x 600 on
 
hmm im at a loss as of why yours is choppy. What windows are you running? xp? because 98 only supports 384mb I think, although this is just me randomly guessin at what could be causing your problem, because not many people still run win98, maybe try running it at directx7 or 8(dunno what your default is) as stated somewhere above this will significantly decrease graphics but should increase fps dramatically.

to origonal poster if you upgrade your ram you will have to upgrade your OS as well because of the above reason

just to clarify my earlier comment my average frame rate is 40fps outside and 55 inside this stays the same wether I have settings on high or low, only difference is loading times
 
i have xp pro running and my gfx card is meant to do dx 9 :/

I think im gunna buy an x800 xt pe at xmas tho cos yah im annoyed at the choppyness when i was in city 17 in the center heading for the horse ( jsut before citadel) i was gettin 18 fps and it is really pissing me off it is so laggeh :( and looks crappy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Sliver
BSOD on my new rig.
Replies
16
Views
2K
No Limit
No Limit
NikolaX
Free PC games Thread
2
Replies
41
Views
6K
VirusType2
VirusType2
Anthraxxx
Warhammer Online- an update...
2
Replies
65
Views
4K
Letters
Letters
C
Very high graphics not working.
Replies
21
Views
2K
Lizardizzle
Lizardizzle
Z
"HL2.exe has stopped working"
Replies
6
Views
6K
ZimFreak
Z
Back
Top