what resolution will you be playing at.

[Adam]

Someone please send me a screen shot of Half-Life 1 in both 640x480 res and the highest you can go (Both with AA and AF enabled). Then point out where the image quality gets better in red circles or something. Because I never could see what the big fuss was about. Only thing that ever changed on my screen was the size of the GUI interface and chat messages. It's not like the size of my actual monitor grows with the increase to show me more pixels of detail.

 

[Woggy]

youd be amazed how much of a difference 16x AF has. its way more noticeable than AA. i can never go back to no AF now that ive played games with AF.

No, Ive tried many games with AF(8x) and AA(4x) and Im not amazed at all. As I said before, I play games, I dont buy games to wank at the graphics.

 

[omlette]

1024 x 768 w/ 0x AA on a 9800 Pro 256mb.
Anything less (resolution) is ugly, anything more (resolution and AA) is just unnessecary. AA/FSAA/whatever the hell you call it is all hype anyway.

 

[droper]

Originally posted by Woggy
No, Ive tried many games with AF(8x) and AA(4x) and Im not amazed at all. As I said before, I play games, I dont buy games to wank at the graphics.

yes but cleaner graphics though not the most important part make for a better experience.

 

[spitcodfry]

Originally posted by Sunbeam
2048*1600 x16AF x4S AA

Just got my new FX5600, woohoo!

HahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaHahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaHahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaHahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaHahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaHahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaHahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaHahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaHahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaHahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaHahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaHahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaHahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaHahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaHahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!

EDIT: Seriously, though, you're not serious are you? That game will run like Myst.

 

[vitale]

im gonna play at 800x600 because I know my PC would slow down dramatically if any higher.

 

[manny_c44]

It depends what the game looks like at 800x600, I think I might rather have max details and AA than High Rez no AA.

But I do have a 9600Pro so I'll definitely try it with max 10x7 first! Hey 40fps, is fast enough for me.:cheers:

 

[Adam]

Im annoyed that NONE of the benchmarks for HL2 were done in 640x480 which is my favorite choice of res. (Sometimes 800x600 when the game doesnt allow anything lower.)

I bet the nvidia cards would be perfectly fine at that res with AA and AF enabled.

 

[poseyjmac]

Originally posted by Adam
Someone please send me a screen shot of Half-Life 1 in both 640x480 res and the highest you can go (Both with AA and AF enabled). Then point out where the image quality gets better in red circles or something. Because I never could see what the big fuss was about. Only thing that ever changed on my screen was the size of the GUI interface and chat messages. It's not like the size of my actual monitor grows with the increase to show me more pixels of detail.

as i mentioned in my previous post anistropic filtering wont be very noticeable in halflife, simply because the textures are small and blurry anyway. it will become dramatically clear when you play a game that has large textures like ravenshield, ut2k3, AA. and you look over a level at a distance. if you can't tell the difference between 640x480 and a res like 1280x1024, you either need to get your eyes checked, or it takes very little in life to make you content. the second actually isn't such a bad thing.

 

[SnowBall]

1152x764 or 1280x960. Probibly No AA. Doesnt really make much of a difference on those resolutions anyways. No AF (never did notice too much of a chnage with it on). I have a 9800 pro... but Im just a preformance monster. I should consider getting a soundcard so I can take a load off of my processor.

 

[A2597]

no less then 1024x768, max details, and DEFINATELY NO LESS THEN 4x AF!

I can live without AA, but AF, which has VERY little impact on proformance, is a MUST!

 

[manny_c44]

Originally posted by Adam
Im annoyed that NONE of the benchmarks for HL2 were done in 640x480 which is my favorite choice of res. (Sometimes 800x600 when the game doesnt allow anything lower.)

I bet the nvidia cards would be perfectly fine at that res with AA and AF enabled.

Why do you like low resolution?

 

[Goombatommy]

Either 1024x768 *most likely* or 1280x960. High Details.

16x AF, and probably 2x or 4x AA.

 

[Adam]

According to this survey done by valve a while back, about 70.6% of the HL community uses a res of 800x600 and below. Yet the hardware sites only benched 1024 and up. Some even wanted to do 1600x.... I mean.. come on now.. I wanted to see how well my PC would perform, and they only test for 30% group who can afford the best hardware.

The site: http://hlsdk.valve-erc.com/

 

[Fuzzy]

without a doubt 640x480 with no AA or anything. Everything set to lowest and ill see if i can pull 30fps.

EDIT: INteresting above. Hopefully that means VALVe Will try really hard to cater for people like me with older systems.

 

[RhapSidious]

1600x1200 2xAA 4xAF If I can run that @40+ fps

in not then...

1280 x 1024 4xAA 8XAF otherwise

my rig:

p4 2.8c 800mhz fsb HT
1gb corsair twinx ddr400
9800pro 256mb
120 gb 7200rpm HD

 

[Loshadka]

640*480 Yup, I have an ass-busted piece of shit computer with a built-in 32 meg ViCa. And that's how I'll be playing it... if I'll get it to work.

 

[Direwolf]

Adam: They also found that a ridiculous number of people still run in software mode though too...so we're not dealing with bright people on the whole.

 

[EC]

I'm going to go for 1024x768, max settings, no AF or AA. If that doesn't work well, down to 800x600, which i still love. Rig in Sig.

 

[Yatta]

Originally posted by spitcodfry
HahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaHahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaHahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaHahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaHahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaHahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaHahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaHahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaHahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaHahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaHahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaHahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaHahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaHahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaHahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!

EDIT: Seriously, though, you're not serious are you? That game will run like Myst.

/me laughs along with spidcodfry. :cheese:

 

[poseyjmac]

Originally posted by RhapSidious
1600x1200 2xAA 4xAF If I can run that @40+ fps

in not then...

1280 x 1024 4xAA 8XAF otherwise

my rig:

p4 2.8c 800mhz fsb HT
1gb corsair twinx ddr400
9800pro 256mb
120 gb 7200rpm HD

what kind of motherboard do you have? u could overclock to 3.2 probably even with stock cooling with that cpu

 

[Miasma]

1280x960, 2x AA, Details Maxed.

Don't you love high-end rigs? ^_^

 

[BBA]

I have a nice running system (xp3200 at 2.5GHz with vm'd OC'd 9700 Pro at 400/360) I think I'll start at 1152x964 4xFSAA/4xAF.

That seems to be the sweet spot on my sys for most games...of course I have to play Doom3 down to 2X/4X or it gets less than 30 FPS. I would hope HL2 is better since it uses a mix of shaders and lightmaps vs the D3 full shader lighting.

 

[Lucifer Crass]

Anyone with 9800 Radeon will be playing 1280-1024 with details maxed will get 60fps np, i dont know why u would run any lower than that and "hope" for a good fps. Morons dont know how privledged u are sheesh

 

[Guest]

Im getting a 9800pro when the new XT comes out (hopefully the old ones prices will drop a bit) and

I will probably run it 1280x1024 with full details and anistropic filtering x8 or x16. At these high resolutions AA isnt noticable anymore.

probably run around 38 to 45 fps on my computer 2.4 ghz amd.

 

[TAZ]

1280x768 4xAA 8xAF.... Wide Screen BABY!!

Barton 2500+(will be a 3200 by the time HL2 comes out), 1 ghz 3200 DDR400 ram, Radeon 9700 pro..

 

[Goombatommy]

Originally posted by coolio2man
Anyone with 9800 Radeon will be playing 1280-1024 with details maxed will get 60fps np, i dont know why u would run any lower than that and "hope" for a good fps. Morons dont know how privledged u are sheesh

Your kidding me right?

 

[Anthraxxx]

I'm gonna run at 10x7 2xAA 4x AF with all details turned on on my 9700 pro. I hope I don't get anything less than 24 fps. The human eye only percieves things at about 24-26 fps, or so scientists say. Anything less than 24 fps will have a noticable 'laggy' look to it. Anything that is 24 fps and above will look good.

 

[Lucifer Crass]

Originally posted by Ron-Jon
Im getting a 9800pro when the new XT comes out (hopefully the old ones prices will drop a bit) and

I will probably run it 1280x1024 with full details and anistropic filtering x8 or x16. At these high resolutions AA isnt noticable anymore.

probably run around 38 to 45 fps on my computer 2.4 ghz amd.

omfg why are u even thinking 38-45fps.........omfg u know it will run smoothly dont worry god damnit bastard
Compared to mine 2.2gighz Radeon 7500, 5200rpm 40gig HD, 512 RAm Cable internet. Ok i am medicore pc probably, 60fps with medium quailty and no ff or aa so at least i have something to cry about, unlike those Radeon 9800xt bitches, o man i hope i can run with u3b0r l337 comp. Comon how stupid are u

 

[TheSmJ]

1024x768 on my GF4 Ti4600.

I'll play around with the settings of AA and AF, but I've never really liked the effects of AA all that much.

 

[BBA]

Originally posted by Adam
Someone please send me a screen shot of Half-Life 1 in both 640x480 res and the highest you can go (Both with AA and AF enabled). Then point out where the image quality gets better in red circles or something. Because I never could see what the big fuss was about. Only thing that ever changed on my screen was the size of the GUI interface and chat messages. It's not like the size of my actual monitor grows with the increase to show me more pixels of detail.

WHy? HL1 has graphics that dont scale.

Now, take Doom3 or BF1942/Desert Combat...if I take screens at 640x480 no aa/af, and then one at 1600x1200 4X/16X you will see a freaking magical difference analogous to watching the superbowl on a black and white tv as opposed to a widescreen HDTV. The difference is indescribable.

Adam...if you want screenshots, I'll send them.

 

[Garp]

Originally posted by Anthraxxx
The human eye only percieves things at about 24-26 fps, or so scientists say..

Most gamers aren't human though. Tell THAT to the scientists!

 

[Mjolnir]

800x600..I run everything at that res.(only have 15' monitor)
As for vid options, not sure have to play around and see what works...
I am just hoping for half decent frame rates(FX owner...no laughing!!!)

 

[Anthraxxx]

Originally posted by Garp
Most gamers aren't human though. Tell THAT to the scientists!

LOL, that's right. I forgot. Damn these mind altering drugs and techno music....

 

[phoenix]

for some reason i decided to fulfill adam's request

this is 1280 X 960 4xAA 8xAF versus 640 X 480 noAA noAF

 

[droper]

i think 25 - 30 is good as long as things or yourself don't move around too quickly.

 

[CyanEyed]

1024*768 2x aa 4xAF, hoping to get around 60fps with radeon 9800 pro 128 ever so slightly OCed.

 

[teobg]

1280 x 768

I've got a widescreen monitor

:cheers:

 

[Yatta]

Originally posted by teobg
1280 x 768

I've got a widescreen monitor

:cheers:

i love widescreen mons. lucky.

 

[TAZ]

Originally posted by droper
i think 25 - 30 is good as long as things or yourself don't move around too quickly.

Hmm.. HalfLife 2, drivable vehicles, firefights with 50 story Stryders and Big mofu Antlions... nah, no quick moving in this game