Sign in to follow this  
NetAsh

AMD readies Athlon 64 price drop

Recommended Posts

DOOM III plays fine at 16x12 on my Radeon 9800 Pro w/128MB. Its got a 2800+ (or 2500+ @ 185 FSB). It stutters a little bit some times but is no ware near unplayable.

I find that hard to believe. Your are either very indiscriminate when it comes to smoothness or the details in doom3 are turned way down because there is no way in the world you can play it at 16x12 on that config. If you look at all the benchmarks on hardocp or anandtech you'll see that in order to achieve good framerates at 16x12 hi detail you need a fx53 + 6800gt / ultra. hell, i have an axp 2500+ running at 2.3GHz which makes it roughly an axp 3200+, a gig of corsair xms running @400/2-2-2 and a 9800pro 128mb and I only get decent performance at 1024x768 if i want good detail/textures. the game is playable at 1280x1024 but definitely not smooth enough to own.

I don’t benchmark it so I can’t tell you what my frames are. I run it at 16x12, at Ultra High detail to boot. I know what the hardware sites are putting out. I read Maximum PC religiously, I have a subscription to Computer Gaming World, and I try to pick up PC Gamer when ever I can. I know what you need to have what the industry likes to call, “acceptable frame rates.†I also know what I can play doom fine with a 2500+ and a radeon 9800 pro at 16x12 with ultra high settings. . I don’t bench mark it because a number doesn’t mean anything to me.

I can move through all the lvls fine (I just entered the Delta Labs), including the out door ones. It starts to get a little iffy when I take on more then three mobs that are shooting something at me or I have multiple explosions going off right in front of my face. That’s why I think a 3200+ would smooth things out a bit. But when it’s anything that doesnt shoot somethign at me I’m fine. Granted I’m barely half way through the game. Things might start getting a little hectic from here on out. My setup may not be able to cute it coming up soon, but now, I’m fine….

Its not about a number I can turn out, its about what’s playable and up till now its been playable at 16x12 with ultra high detail on a 2500+ (over clocked to 2800+ :)) Granted I cant turn anti alising on, but oh well, At 16x12, you cant hardly tell the difference anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DOOM III plays fine at 16x12 on my Radeon 9800 Pro w/128MB. Its got a 2800+ (or 2500+ @ 185 FSB). It stutters a little bit some times but is no ware near unplayable.

I find that hard to believe. Your are either very indiscriminate when it comes to smoothness or the details in doom3 are turned way down because there is no way in the world you can play it at 16x12 on that config. If you look at all the benchmarks on hardocp or anandtech you'll see that in order to achieve good framerates at 16x12 hi detail you need a fx53 + 6800gt / ultra. hell, i have an axp 2500+ running at 2.3GHz which makes it roughly an axp 3200+, a gig of corsair xms running @400/2-2-2 and a 9800pro 128mb and I only get decent performance at 1024x768 if i want good detail/textures. the game is playable at 1280x1024 but definitely not smooth enough to own.

I don’t benchmark it so I can’t tell you what my frames are. I run it at 16x12, at Ultra High detail to boot. I know what the hardware sites are putting out. I read Maximum PC religiously, I have a subscription to Computer Gaming World, and I try to pick up PC Gamer when ever I can. I know what you need to have what the industry likes to call, “acceptable frame rates.†I also know what I can play doom fine with a 2500+ and a radeon 9800 pro at 16x12 with ultra high settings. . I don’t bench mark it because a number doesn’t mean anything to me.

I can move through all the lvls fine (I just entered the Delta Labs), including the out door ones. It starts to get a little iffy when I take on more then three mobs that are shooting something at me or I have multiple explosions going off right in front of my face. That’s why I think a 3200+ would smooth things out a bit. But when it’s anything that doesnt shoot somethign at me I’m fine. Granted I’m barely half way through the game. Things might start getting a little hectic from here on out. My setup may not be able to cute it coming up soon, but now, I’m fine….

Its not about a number I can turn out, its about what’s playable and up till now its been playable at 16x12 with ultra high detail on a 2500+ (over clocked to 2800+ :)) Granted I cant turn anti alising on, but oh well, At 16x12, you cant hardly tell the difference anyway.

I can't play Doom 3 @ 1600x1200 ultra high on my 2800+ 9800pro

I can only play it at Med 1024x786, average around 60FPS. Ultra high has massive textures and ID recommends 512MB ram on the video card. There must be heaps of swapping to main mem to fit all the textures, which would take about 1/4 of your main mem bus. I really don't know how you can play the game affectively; it must look like a power point presentation :D .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

okkkkk... i dont think theres a system out at the moment that can play 16x12 with all options cranked up all the way . that quesition has been raised in pretty much every big forum and the conclusion was that you would either need sli pci-e or a video card with 512mb of ddr and a really fast rig to boot.

SCIENCE FICTION! mastershake.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, how do i do it then?

Now you have me wondering. Is there a fail safe that won’t let you run that high if you can’t? Something that would show you where on the ultra high setting but NOT actually being there? As in, “You may have it on the ultra high setting but your not getting the ultra high setting textures because you don’t have enough vid memory for it,†kinda thing?

It sure doesn’t look like a Power Point presentation that’s for sure... I'm intrigued now...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dunno the only thing i can think of is you're actually running it in 16x12 and not 1600x1200

Listen Dick, if that’s really your name, I don’t came here to brag about how uberbadass my frame rates are or how much more I score then you in 3DMark03 or what ever. I don’t spend $500 on the hottest vid card in the world so some game that was already playable is more playable then it was before at the same resolution and settings as before. I don’t spend my time debating the finer points of Doom 3 FPS, and I don’t stay up late at night wondering what kind of system it will take to turn out 80 FPS in Doom 3 instead of 60.

I’m a casual gamer. Doom 3 has been out for how long? And I’m just now entering the Delta Labs?

All I’m saying is I can play Doom 3 at 1600x1200 with ultra high settings and its not a slide show. For that split second the FPS drop below 15 when that one-ever-ten-minutes monster jumps out is fine with me.

The game is slow. Its not a run and gun, seat of your pants shooter. You walk around, something jumps out at you, you shoot it, you walk around some more, something else jumps out at you, you shoot it, you walk more, some body gets pulled up into the ceiling or into the floor, you walk around, you see a shadow, you walk around some more…. Bla bla bla… the game repeats… its not like its on-the-seat-of-your-pants action constant, things blowing up all around you, things shooting at you, your running and diving, jumping, ducking, shooting, all high speed and action packed. It’s a slow game.

Its not like your computer will blow up if you try it for a while at 1600x1200 on high detail. You don’t need a panel of self appointed Doom 3 experts to tell you it won’t work. You don’t need an on going forum debating whether it can be played at ultra detail if you don’t have 1 GB of video memory.

You dont need to post a question, “What do I need to run Doom 3 at 1600x1200?â€

You need a finger that can click on the drop down menu is what you need.

Don’t call me a liar because I said Doom 3 is playable at 1600x1200 on my computer. I made a passing comment about how more and more worthless high end CPU’s are becoming and you take it as a personal insult that I can play Doom 3 at 1600x1200 on my rig without having all the uber badass hardware all the “experts†say I need to have to play it at said resolution.

Have you tried actually playing at 1600x1200 on your computer or are you just going with what the “experts†say and what the benchmark numbers tell you?

I’m sure if you tried it you would see the increase in visually quality far out ways the split second pause you might experience when that monster jumps out at you.

I tried going down to 1200x1024 to smoothen things out a little. I didn’t think what I lost in visual quality made up for the little performance increase I got so I went back to 1600x1200.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Listen Dick, if that’s really your name

pico,

dont get bent out of shape, i did try the game in all modes and no, it's not a pissing contest of whos rig is more k-rad eleet. we actually have rather similar configs.

i actually do play some 3d shooters like cs 1.6 and cs source as well as the professionals mod for aforementioned games both online and on private lan servers so i know what i'm talking about. i never called you a liar though i did say that you probably are indiscriminate when it comes for fps which you pretty much confirmed with your post.

the bottom line is and it's not just me many others will concurr doom3 is not playable at 1600x1200 ultra high detail turned up on a config like yours or mine or most other home users'; if you are into 3d games. if not, who knows maybe it does look good enough

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Long gone the days I could spend most of the day playing games. There are some games like doom3 I play just for curiosity how game industry evolve. Once bored with the one, some googling, some cheating, some finishing and the game becomes history to me. (I played doom3 on laptop with B1.7GHz 512MB GF420Go, and the one was damn playable!)

I see no reason to buy or upgrade a pc just for games. But than selecting parts for a new computer, I consider the fact I will not want to put a penny into upgrading one in to years or more. This is why my desktop is still a AXP2000+ 768MB GF4200Ti for two years now. For the next buy I am considering A64 s939 (maybe dual core if any) or 2x Opterons, lots of ram and decent midrange graphics card...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this