<!--QuoteBegin-Soylent green+Jul 21 2004, 11:27 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Soylent green @ Jul 21 2004, 11:27 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Aside from that, down here in the dungeon that is my room we've got the 'high quality' ATI Radeon 9200 128mb going on...which does pass the Radeon 8500 or higher part - <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Except that it doesn't. An 8500 is quite alot better(it was ATi's high end card at one time). The 9200 uses the rv280 core which is very similar to the rv250 core which is a cut back entry level version of the r200 core used by the 8500. It performs somewhere around the fx5200 in most tests. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Well, just shoot down all my hype by debunking my 9200 then. Now I have to shoot my computer because it has a 9200 which is worse than an 8500 because people at ATi don't know that stuff is supposed to be better when you use a bigger number.
...pffft.
[would shoot computer, but can't afford a new one]
Gecko it caused a pretty big stirr at the time it was released, but it was worse when nvidia released the geforce 4 mx, that was basically a repackaged geforce 2, no shaders.
Allways take a quick look at reviews if you are unsure, if it has any little preffix or suffix that you don't know about, it's not allways a good thing(MX, SE, XT(e.g. geforce 6800XT, a low budget version. Radeon 9800XT a high end version) etc.).
There will likely be a demo for doom 3, play it and see if it runs well enough, I know I will.
<!--QuoteBegin-Soylent green+Jul 21 2004, 11:53 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Soylent green @ Jul 21 2004, 11:53 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Doomy that's higher minimum specs than I expected, when talking minimum specs we're talking barely playable, choppy, 640x480, everything that can be turned off turned off here. This game is barely playable on a medium/low end computer? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> While the 384MB RAM Requirement is probably the eyebrow raising thing there, the fact is a 1.5Ghz system is low end. Low end. Not mid, low. Same with the Geforce 3. Its an old card.
Yes a lot of people have to upgrade, but people also had to upgrade their 386's to Pentium's if they wanted to play Quake. Same situation here.
Besides, if nothing pushed system requirements then we would all still be using 286's because nobody would have ever made anything that pushed it further...
Any game I have ever played on a computer just a slight bit faster than minimum specs have been horrible slow, minimum specs are usually for the truly desperate.
What's the "recommended specs", I find that to usually be a much better indication of minimum specs.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->While the 384MB RAM Requirement is probably the eyebrow raising thing there, the fact is a 1.5Ghz system is low end. Low end. Not mid, low. Same with the Geforce 3. Its an old card.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's an old card but it's still better AFAIK than the most common low end cards(fx5200, radeon 9100/9200 series).
And it depends alot on how we are supposed to be taking the 1.5 GHz minimum CPU, an atlhon-64 3000+(1.8 GHz) barely passes over their suggested minimum, and it's no slouch, on the other hand a p4 1.6 GHz is very much low end.
<!--QuoteBegin-coil+Jul 21 2004, 07:11 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (coil @ Jul 21 2004, 07:11 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Yeah... I'm thinking I'll probably get this on Xbox. Pity. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Me too, but co-op's what i'm interested in tbh. Besides when (If) any decent mods (Hopefully co-op) come put for the PC version it'll be much cheaper and so will the hardware. Win win! (That plus I've got a feeling that the PC version would look worse than the Xbox version on my laptop anyway)
Edit: <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->And it depends alot on how we are supposed to be taking the 1.5 GHz minimum CPU, <b>an atlhon-64 3000+(1.8 GHz) barely passes over their suggested minimum</b>, and it's no slouch, on the other hand a p4 1.6 GHz is very much low end. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What??
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->- A 1.5-gigahertz Intel Pentium 4 chip or <b>AMD Athlon 1500.</b><!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-DOOManiac+Jul 22 2004, 01:02 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (DOOManiac @ Jul 22 2004, 01:02 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Yeah. I was deadset on the x800 XT, but now I gotta think about it.
Sure the XT is still better for every other game, and even I know there are other games out there besides DOOM3, but... $100 is $100... <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Are you going to be playing it at the obscene 1600x1200? At 1024x768 the field is almost level, and ATI's card will wipe numerous floors for games like Half-Life 2.
As expected with this game, the 6800gt makes the x800XT-PE its ****. Ow. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> That would be because NVidia specifically engineered its drivers to perform well in Doom3. To quote a post in one of the hundreds of ATi vs NVidia threads: <!--QuoteBegin-Talesin+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Talesin)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The only reason that the 6800 series is shown to be faster at Doom3 in the closed iD testing, is that the GF6 has a DEDICATED (read: highly optimized/tweaked) codepath with reduced colour calculations, using their (nVidia's) proprietary hardware-equivalent coding language... and ATi uses the default OpenGL path.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And with those specs, various reviews show you can expect to be able to count your framerate on one hand.
Fortunately, I'm getting a X800 XT P.E. in a system with better overall parts than they were using. So I should just about get a peachy 60FPS in Doom 3 at 1024x768 with 4xAA, which looks about the same as 1600x1200 unenhanced to me. nVidia isn't stealing my cash on a gimmick. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
EpidemicDark Force GorgeJoin Date: 2003-06-29Member: 17781Members
edited July 2004
Athlon xp 3200+ 512 DDR ram (cant remember exact stats) 5 gigs of HD radeon 9600 pro <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Will I be able to run 2024*15xx ? <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Comments
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Except that it doesn't. An 8500 is quite alot better(it was ATi's high end card at one time). The 9200 uses the rv280 core which is very similar to the rv250 core which is a cut back entry level version of the r200 core used by the 8500. It performs somewhere around the fx5200 in most tests. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, just shoot down all my hype by debunking my 9200 then. Now I have to shoot my computer because it has a 9200 which is worse than an 8500 because people at ATi don't know that stuff is supposed to be better when you use a bigger number.
...pffft.
[would shoot computer, but can't afford a new one]
-AMD Athlon XP 2200+ (1.79 GHz)
-512 mb ram
-ASUS 9800XT
-Plenty of HD space
I hope I will be able to play with atleast OK settings...
Allways take a quick look at reviews if you are unsure, if it has any little preffix or suffix that you don't know about, it's not allways a good thing(MX, SE, XT(e.g. geforce 6800XT, a low budget version. Radeon 9800XT a high end version) etc.).
There will likely be a demo for doom 3, play it and see if it runs well enough, I know I will.
While the 384MB RAM Requirement is probably the eyebrow raising thing there, the fact is a 1.5Ghz system is low end. Low end. Not mid, low. Same with the Geforce 3. Its an old card.
Yes a lot of people have to upgrade, but people also had to upgrade their 386's to Pentium's if they wanted to play Quake. Same situation here.
Besides, if nothing pushed system requirements then we would all still be using 286's because nobody would have ever made anything that pushed it further...
What's the "recommended specs", I find that to usually be a much better indication of minimum specs.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->While the 384MB RAM Requirement is probably the eyebrow raising thing there, the fact is a 1.5Ghz system is low end. Low end. Not mid, low. Same with the Geforce 3. Its an old card.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's an old card but it's still better AFAIK than the most common low end cards(fx5200, radeon 9100/9200 series).
And it depends alot on how we are supposed to be taking the 1.5 GHz minimum CPU, an atlhon-64 3000+(1.8 GHz) barely passes over their suggested minimum, and it's no slouch, on the other hand a p4 1.6 GHz is very much low end.
Me too, but co-op's what i'm interested in tbh. Besides when (If) any decent mods (Hopefully co-op) come put for the PC version it'll be much cheaper and so will the hardware. Win win! (That plus I've got a feeling that the PC version would look worse than the Xbox version on my laptop anyway)
Edit: <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->And it depends alot on how we are supposed to be taking the 1.5 GHz minimum CPU, <b>an atlhon-64 3000+(1.8 GHz) barely passes over their suggested minimum</b>, and it's no slouch, on the other hand a p4 1.6 GHz is very much low end. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What??
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->- A 1.5-gigahertz Intel Pentium 4 chip or <b>AMD Athlon 1500.</b><!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
As expected with this game, the 6800gt makes the x800XT-PE its ****. Ow.
Sure the XT is still better for every other game, and even I know there are other games out there besides DOOM3, but... $100 is $100...
Sure the XT is still better for every other game, and even I know there are other games out there besides DOOM3, but... $100 is $100... <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Are you going to be playing it at the obscene 1600x1200? At 1024x768 the field is almost level, and ATI's card will wipe numerous floors for games like Half-Life 2.
As expected with this game, the 6800gt makes the x800XT-PE its ****. Ow. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That would be because NVidia specifically engineered its drivers to perform well in Doom3. To quote a post in one of the hundreds of ATi vs NVidia threads:
<!--QuoteBegin-Talesin+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Talesin)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The only reason that the 6800 series is shown to be faster at Doom3 in the closed iD testing, is that the GF6 has a DEDICATED (read: highly optimized/tweaked) codepath with reduced colour calculations, using their (nVidia's) proprietary hardware-equivalent coding language... and ATi uses the default OpenGL path.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And with those specs, various reviews show you can expect to be able to count your framerate on one hand.
512 DDR ram (cant remember exact stats)
5 gigs of HD
radeon 9600 pro <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Will I be able to run 2024*15xx ? <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->