Question - Graphic Quality Of Ns 3.0?
Defiance
Join Date: 2003-12-01 Member: 23847Members
Join Date: 2003-12-01 Member: 23847Members
I have been playing NS since it came out, and it is my favorite MOD for HL, but I fear that I might have to stop playing it becuase the graphics are becoming to advanced for my outdated computer.
600MZ
256 PC-100 SDRAM
RADEON 9000 64MB DDR
2X AGP
Thats my gaming related stuff anyway, I'm just wondering if anyone can give me some insite as to how the NS 3.0 graphics are going to be in Steam, becuase I'm not sure if I can run it, I get low FPS in the current version as it is.
Thanks for your time.
600MZ
256 PC-100 SDRAM
RADEON 9000 64MB DDR
2X AGP
Thats my gaming related stuff anyway, I'm just wondering if anyone can give me some insite as to how the NS 3.0 graphics are going to be in Steam, becuase I'm not sure if I can run it, I get low FPS in the current version as it is.
Thanks for your time.
Comments
Old HL had about 20
I've got a P4 2.0 Ghz with 512 MB RAM and a GeForce 3 ti200. But it's not the setup that makes me think it's ****. It's the fact that I get an extremely unstable fps between 30 and 50. As a reference I can say that in Quake 3 I get an average of about 150 <!--emo&::nerdy::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/nerd.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='nerd.gif'><!--endemo--> .
And, Defiance, I can only tell you that steam HL runs perfectly on my PII 350 Mhz.(no 3D card) At a kinda smooth 30 fps that is. NS should run similar. <!--emo&::nerdy::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/nerd.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='nerd.gif'><!--endemo-->
Even with V-Synch ON that's low for those specs....
But yeah, the graphics will be about the same.
2.0ghz
256ram
geforce 4 mx440
Yes i know the card sucks, but it gets 60fps in ns/hl without steam. With steam I get 30 and lower. Steam is crap.
I've got a P4 2.0 Ghz with 512 MB RAM and a GeForce 3 ti200. But it's not the setup that makes me think it's ****. It's the fact that I get an extremely unstable fps between 30 and 50. As a reference I can say that in Quake 3 I get an average of about 150.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
doesn't sound too healthy, i'm running similar specs and get 70fps (40 in heat of battle) - and given that i'm running two displays from my gfx <!--emo&::nerdy::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/nerd.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='nerd.gif'><!--endemo--> yours should perform better.
As for the original q, the engine is the same as before so i don't see why it should make a difference, but i'm not sure.
If someone comes with a solution I'll be very thankful.
Edit: oh, maybe I shouldn't hijack the thread but I am too lazy to start a new one. If you don't want to follow my bad manner, feel free to pm me.
I have:
AMD xp 2500+ barton oc'd to xp 3200+ (2.2 ghz)
1024 pc 3200 ddr (dual mode on)
geforce 2 ti
and all i get is 99fps constant w/ vertsync on and overridden to 100fps at the control panel. But when theres umbra sprayed in turrets / oc's it drops to like 60 fps because of all that junk being proccessed.
But w/ that system you have it should handle fine.. other wise you gotta tweak your gfx settings.
i get as low as 20 fps in ns when looking at buildings and shooting, and its kinda weird because i should be getting 99 fps like i use to before...
I can run other games fine with no problem.... call of duty runs smooth and in high fps, need for speed underground runs good too.
In CS, sometimes i get 40 fps when i know i should be getting 99 fps.
In Ricochet, i dunno why but i get 25 fps when a bunch of players are on screen! , this sucks and i think either my computer is f*** up or steam is being stupid
and defiance, ur video card is fine, u just need a faster cpu
I've noticed that if I turn all entities off (r_drawentities 0) it goes alot higher so maybe it's something with my memory.
I've got a P4 2.0 Ghz with 512 MB RAM and a GeForce 3 ti200. But it's not the setup that makes me think it's ****. It's the fact that I get an extremely unstable fps between 30 and 50. As a reference I can say that in Quake 3 I get an average of about 150 <!--emo&::nerdy::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/nerd.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='nerd.gif'><!--endemo--> . <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
On my old Celeron 900MHz and GF3Ti200 (overclocked to max) system my Q3 was smooth with max AA max AF max detail max resolution. Never went under 60.
o_X
format c: won't help... <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif'><!--endemo-->
BTW, put these settings in your config.cfg for ++ fps:
// OpenGL Settings
gl_texturemode gl_nearest_mipmap_nearest
gl_picmip 0
gl_playermip 0
gl_max_size 64
gl_ztrick 0
gl_keeptjunctions 0
gl_dither 0
gl_lightholes 0
gl_cull 0
Thanks! I couldn't remember what I had to put in the console to get pretty mipmapping. I used to do this all the time with GLquake <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->
btw, wouldn't gl_nearest be even faster? (without the _mipmap_nearest part)
1024 MB ECC REGISTERED RAM
Ti2400 128 MB @ 555 Mhz
~30 FPS
Somebody care to help me, vSync is off but I had 60 FPS when I had only 1 monitor.
My laptop gets the same and it's 3 years old :|
<img src='http://home.comcast.net/~powahslave/ns_ayumi0001.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image'>
That's with it set at gl_texturemode GL_NEAREST_MIPMAP_NEAREST. You can forget about reading text, kills, and the popupmenu. The crosshair is also affected greatly. Really sucks just because it gives me an extra 10~15 FPS. =/
I have met gobs of people at school (from running a CS server) and I can't even tell you how many times I would tune a rig for someone and they had good hardware for HL but were in software mode.
Aea, I don't know what mobo you have exactly but it most likely has a VIA chipset. Try going to <a href='http://www.viaareana.com' target='_blank'>http://www.viaareana.com</a> and getting the latest 4in1's. Obviously only if you have a VIA chipset.
gl_texturemode changes how "far" you can see before textures are blurred for better performance. Walk down a hallway with the default texturemode and you'll notice on the wall at a certain distance the texture goes from blurred to crisp. Now add gl_texturemode "GL_LINEAR_MIPMAP_LINEAR" to your autoexec (might work in config but it will not work in console). This is the best rendering mode, you will no longer have that "line of blurriness".
If you have an Nvidia card and want better fps and are willing to sacrafice some graphical quality I suggest manually disabling full scene anti-aliasing and anisotropic filtering in the display settings. Also you can change from a the image quality in the OpenGL settigns to "performance" or "high performance". Dropping down to 16bit color will help on some older cards as well.
I strongly recommend getting some sort of refresh rate fix weather you use vsync on or not. This is because the deault refresh rate of 60 is not good for your eyes.
<a href='http://www.readyroom.org' target='_blank'>http://www.readyroom.org</a> has a good guide to tuning your OS for further fps madness, check it out.
Finally, research your rig. Find out what settings make it cry and which one make it happy. Update those drivers, defrag, clean the registry (back it up first!). You'd be surpised how much something like installing the VIA 4in1's can do for your system.
On my old rig if I didn't install the 4in1's I could only rip audio in secure mode at 4x, as opposed to 16x with them installed. FPS in HL would NOT go over 48 without them, 99 solid in CS with them. Fluxes a bit in NS, but that's because the quality of map design in NS outclasses CS by about a billion percent.
Tune your rig. People might laugh at you for being a dork, but hey, we're not the idiots buying 350 dollar gfx cards when we don't need to.
2.0ghz
256ram
geforce 4 mx440
Yes i know the card sucks, but it gets 60fps in ns/hl without steam. With steam I get 30 and lower. Steam is crap. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
You have to realize that NS 2.0x was not designed for steam, and that 3.0 was. 3.0 has no noticable effect on my fps.
As well, I'm pretty sure it may be a HALF-LIFE problem (Steam is just an authing system, but it was released in conjunction with the HL 1.1.2.0 patch) as it matters little if I'm in 640x480x16 with nothing turned on, or 1600x1200x32, 16xAniso, 6xFSAA... until buildings start going up, it's stuck at 100fps. Soon as the first turret farm is built, fps drops to around 40-60. And no, TruForm is turned off, so it's not that.
800 mhz bus speed
512 mb pc-2700 ddr ram
radeon 9800 pro 128 mb agp 8X
i average about 100.0 fps... sometimes i drop to a miserable 99.9.. god it sucks so hard... na im jk, ill get 100 usually, if there too much going on, i can drop to about 70..
but for you not-so-fortunate people out there, who get like 20 fps... i once to felt your pain, about 2 months ago, yes it sucks.. and once you finally get your comp that is capable of reaching 100, youll never want to go back... but until you do, just own the way you are now <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->