Doom3 .. VERY LOW END Benchmarks GF4 PNY 4200 64mb 1.33Ghz..

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Game defaulted to 640x480 Low Quality with this CPU/GPU setup.
AF and AA and HSYNC are OFF. Typical Low Quality settings.

No changes from default to setup besides 'System' Resolution and
'Quality' Setup

From 'Eric's post' :


1. open console (cntr/alt/tilde key) -- instead of control alt delete --
hold
down control -- alt -- and tilde (~) key.
2. type timedemo demo1 (let it run -- takes about a minute -- then your
fps
will show up)

FPS are from *SECOND* Run
Lots of caching on *FIRST* Run


--------------------------------------------------------------------------

SECOND RUN:

640x480 Low Quality 25.0 FPS
640x480 Medium Quality 24.2 FPS
640x480 High Quality 20.1 FPS

800x600 Low Quality 24.9 FPS
800x600 Medium Quality 24.0 FPS
800x600 High Quality 19.8 FPS

1024x768 Low Quality 20.5 FPS
1024x768 Medium Quality 15.1 FPS
1024x768 High Quality 9.7 FPS

PNY GF4 4200 300Mhz GPU / 600Mhz Memory
Overclocked Tualatin Celeron 1.33Ghz 133Mhz FSB
512Mb Crucial PC133 CAS2
Audigy 1
61.77 Drivers

Not much visual difference between Low Quality and Medium Quality.
VERY Noticeable difference going from Medium Quality to High Quality.


I'll probably start playing at 800x600 High Quality. ~ 20FPS at 800x600
High Quality.
Hey, I played Quake 1 about this speed ;-)


)-()-(
15 answers Last reply
More about doom3 benchmarks 4200 64mb 33ghz
  1. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

    >640x480 Low Quality 25.0 FPS
    >640x480 Medium Quality 24.2 FPS
    >640x480 High Quality 20.1 FPS
    >
    >800x600 Low Quality 24.9 FPS
    >800x600 Medium Quality 24.0 FPS
    >800x600 High Quality 19.8 FPS
    >
    >1024x768 Low Quality 20.5 FPS
    >1024x768 Medium Quality 15.1 FPS
    >1024x768 High Quality 9.7 FPS
    >
    >PNY GF4 4200 300Mhz GPU / 600Mhz Memory
    >Overclocked Tualatin Celeron 1.33Ghz 133Mhz FSB
    >512Mb Crucial PC133 CAS2
    >Audigy 1
    >61.77 Drivers
    >
    >Not much visual difference between Low Quality and Medium Quality.
    >VERY Noticeable difference going from Medium Quality to High Quality.
    >
    >
    >I'll probably start playing at 800x600 High Quality. ~ 20FPS at 800x600
    >High Quality.
    >Hey, I played Quake 1 about this speed ;-)
    >
    >
    >)-()-(
    >
    >
    What CPU are you using?
  2. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

    PRIVATE1964 wrote:

    >
    > What CPU are you using?

    Overclocked Tualatin Celeron 1.33Ghz 133Mhz FSB
    Very Low End

    Actually had a couple numbers swapped:

    SECOND RUN:

    640x480 Low Quality 25.0 FPS
    640x480 Medium Quality 24.2 FPS
    640x480 High Quality 20.1 FPS

    800x600 Low Quality 24.9 FPS
    800x600 Medium Quality 24.0 FPS
    800x600 High Quality '15.1 FPS'

    1024x768 Low Quality 20.5 FPS
    1024x768 Medium Quality '19.8 FPS'
    1024x768 High Quality 9.7 FPS

    PNY GF4 4200 300Mhz GPU / 600Mhz Memory
    Overclocked Tualatin Celeron 1.33Ghz 133Mhz FSB
    512Mb Crucial PC133 CAS2
    Audigy 1
    61.77 Drivers

    Not much visual difference between Low Quality and Medium Quality.
    VERY Noticeable difference going from Medium Quality to High Quality.


    I'll probably start playing at 800x600 Medium Quality ~ 20FPS at 800x600
  3. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

    >Overclocked Tualatin Celeron 1.33Ghz 133Mhz FSB
    >Very Low End
    >

    That's not bad at all for that CPU then.

    I was asking because I'm still using a 4200 with a Barton 2500+ Athlon.

    Does the demo give you the framerate that you would get playing the actual game
    on most levels?
  4. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

    PRIVATE1964 wrote:

    > >Overclocked Tualatin Celeron 1.33Ghz 133Mhz FSB
    > >Very Low End
    > >
    >
    > That's not bad at all for that CPU then.
    >
    > I was asking because I'm still using a 4200 with a Barton 2500+ Athlon.
    >
    > Does the demo give you the framerate that you would get playing the actual game
    > on most levels?

    Don't know yet. I still need to figure out how to display FPS during a game.
  5. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

    Try going here for information.

    http://ucguides.savagehelp.com/Doom3/FPSVisuals.htm
  6. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

    PRIVATE1964 wrote:

    > Try going here for information.
    >
    > http://ucguides.savagehelp.com/Doom3/FPSVisuals.htm

    Thanks. That's a great site. I think I'll try some tweaking to get up
    my frame rate before I play the game
  7. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

    Let me know how the framerate is actually playing, and at what resolution and
    detail setting....Thanks
  8. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

    PRIVATE1964 wrote:

    > Let me know how the framerate is actually playing, and at what resolution and
    > detail setting....Thanks

    I tried the autoexec.cfg file for the 64mb cards

    http://ucguides.savagehelp.com/Doom3/FPSVisuals.htm

    Framerates MUCH improved on the higher res:

    Default:

    6x4 Low 25.0
    6x4 Med 24.9
    6x4 High 20.5

    8x6 Low 24.2
    8x6 Med 24.0
    8x6 High 15.1

    10x7 Low 20.5
    10x7 Med 19.8
    10x7 High 9.7

    With the Autoexec.cfg:
    6x4 Low 25.2
    6x4 Med 25.2
    6x4 High 25.1

    8x6 Low 24.6
    8x6 Med 24.6
    8x6 High 24.5

    10x7 Low 21.4
    10x7 Med 21.4
    10x7 High 21.4

    Just walking around the First Level at various resolutions and Quality Levels,
    I find that the framerates vary all over the place.. from 9 FPS to over 50 FPS.
    The good news with the autoexec.cfg file is because I'm mostly all CPU limited,
    the 'framerate' feel is about the same for 640x480 Low Quality as
    1024x768 High Quality. It feels laggy but playable in any setting above 'with'
    the autoexec.cfg file. I think the Quality difference between 6x4 Low Quality
    and 10x7 High Quality is enough that I will try to play at 1024x768 High Quality,

    taking a ' 4 FPS ' hit is worth it from how it feels so far. I'm CPU limited
    anyway.
    But again, the FPS in play is all over the place. I think the average of 21 FPS
    and 25 FPS in this benchmark may be slightly higher than you would expect as
    an average at least in the First Level. The game doesn't recognize my keys like
    Page Down, Delete, etc... so I gotta get a new keyboard, but the I ran all these

    benchmarks with no crashes, or glitches. It feels solid.

    Overall, I pleased my LOWLY CPU and GF4 are doing this well.

    Thanks again for the link !

    Autoexec.cfg used

    seta image_downSizeLimit "256"
    seta image_ignoreHighQuality "1"
    seta image_downSizeBumpLimit "256"
    seta image_downSizeSpecularLimit "64"
    seta image_downSizeBump "1"
    seta image_downSizeSpecular "1"
    seta image_downSize "1"
    seta image_forceDownSize "1"
    seta r_useOptimizedShadows "1"
    seta r_useTurboShadow "1"
    seta g_decals "0"
    seta g_showBrass "0"
    seta g_muzzleFlash "0"
    seta g_showPlayerShadow "0"
    seta image_anisotropy "0"
    seta image_filter
    "GL_LINEAR_MIPMAP_NEAREST"

    PNY GF4 4200 64mb 300Mhz GPU / 600Mhz Memory
    Overclocked Tualatin Celeron 1.33Ghz 133Mhz FSB
    512Mb Crucial PC133 CAS2
    Audigy 1
    61.77 Drivers
  9. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

    >I find that the framerates vary all over the place.. from 9 FPS to over 50
    >FPS.

    Medal of Honor did that also.


    >The good news with the autoexec.cfg file is because I'm mostly all CPU
    >limited,
    >the 'framerate' feel is about the same for 640x480 Low Quality as
    >1024x768 High Quality. It feels laggy but playable in any setting above
    >'with'
    >the autoexec.cfg file.

    It looks like it is lowering graphic settings that were automatically selected
    for your system by the game.

    Do you notice a loss in visual quality after using the autoexec settings?


    >The game doesn't recognize my keys like
    >Page Down, Delete, etc... so I gotta get a new keyboard, but the I ran all
    >these
    >

    Not sure what keyboard you have, but sometimes they load up an extra program
    for specilized features like volume control, website favorites, etc. . The
    program is really not needed for a basic keyboard to run and maybe its
    confusing the game. Either that or the keyboard is just no good.


    >
    >Overall, I pleased my LOWLY CPU and GF4 are doing this well.
    >
    >Thanks again for the link !
    >

    Your welcome....So is the game worth it?
  10. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

    PRIVATE1964 wrote:

    > It looks like it is lowering graphic settings that were automatically selected
    > for your system by the game.
    >
    > Do you notice a loss in visual quality after using the autoexec settings?

    I looked a few times for differences using the autoexec settings, and the only
    thing
    that might be very slightly lower quality is the faces. That's at 1024x768 High
    Quality.
    The framerate feel is slightly faster using the autoexec, but the quality
    difference
    is virtually the same so far. I realize some things like showBrass and muzzleFlash

    will be missing. Still a bit laggy, but I'm amazed it looks this good on my lowly
    setup.


    >
    > >
    > >Thanks again for the link !
    > >
    >
    > Your welcome....So is the game worth it?

    I still need to figure out the keyboard issue, cause I'm just so used
    to my way of keyboard mapping, so I haven't really played it much.
    I'd still pay the $50 so far..

    Another link for autoexec settings:

    http://www.viperlair.com/articles/howto/software/tweakd3/

    and my GF4 4200 autoexec.cfg file:

    seta image_downSizeLimit "256"
    seta image_ignoreHighQuality "1"
    seta image_downSizeBumpLimit "256"
    seta image_downSizeSpecularLimit "64"
    seta image_downSizeBump "1"
    seta image_downSizeSpecular "1"
    seta image_downSize "1"
    seta image_forceDownSize "1"
    seta r_useOptimizedShadows "1"
    seta r_useTurboShadow "1"
    seta g_decals "0"
    seta g_showBrass "0"
    seta g_muzzleFlash "0"
    seta g_showPlayerShadow "0"
    seta image_anisotropy "0"
    seta image_filter
    set r_displayRefresh "75"
    set r_brightness 1
    set r_gamma 1.3
    set com_allowConsole "1"
    "GL_LINEAR_MIPMAP_NEAREST"

    Pressing just the ~ key now brings the console,
    refresh is now 75hz, screen a bit lighter.


    Also,
    +disconnect
    to the command line to skip the intro
    per the link above.

    Cheers..
  11. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

    >The framerate feel is slightly faster using the autoexec, but the quality
    >difference
    >is virtually the same so far. I realize some things like showBrass and
    >muzzleFlash
    >
    >will be missing. Still a bit laggy, but I'm amazed it looks this good on my
    >lowly
    >setup.
    >

    Thats good to know thanks for the information.

    I might wait a little bit so the price comes down. I don't have a problem
    paying the $50 for it now, but I figure the longer I wait the more tweaks
    people will figure out. So then when I do get it all the tweaks will be ready
    for me. I might also upgrade my 4200 before getting it if the prices drop a
    little bit more for video cards like the 5900XT or SE.
  12. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

    "PRIVATE1964" <private1964@aol.com> wrote in message
    news:20040807001831.29210.00000749@mb-m19.aol.com...
    >
    > >The framerate feel is slightly faster using the autoexec, but the quality
    > >difference
    > >is virtually the same so far. I realize some things like showBrass and
    > >muzzleFlash
    > >
    > >will be missing. Still a bit laggy, but I'm amazed it looks this good on
    my
    > >lowly
    > >setup.
    > >
    >
    > Thats good to know thanks for the information.
    >
    > I might wait a little bit so the price comes down. I don't have a problem
    > paying the $50 for it now, but I figure the longer I wait the more tweaks
    > people will figure out. So then when I do get it all the tweaks will be
    ready
    > for me. I might also upgrade my 4200 before getting it if the prices drop
    a
    > little bit more for video cards like the 5900XT or SE.
    >
    >

    Some good tweaks coming out now - the only one I use is changing the
    anisotropy setting form '8' to '2' in Doomconfig.cfg. This allows me to
    have great framerates with 2xAA with a 9800Pro. However the point of the
    post is perhaps wait until you see more views on the gameplay itself? I'm
    personally finding it all a bit 'samey'. Open a door 'oh look ANOTHER
    corridor'. Been spoiled by Far Cry's open space/alternative ways of
    approaching missions I guess. Now I'm back to a very linear experience -
    not sure I like it. Shaun
  13. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

    >Some good tweaks coming out now - the only one I use is changing the
    >anisotropy setting form '8' to '2' in Doomconfig.cfg. This allows me to
    >have great framerates with 2xAA with a 9800Pro. However the point of the
    >post is perhaps wait until you see more views on the gameplay itself? I'm
    >personally finding it all a bit 'samey'. Open a door 'oh look ANOTHER
    >corridor'. Been spoiled by Far Cry's open space/alternative ways of
    >approaching missions I guess. Now I'm back to a very linear experience -
    >not sure I like it. Shaun
    >

    From what I have seen, I would buy it just for the graphics and so so gameplay.

    I doubt it's that bad. Id always puts a lot into thier games.
  14. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

    Upgrade to an Athlon 64 processor.
    http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2149&p=7

    PRIVATE1964 wrote:

    > >Overclocked Tualatin Celeron 1.33Ghz 133Mhz FSB
    > >Very Low End
    > >
    >
    > That's not bad at all for that CPU then.
    >
    > I was asking because I'm still using a 4200 with a Barton 2500+ Athlon.
    >
    > Does the demo give you the framerate that you would get playing the actual game
    > on most levels?
  15. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

    "PRIVATE1964" <private1964@aol.com> wrote in message
    news:20040807211501.04176.00002004@mb-m26.aol.com...
    > >Some good tweaks coming out now - the only one I use is changing the
    > >anisotropy setting form '8' to '2' in Doomconfig.cfg. This allows me to
    > >have great framerates with 2xAA with a 9800Pro. However the point of the
    > >post is perhaps wait until you see more views on the gameplay itself?
    I'm
    > >personally finding it all a bit 'samey'. Open a door 'oh look ANOTHER
    > >corridor'. Been spoiled by Far Cry's open space/alternative ways of
    > >approaching missions I guess. Now I'm back to a very linear experience -
    > >not sure I like it. Shaun
    > >
    >
    > From what I have seen, I would buy it just for the graphics and so so
    gameplay.
    >
    > I doubt it's that bad. Id always puts a lot into thier games.
    >

    Perhaps they put it into later levels then.
Ask a new question

Read More

Nvidia Graphics Product