half life2 max settings

[Guest]

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

Hi,

I would like to play half life 2 with maximum settings.
Is my system capable to do this smoothly (acceptable framerate)?

pentium 4 - 2.8 (533 fsb)
dual rambus ram 512
ati radeon 9700 pro
80 gb. hd

thanx!

 

[Andrew]

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

On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 09:58:38 GMT, "Juan Alvarez" <j.alvarez@chello.nl>
wrote:

>I would like to play half life 2 with maximum settings.
>Is my system capable to do this smoothly (acceptable framerate)?
>
>pentium 4 - 2.8 (533 fsb)
>dual rambus ram 512
>ati radeon 9700 pro
>80 gb. hd

Your RAM will be the limiting factor, 1GB would be better.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.

 

[Glitch]

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

> On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 09:58:38 GMT, "Juan Alvarez" <j.alvarez@chello.nl>
> wrote:
>
>
>>I would like to play half life 2 with maximum settings.
>>Is my system capable to do this smoothly (acceptable framerate)?
>>
>>pentium 4 - 2.8 (533 fsb)
>>dual rambus ram 512
>>ati radeon 9700 pro
>>80 gb. hd
>

I have a similar system at home and would also like to know at which
resolutions and settings would the game be playbable at? I have a 17"
CRT so I play most of the games at 1152x864.
The system is a 2.8 P4(800 fsb),1 GB DDR433 Kingmax and ATI Radeon 9700PRO.

 

[eddy]

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

"Glitch" <Glitch_120@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:coso39$t7n$1@bagan.srce.hr...
>> On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 09:58:38 GMT, "Juan Alvarez" <j.alvarez@chello.nl>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I would like to play half life 2 with maximum settings.
>>>Is my system capable to do this smoothly (acceptable framerate)?
>>>
>>>pentium 4 - 2.8 (533 fsb)
>>>dual rambus ram 512
>>>ati radeon 9700 pro
>>>80 gb. hd
>>
>
> I have a similar system at home and would also like to know at which
> resolutions and settings would the game be playbable at? I have a 17" CRT
> so I play most of the games at 1152x864.
> The system is a 2.8 P4(800 fsb),1 GB DDR433 Kingmax and ATI Radeon
> 9700PRO.

My system is more or less the same, except I have a 9600XT, I also started
to play at 1152x864, I was playing higher but my frame rate fell below 30 in
some areas, I now run everything on high, water to reflect everything,
anisotropic x16 and 6xAA, and I have yet to see the game get sluggish, and I
am about 85% the way through.

Eddy

 

[Wazza]

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

"Eddy" <weeeddyNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:31eu4hF387e4pU1@individual.net...
>
> "Glitch" <Glitch_120@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:coso39$t7n$1@bagan.srce.hr...
>>> On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 09:58:38 GMT, "Juan Alvarez" <j.alvarez@chello.nl>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>I would like to play half life 2 with maximum settings.
>>>>Is my system capable to do this smoothly (acceptable framerate)?
>>>>
>>>>pentium 4 - 2.8 (533 fsb)
>>>>dual rambus ram 512
>>>>ati radeon 9700 pro
>>>>80 gb. hd
>>>
>>
>> I have a similar system at home and would also like to know at which
>> resolutions and settings would the game be playbable at? I have a 17" CRT
>> so I play most of the games at 1152x864.
>> The system is a 2.8 P4(800 fsb),1 GB DDR433 Kingmax and ATI Radeon
>> 9700PRO.
>
> My system is more or less the same, except I have a 9600XT, I also started
> to play at 1152x864, I was playing higher but my frame rate fell below 30
> in some areas, I now run everything on high, water to reflect everything,
> anisotropic x16 and 6xAA, and I have yet to see the game get sluggish, and
> I am about 85% the way through.
>
> Eddy
>

I think an 9600XT would be more powerful than a 9700 pro.
I am using an AMD XP 2500+ and 9800 pro, with 1GB memory. I played through
the entire game on 1024*768 with no AA and trilinear filtering, it was very
playable and looked great.(game recommendations)
Any higher settings caused the fps to drop below 30 (in outside areas
mostly), and made the game less enjoyable, so I left it as it was.

I doubt your setup will allow you to run the game at maximum settings.
I will play the game again on higher settings when I upgrade my PC - gives
me something to look forward to. ;-)

 

[Maniac]

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

Potential newsgroup troll known as wazza <wazzw@mindyerown.biz> typed:

> I think an 9600XT would be more powerful than a 9700 pro.

Yeah... 8 pipes (R9700 Pro) versus 4 pipes (R9600 XT)... ))))))))))))))
LOL

--
maniac/at/tweak.pl
"We are spiritual beings
in physical bodies"
(c) Shakta

 

[eddy]

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

"wazza" <wazzw@mindyerown.biz> wrote in message
news:41b29164$0$25787$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>
> "Eddy" <weeeddyNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:31eu4hF387e4pU1@individual.net...
>>
>> "Glitch" <Glitch_120@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:coso39$t7n$1@bagan.srce.hr...
>>>> On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 09:58:38 GMT, "Juan Alvarez" <j.alvarez@chello.nl>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>

>>
>
> I think an 9600XT would be more powerful than a 9700 pro.
> I am using an AMD XP 2500+ and 9800 pro, with 1GB memory. I played through
> the entire game on 1024*768 with no AA and trilinear filtering, it was
> very playable and looked great.(game recommendations)
> Any higher settings caused the fps to drop below 30 (in outside areas
> mostly), and made the game less enjoyable, so I left it as it was.
>
> I doubt your setup will allow you to run the game at maximum settings.
> I will play the game again on higher settings when I upgrade my PC - gives
> me something to look forward to. ;-)
>
>

What drivers are you using?, have you tried the Omega drivers
http://www.omegadrivers.net/
I don't know if your CPU would slow it down due to being a little slower
than a P4 2.8, but I don't see why you can't run it at a higher setting?,
have you all the proper/newest chipset drivers for your motherboard
installed?, turned off all the background applications you don't need?,
especially your antivirus software, My gaming pc is a standalone system, I
do not put anything on it that I don't need, and never surf the web on it, I
don't need thousands of wee files slowing my gaming system down, O and one
thing, I do have the memory overclocked on the card but that is it.

Eddy

 

[Thomas]

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

maniac wrote:
> Potential newsgroup troll known as wazza <wazzw@mindyerown.biz> typed:
>
>> I think an 9600XT would be more powerful than a 9700 pro.
>
> Yeah... 8 pipes (R9700 Pro) versus 4 pipes (R9600 XT)...
> )))))))))))))) LOL

+ 256 bit memory.. ;-) Indeed, 9700 is alot more powerful than the 9600
series ;-)

Thomas

 

[augustus]

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

> I think an 9600XT would be more powerful than a 9700 pro.
> I am using an AMD XP 2500+ and 9800 pro, with 1GB memory. I played through
> the entire game on 1024*768 with no AA and trilinear filtering, it was
> very playable and looked great.(game recommendations)

Maximum bandwidth of a 9600XT: 9.6 Gig/sec
Maximum bandwidth of a 9700 Pro: 19.8 Gig/sec

Double the pipleines, double the memory bus width. 'Nuff said