Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

New Comp Upgrade For BF2142 Need Help!

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
November 21, 2006 8:59:25 PM

OK i currently have a 3200 1.99ghz processor, 1.5 gig of ram, yearold motherboard (ati IXP400 chipset ), nvidia 7900 gt oc 256mb ddr3 and a 480w power supply. Now here is what I am looking to invest in. nvidia 8800 gts, nforce 4, and either a 3800 single or duo core.

Problem: Money is limited to 500-600 leaving me with enough for the gfx card or the motherboard/processor.

*I am currently using windows vista and running bf in full graphics but still experiencing lag jumps every 30 sec - min. Ive taken of superfetch so that all my ram isnt used for useless background tasks and it helped alot. Does anyone have any suggestions on what i should do in order to run bf2142 and bf2 without any problems?

More about : comp upgrade bf2142

November 21, 2006 9:43:10 PM

What sort of FPS are you getting at the settings you play at? Try lowering the settings and see if you still get the jumps. If they are coming at steady intervals and you have plenty of memory available, might want to try uninstalling and reinstalling the game and patches.

Battlefield series is so buggy and glitchy that I have had to reinstall it twice to fix random bugs.
November 21, 2006 9:45:34 PM

I have it in highest settings with X4 Antianalizing and im wondering what i should get that would most effectivly help my comp gaming wise. Im leaning towards the 8800gts but im still not sure.
Related resources
November 21, 2006 9:46:43 PM

YUCK. Do you realize the amount of spyware that game has built in? It tracks all your moves online while browsing.


There are 100's of websites protesting that game lol.
November 21, 2006 9:49:33 PM

Well, you need to list all the video settings you are running the game at. The 7900GT should run the game without issues. List the video settings you are running the game under so I can have a better idea of what is goig on. Also, are you getting net lag spikes, or system lag spikes? when it lags out is your ping high or not.

wes
November 21, 2006 9:51:05 PM

If it has spyware built in, why don't I ever pick it up with any of the spyware removers I use?

wes
November 21, 2006 9:53:20 PM

Because its a legit game required program. you agree to it when you say yes to the ULA. Spyware programs can not legaly remove it because it is a legal spyware program, but it is a spyware program all the same. If you care, google it and find out.
November 21, 2006 10:00:13 PM

Not sure, but it sounds like that your one of those people that just selects the high setting and leaves it at that, There are effects in the bf2/bf2142 engine such as dynamic shadows and dynamic lighting which while having little visual effect, absolutely destroy your framerate. Go to a tweak guide site such as this one and set your graphical settings according to that to get the most out of your hardware. Also if your running 1280x1024 resolution you could probably get away with just 2x AA but do the guide first and see how your FPS are.
November 21, 2006 10:02:14 PM

Well, I just did google it, and from what I was reading, it says it does not access cookies or track surfing.

"The advertising program in Battlefield 2142 does not access any files which are not directly related to the game. It does not capture personal data such as cookies, account login detail, or surfing history.

BF 2142 delivers ads by region. The advertising system uses a player's IP address to determine the region of the player, assisting to serve the appropriate ads by region and language. For instance, a player in Paris might be presented with ads in French. The information collected will not be repurposed for other uses.

Battlefield 2142 also tracks "impression data" related to in-game advertisements: location of a billboard in the game, brand advertised, duration of advertisement impression, etc. This information is used to help advertisers qualify the reach of a given advertisement."

Doing a quick search I couldn't find much on BF2 only, other than speuclation and forum rumor mill stuff. But I would assume the two have similar spyware programs in them. Not sure though.

wes
November 21, 2006 10:36:06 PM

from personal experince,bf2142 is running on 4400x2 and x1900xtx i still get dodgy shadows and the graphics dont seem the best. im running evrything on high apart from anti ailiasing. at the moment it says i have
no points etc its f**cked.but more to your point, what im trying to say is even though i know i have a good processor and graphics card it aint perfect for me. advice i cant give ya,because if a games good im gunna play it wether graphics are crap or not.(i spent last 2 years on ut2004 and nowt else) and then i got bored and found new games)
.
.
.
.
a
fuck
it
im
hammered
November 21, 2006 11:36:07 PM

What I need to know is should I get an 8800 GTS or the motherboard and processor combination? And which would help my performance most graphics wise. Keep in mind I can only get one or the other. I'm on a budget.
November 21, 2006 11:51:12 PM

To the OP, your PC should be running that game maxxed out.

I play it with max everything, with high quality AF, 6x adaptive AA, and 1280x1024 res forced through the desktop shortcut.

And you're pc isnt too different from my own, except your card uses an nVidia gpu.

I'm getting between 50-60Fps(I'd love to show some screenshots :wink: )
November 21, 2006 11:56:33 PM

Well im also running windows vista on XP i Run it without lag aswell. My question Is should i get the 8800 GTS or the motherboard and processor combination.
November 22, 2006 12:17:42 AM

dont mean to sound stupid..but..still hamerred.graphics means if you have the good graphics card then you will get better performance than a cpu and mobo.if it is picture quality you want then a better gpu will give it to ya,than compared to a cpu and mobo.but all within moderation. its what comes down to what you want that should swing your decision,and dont forget that!
November 22, 2006 12:26:17 AM

Quote:
Well im also running windows vista on XP i Run it without lag aswell. My question Is should i get the 8800 GTS or the motherboard and processor combination.

The title of your thread says that you need to upgrade for BF2142, so if your current setup is running that game well, then why in thell did you name this thread what you did?

As for Vista....I'm dual booting XP with RC1 at this very moment....but what in the hell does that have to do with anything?
November 22, 2006 12:28:27 AM

Quote:
OK i currently have a 3200 1.99ghz processor, 1.5 gig of ram, yearold motherboard (ati IXP400 chipset ), nvidia 7900 gt oc 256mb ddr3 and a 480w power supply. Now here is what I am looking to invest in. nvidia 8800 gts, nforce 4, and either a 3800 single or duo core.

Problem: Money is limited to 500-600 leaving me with enough for the gfx card or the motherboard/processor.

*I am currently using windows vista and running bf in full graphics but still experiencing lag jumps every 30 sec - min. Ive taken of superfetch so that all my ram isnt used for useless background tasks and it helped alot. Does anyone have any suggestions on what i should do in order to run bf2142 and bf2 without any problems?



8800 by far.
November 22, 2006 1:23:25 AM

ok well i think ill get the 8800 then seeing as how its almost 3 times better than my current card and has dX10. thanks for the help guys.

*one more question; I've stoped the superfetcher which is what consumes the free ram but still i am lagging even with AA off and dyn lit and shadow at medium and enhanced lighting off but yet in windows XP i run full on everything and it runs perfectly. can anyone help me figure this out or do you think the 8800 will take care of this for me?

*EDIT: Ok I have done a series of test on video settings changing around AA and other settings making my graphic quality less and less and i still have the same lag issues. Could it be possible that my lag is because of ram instead of my graphics card? I am running with 1.5gig of ram and vista uses a good amount or enough to leave me with around 950-1024 mb of ram and if im not mistaken their recomended ram was either 1 gig or 1.5 total...
November 22, 2006 1:43:05 AM

You could have net lag for alot of reasons, have you checked for spyware?

And you STILL haven't even said what settings you are running the game at!!!

wes
November 22, 2006 2:02:40 AM

First things first. No i do not have spyware.

Second. i am running all high except for dynamic chadow, dynamic light, and effects which are at medium and AA is off along with enhanced lighting.

Third. While running the game i realized my Comp was using 1.09 gigs of my phyisical memory with 50 free and the rest cashed. (Roughly 450) ***by the way what the F--- does cashed mean*** Would this be the source of my problem or should i not worry about ram issues and just go ahead and get the 8800gts...
November 22, 2006 2:13:01 AM

Quote:
or should i not worry about ram issues and just go ahead and get the 8800gts...

It doesnt make sense to compensate performance with a high end video card when you cant even maintain your current system.
November 22, 2006 2:15:37 AM

Then what do you suggest... btw, if you read it says i have 1.5 gig so i am asking if that is enough...
November 22, 2006 2:23:32 AM

Reinstalling windows, and streamlining your system so that most of your ram isn't eaten up by services.

There is something wrong with your system my friend, and a fresh OS install will make you a true believer.

I just cant help but look back on all of the 7900GT reviews I've read, and that card should be smoking through the games you are playing.

I have a 7800GS sitting in a box that will play BF2142 on max everything.

I'm typing my phrases with a space in between and I don't know why.

I hope you sort it out.


*edit*
Quote:
btw, if you read it says i have 1.5 gig so i am asking if that is enough...

IMHO that will work with most games.....even BF2142.

kthx.
November 22, 2006 2:27:44 AM

you do know i am running Vista correct?]

EDIT: how much ram do you have?
November 22, 2006 2:44:25 AM

Quote:
Well I'm also running windows vista on XP


The above quote is what I have been going by, and I took that as you were dual booting XP and Vista on one machine. If you're running Vista only, then I dont know why you said "Vista on XP"....it doesn't make any sense.

If you're complaining about poor gaming performance while running Vista, then I've been wasting my time.

Everybody and their dog knows that Vista gaming performance sucks ass right now, and a Vista machine is currently much slower than an identically spec'd machine running XP.

Any Vista review will tell you this, and anyone who is legally beta testing Vista knows this.

People who are into pc gaming do not use Vista for their primary OS(actually, anybody who values stability would be stupid to run a Vista only machine).

I think I'm done here.
November 22, 2006 2:47:42 AM

Ive Got windows XP as an aoptional OS and i am Running the final corporate version of Vista....

Edit: is there now possible way for me to run games on Vista? Or will i have to wait for the Updates on Patches Etc...
November 22, 2006 11:56:05 AM

I am confused now. :?
November 22, 2006 1:16:46 PM

Quote:

Any Vista review will tell you this, and anyone who is legally beta testing Vista knows this.



I dont think people realize that Vista has not been release for public testing.

95% of vista owners are not legally allowed to be using it anyway.
November 22, 2006 2:47:23 PM

I just called Microsoft and they gave me a CD key lol...
November 22, 2006 7:47:58 PM

Quote:
I dont think people realize that Vista has not been release for public testing.


Click..

Just goes to show how stupid you are :roll:
November 22, 2006 7:53:18 PM

Thanks for starting out with a link instead of calling me stupid.


However,

1.) Most people have been using Vista long before it was released by windows to the public.

2.) They only released RC1 (and not RC2)

3.) They stopped providing the download to the public awhile ago.

So while you made my previous statement false, its still more or less true.

If your smart enough to download Vista, your smart enough to download the lastest copy off bittorrents instead of being stuck with the limited consumer version. I still dont think many people realize MOST of vista has not been released to the public legally.
November 22, 2006 8:43:12 PM

Quote:
1.) Most people have been using Vista long before it was released by windows to the public.


Quote:
2.) They only released RC1 (and not RC2)

What??...a minute ago you just said that Vista was never released to the public :!:

And now you're going to write out all of the facts about it to me?...in numerical order even?

Lame!

Quote:
3.) They stopped providing the download to the public awhile ago.

No fukcing shiit. What does that have to do with your original statement?

Quote:
So while you made my previous statement false, its still more or less true.


Dude...you're a moron, Vista was released to hundreds of thousands of beta testers, I applied, I got in, now I have to listen to some guy on Toms Harware run over the the basic facts of the Vista beta program with me, because I gues I'm the stupid one here, who shot his mouth off
November 22, 2006 8:47:29 PM

you are angry because of the order of my statements?


Let me rephrase for you to reduce the chanes of you getting an ulser.

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

So while you made my previous statement false, its still more or less true.

As I just took 10 seconds to look:

1.) Most people have been using Vista long before it was released by windows to the public.

2.) They only released RC1 (and not RC2)

3.) They stopped providing the download to the public awhile ago.

If your smart enough to download Vista, your smart enough to download the lastest copy off bittorrents instead of being stuck with the limited consumer version. I still dont think many people realize MOST of vista has not been released to the public legally.
November 22, 2006 9:00:28 PM

You're posting useless garbage to me. I know the ins and outs of the beta system much better than the five minutes of Googling got you.

Quote:
Vista has not been release for public testing.


Did you say this?......if the answer is yes, then please just stfu and go away, because I proved you wrong without a doubt.

The rest of your post's have simply been you trying to save face.

Suck it up now and dont post another stupid reply.
November 22, 2006 9:07:32 PM

Quote:
you are angry because of the order of my statements?


Let me rephrase for you to reduce the chanes of you getting an ulser.

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

So while you made my previous statement false, its still more or less true.

As I just took 10 seconds to look:

1.) Most people have been using Vista long before it was released by windows to the public.

2.) They only released RC1 (and not RC2)

3.) They stopped providing the download to the public awhile ago.

If your smart enough to download Vista, your smart enough to download the lastest copy off bittorrents instead of being stuck with the limited consumer version. I still dont think many people realize MOST of vista has not been released to the public legally.



Are you angry that, although you did infact prove my statement wrong (i missed the release of RC1 myself and didnt care) I did still make my point.

What was my point you ask? Let me remind you what we are arguing about.

95% of vista owners are not legally allowed to be using it anyway

This is still a valid assumption. Nobdoy will be bothering with RC1 when you can download the (near) full version online (illigally for most people).

Now, maybe my faith in the community is not as strong as yours, but I find using RC1 a waste of time as it was buggy and many features were not included. People who are running Vista currently will be running something other then RC1.
November 22, 2006 9:34:39 PM

Well, most of the people are probably running RC1. A lot of people (myself included) aren't huge pirates, so if there is a legal version why not download that?

Anyway, RC2 wasn't released to everybody, but it was released to IT pros:

Quote:
If you are not already a member of the Windows Vista beta program, there are still two ways to obtain the Beta version of Windows Vista.

* MSDN Subscriptions - If you have an MSDN Subscription (Operating System level or higher), you can download the latest version of Windows Vista.
(Read information on purchasing an MSDN Subscription)
* Windows Vista Beta Program If you wish to become a beta member, you can do so by registering for the world-wide Windows Vista Beta Experience.

On the Beta Experience site, you may also sign up for the Office 2007 Beta 2.
http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=4...

So how many people on this forum have access to a MSDN subscription? Probably a lot of us. So, I still think you should just admit that you were not speaking fact, just an assumption. Please??? :D 
November 22, 2006 9:39:22 PM

Im sure a few people have access, myself included...


However, do you think this forum is representitive of the whole? I dont think so.



And im saying a good majority of the Vista users (current users) would be using a verson that is newer... as the legal version RC1 sucks ba11s.
November 22, 2006 9:41:56 PM

Stop being a menace to THG society :p .

So would you agree with most technical people probably have technical jobs, therefore have access to Vista via MSDN subscriptions or beta programs?
November 22, 2006 9:47:21 PM

No.


From what I gather, most the people with wholesale technical knowledge (i.e. work in the field and are more then average enthusiasts), work in mid level technical fields, such as repair shops, call centers, small companies.

These positions do not grant you access.

And I do realize there are more then a few (but still a small percentage) people here with high-end jobs in the IT market, or jobs that would allow legal downloads though MSDN.
November 22, 2006 9:50:24 PM

Regardless, this is not what the original argument was about. You are just arguing whatever you can to try to draw attention from the fact that your previous post was a bunch of BS.

This thread is now a bunch of BS as well. Sorry for taking a part in hijacking. :oops: 
November 22, 2006 9:55:17 PM

I said 2 things: 1, VISTA was not released to the public, which I said I was wrong.

and the other thing, which was the basis of my post: Most Vista users are not using a legal version.

I hold to my case. Feel free to continue this, but i recomend not.
!