Can this computer play these games?

Alright, I currently have this computer:

E2180 Overclocked to 3 Ghz
Abit ip35-e Motherboard
2 gb ddr2-800 Crucial Ballistix Memory
250 GB WD SATAII HD
BFG 7900GS Factory Overclocked (540, 661=1322 mhz effective)
Audigy Blaster SE sound card

I'm wondering, will this setup be able to play COD4 and bf2142 maxed out?
Max resolution I'll be using is 1280 X 1024

So will I be able to play those two games maxed out with decent fps? (40+)
I might be able to overclock the video card some more if that helps...
But at that resolution is the game more cpu or gpu intensive?

Hoping to get feedback from people who have a similar setup and have tried out those particular games.
Thanks in advance!

P.S. Posted in the cpu section as well...then remembered the graphics section. My bad.

Add a reply

Register or log in to remove.

BF, probably. I did with my 79GS @ 60+fps. COD4... err, maybe not.
OCing will help a bit. That res is more CPU intesnsive - not exactly more though, since your more likely to see a CPU bottleneck at low resolutions.

Message edited by blacken on 11-27-2007 at 04:26:19 AM

Reply to blacken

So will overclocking to 3.2 help that much?

Reply to nightscope

Minutely, but if you aren't concerned with heat or the cpu, go for it.
I wouldn't worry to hard about BF, COD4 is gonna be the bugger.

Reply to blacken

What if some settings were cranked down to medium?

Reply to nightscope

Just like the previous generation, the newer games are more video card dependent than CPU dependent. 3.0ghz should be plenty. COD4 should be no problem. Never liked the BF series, so I cannot comment as i don't have it.

------------------------------ I know what I know, and I don't know what I don't know.
Reply to tlmck

We have similar setups except my video card is a bit more powerful. Have you tried COD4 on your computer tlmck? What did you crank your settings up to? What fps do you get on average?

Message quoted 1 times

Reply to nightscope

Hmm, I tried the demo on my 3ghz quad and oced 8800GTS. I say it was playable all on high, got around 40+ frames. However it started to lag when there was smoke. oh and res of 1280x1024

I don't know if you can play all on high tbh. Maybe high/med

------------------------------ "Nvidia, the Way It's Meant to be ~~PAID~~ Played! - Corrado
*Lesbian Lover Club* - founder Assman
Reply to Evilonigiri

nightscope wrote :

We have similar setups except my video card is a bit more powerful. Have you tried COD4 on your computer tlmck? What did you crank your settings up to? What fps do you get on average?

I get 30fps according to fraps at 1280x1024 on my 7600gt. I run Vista Home Basic. I have everything turned "on"(either normal or yes)except AA. I tried turning AA to 2x, but COD4 keeps turning it off. I can get 2x AA at 800x600. I also have the corpses set to "normal". Don't know if turning this up does anything.

I tried XP SP1 briefly, and got about 38fps. Either way, it is way better than Crysis. I have to set all to low and 800x600 to get smooth play. Still looks OK, if a little jaggedy.

Still waiting to see if they get DX10 fixed one of these days before buying a new card.

Also played the Bioshock demo. Had to set it to the XP SP2 compatibility mode to get sound. Not really my kind of game though. Kind of reminds me of Duke Nukem 3D. A little on the hokey side.

Message quoted 1 times

------------------------------ I know what I know, and I don't know what I don't know.
Reply to tlmck

tlmck wrote :

I get 30fps according to fraps at 1280x1024 on my 7600gt. I run Vista Home Basic. I have everything turned "on"(either normal or yes)except AA. I tried turning AA to 2x, but COD4 keeps turning it off. I can get 2x AA at 800x600. I also have the corpses set to "normal". Don't know if turning this up does anything.

I tried XP SP1 briefly, and got about 38fps. Either way, it is way better than Crysis. I have to set all to low and 800x600 to get smooth play. Still looks OK, if a little jaggedy.

Still waiting to see if they get DX10 fixed one of these days before buying a new card.

Also played the Bioshock demo. Had to set it to the XP SP2 compatibility mode to get sound. Not really my kind of game though. Kind of reminds me of Duke Nukem 3D. A little on the hokey side.

So I guess I could get around 50-70 fps on windows xp? I guess that's decent. I'll just have to live with medium settings :cry:

Message quoted 1 times

Reply to nightscope

COD4 runs extremely well on low end systems, so I wouldn't worry about it. Your machine looks fine for both games, especially at that res.

Reply to twellman

But he won't be able to run max details on a 7900GS. Turning down some settings from maximum, and running no fsaa and low AF, then he should have no problem.

Reply to pauldh

nightscope wrote :

So I guess I could get around 50-70 fps on windows xp? I guess that's decent. I'll just have to live with medium settings :cry:

Don't know if it is an option for you, but XP SP2 is about 30-40% slower than SP1. I know because I started with SP1, and noticed immediately after upgrading and ran some benches. I almost immediately wiped and reinstalled SP1, added a 3rd party firewall, eventually ending up with Comodo, and never had a security problem. To me, SP2 just added useless bloat, and after endless updates, was no more secure.

Obviously, if you do not have SP1 on disk, it will not be an option. Others have tried to uninstall SP2 with little success.

Message quoted 2 times

------------------------------ I know what I know, and I don't know what I don't know.
Reply to tlmck

tlmck wrote :

Don't know if it is an option for you, but XP SP2 is about 30-40% slower than SP1. I know because I started with SP1, and noticed immediately after upgrading and ran some benches. I almost immediately wiped and reinstalled SP1, added a 3rd party firewall, eventually ending up with Comodo, and never had a security problem. To me, SP2 just added useless bloat, and after endless updates, was no more secure.

Obviously, if you do not have SP1 on disk, it will not be an option. Others have tried to uninstall SP2 with little success.

...SP2 is MUCH faster and MUCH more stable than SP1...

Reply to skittle

Will the real SP please stand up?

I'd like to know for sure because I've avoided SP2 thinking it was just bloated crap, but not actually knowing for sure.

Reply to lakedude

tlmck wrote :

Don't know if it is an option for you, but XP SP2 is about 30-40% slower than SP1. I know because I started with SP1, and noticed immediately after upgrading and ran some benches. I almost immediately wiped and reinstalled SP1, added a 3rd party firewall, eventually ending up with Comodo, and never had a security problem. To me, SP2 just added useless bloat, and after endless updates, was no more secure.

Obviously, if you do not have SP1 on disk, it will not be an option. Others have tried to uninstall SP2 with little success.

I didn't know that...You have any online benchmarks to compare both?

Message quoted 1 times

Reply to nightscope

It'll be fine. My son's e6600, 2gig, 8600GT, XPsp2 runs CoD4 just fine at 1280x1024. The only thing turned off is AA. Your video card, the most important aspect, is quite a bit faster than his. These settings are for singleplayer mind you. You may need to tweak things a bit to get the framerate just right for competitive online play.

Message quoted 1 times

Reply to mutt11

mutt11 wrote :

It'll be fine. My son's e6600, 2gig, 8600GT, XPsp2 runs CoD4 just fine at 1280x1024. The only thing turned off is AA. Your video card, the most important aspect, is quite a bit faster than his. These settings are for singleplayer mind you. You may need to tweak things a bit to get the framerate just right for competitive online play.

You know what, I bet in COD4 the 8600GT is every bit as good as a 7900GS, and probably better. I don't have a direct comparison, but I do know that an 8600GTS matches and X1950 pro in that game, and the x1950 pro destroys a 7900GT. Normally we would think that a 7900GT, X1950 pro, and 8600GTS are fairly on par. But The GF7's don't fare too well against X19 and GF8's in COD4, as in UT3 and Crysis. aNyway, Most games, yeah, the 7900GS is better than the 8600GT but I have a strong hunch it's the opposite in COD4.

edit: As an example of what I am talking about, look at this direct comparison in UT3. Notice the 8600GT is twice as fast as the 7900GS in that game. http://www.legionhardware.com/docu [...] id=693&p=5

And to show it's no 1 site fluke, Anand shows the 8600GT keeping up with the 7950GT and the 8600GTS, X1950 pro, and HD2600XT all above a 7900GTX. http://www.anandtech.com/video/sho [...] i=3128&p=4

Message edited by pauldh on 11-29-2007 at 12:36:07 AM

Reply to pauldh

nightscope wrote :

I didn't know that...You have any online benchmarks to compare both?

Nope. Did it a while back with Sandra and Futuremark stuff. Sold the copy of XP SP1 with another machine about 4 months ago. You can probably troll the Futuremark site and see similar results. I don't recall how long they keep older results, meaning you may not see any SP1 numbers.

------------------------------ I know what I know, and I don't know what I don't know.
Reply to tlmck

maaaaaaaaaaaaayyyybe

------------------------------ Intel Quad 2 Core Q6600 @ 3.20Ghz FSB @ 356 MHz, 1.288 voltage, multiplier @ 9x
Master Cooler Eclipse cooler
GA-P35-DS3L rev 1.0 BIOS Ver F8a
2Gb Patriot Extreme memory DDR2-800 at 890
Reply to boner

i have call of duty 4 and i have a geforce 8500gt and my game lags also.
i post a new topic about this and they are saying that is the graphics card.
Check out my topic and maybe some of you can also help me out:
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/ [...] mb-problem

Also how can i check what SERVICE PACK do i have???

thanks to all

Reply to genius107

Forum Graphic & Displays : Graphics Cards - Can this computer play these games?

Please mind

Focus On

Can this computer play these games?

Forum Graphic & Displays : Graphics Cards - Can this computer play these games?

Please mind