There is little point in downloading UT3 illegally because you need a legit CD-key to play online with it - same as UT2004. While there may be a keygen which lets you install the game, you can't play online with generated keys.
crysis and ut3 tanking?
- Thread starter Gerard
- Start date
There is little point in downloading UT3 illegally because you need a legit CD-key to play online with it - same as UT2004. While there may be a keygen which lets you install the game, you can't play online with generated keys.
Kudos to Valve. They even included a DX7 path for their HL2 engine so that people on lowly DX7 hardware can play the game with it looking decent and giving playable framerates.
UT3 should at least have a DX8 path but it doesn't.
Oh I agree, the only real thing which UT3 has brought to the table is graphics which most peoples machines aren't capable of running. Likewise with crysis it has pretty much nothing else to offer.
Maybe if it had been a PC only title, it might have. Dx8 is ancient history now anyway. I had the UT3 demo running on an old x1800xt 256mb and it ran perfectly fine. Its nowhere near as demanding as Crysis.
Well, an X1800XT is the "recommended" spec. Not average or minimum. Most people do not have X1800XTs. In fact I'm at the 6200 end of the scale, because the Radeon 9700 was the first DX9 card around, and is now an outdated architecture.
From what I can really notice about console only games is that there is a lot of them, thus they appear to have a short life-span (until the next latest and greatest) therefore early sales figures etc will look massive. Whereas the PC gaming market has far less different top notch titles (trying to stay on the lines of FPS) coming out as frequently as the console market which generally means they have a longer (and flatter) sales curves - meaning that in time sales figures will be a lot more respectable and shouldn't be seen as a 'flop'.
Last edited:
Old? It is still a very fast card. I see on Tom's VGA charts it is approximately on a par with or faster than cards like the X1950 Pro and the 7900 GT.
I think the 9700 would spank the 6200 actually.
You said the 6200 is min. spec for UT3? According to Tom's charts it seems the 7600GS (which is way too slow for UT3) is 400% faster in some benchmarks. So where the 7600GS gets 30fps, the 6200 can expect to get single figure fps...
...and can be had for 50 quid new! Got one here actually, sat in a box doin nowt. Giving it to my bro for xmas
The 6200 has newer shader units though. The efficiency per clock has gone up. Alas, I cannot find reviews comparing them directly...
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Dec 2006
- Posts
- 9,333
- Location
- Around Town
Well i just picked up a copy so there is another sale.
...and can be had for 50 quid new! Got one here actually, sat in a box doin nowt. Giving it to my bro for xmas
O rly? I don't think it can mate.
In the US, for example, older tech is available for longer..eg I could get a Chaintech KM400 board which was rare even during Socket A's prominence over here.
I just had a quick search online and the only X1800XTs I saw are £150-£200. X1950 Pro which is similar performance is around £100. There are people on Epic's forum with such cards (and C2Ds etc) saying the game doesn't run very well.
Well not brand new obviously cos theyre not in production anymore, but still...50 quid off the bay for a used one, still a good deal
Well not brand new obviously cos theyre not in production anymore, but still...50 quid off the bay for a used one, still a good deal
The one on there is £57.50 including postage, actually
Anyway the point is, it is better than most people have.
As for DX8, a lot of people are still using Geforce4s and the like. They are faster than most of nvidia's subsequent cards, ie. the Geforce5 series and Geforce6 below a 6600GT. Most recent games run perfectly well on it. I am using a Geforce4 myself. I only bought the 7600GS mainly to try out UT3. I since sold it again and went back to the GF4 because I prefer its TV-output but that's another story.
Ho ho ho. Good one.
How many threads, how many posts, are in this one PC Games area of this one forum?
HAH! HA HA HA! Oh stop, you're killing me. Consoles are now advertising high-def gaming when we've had it for a decade. There is no comparison, it's not fair on consoles.
Its high-def, but with DRM, and all that other ****. Which actually ends up harming the artists, and closing up the distribution market.
Ah, the yearly PC Gaming is dead joke - you know there has been one every year for the last decade, maybe this one will turn out to be totally true
Yeah man, you're spot on, I'd say Valve and co. have absolutely no motivation to make PC games anymore, sure why would they bother?
Just a point, not sure if it's relevant, but DX7 was 5 years old when HL2 was released. DX8 is 7 years old now. DX6 was 6 years old and HL2 didn't support it.