How do you get 60+ minimum FPS?

Perfect_Chaos · 22 Feb 2007 at 23:40

is there a way around it? without crossfire or sli, since you buy a new card and a new game comes out say a few weeks/months later, the minimum fps on some games is awful.. say below 50fps, where it gets noticably laggy.

I'm planning on getting the X2800XTX when its released, though im sure much like every game with new cards that you always get the poor minimum fps.

is it always going to be like this with games or will it change some day? it is very annoying, and it feels like a waste of money after you buy a brand spanking new card to run those games.. yet the games still dominate the graphics card, im only talking 1024 x 768 resolution btw.

Sir Random · 22 Feb 2007 at 23:48

A Conroe + 8800GTX rig will give you 60+ fps in most games at 1024x768 with max details and lots of AA/AF.
You need top-end kit to get 60fps in the latest games. The X2800XTX should be well able for 60+fps, but your Opty might hold it back.

Perfect_Chaos · 22 Feb 2007 at 23:51

Sir Random said:
A Conroe + 8800GTX rig will give you 60+ fps in most games at 1024x768 with max details and lots of AA/AF.

yes but thats for current games and no DX10, whats the point of buying a card that runs 60+ minimum on current games when it probably wont on DX10 games?

Sir Random · 22 Feb 2007 at 23:52

Perfect_Chaos said:
whats the point of buying a card that runs 60+ minimum on current games

Is that not what you're looking for?

thread title said:
How do you get 60+ minimum FPS?

squiffy · 22 Feb 2007 at 23:53

Run all games 640x470, lowest detail, no aa

Shocky-FM · 22 Feb 2007 at 23:56

Perfect_Chaos said:
yes but thats for current games and no DX10, whats the point of buying a card that runs 60+ minimum on current games when it probably wont on DX10 games?

There is no card available that can play future dx10 games with minimum 60fps , wait a year or two maybe and one will be released. Enjoy the wait.,..

Azza · 23 Feb 2007 at 00:08

Shocky-FM said:
There is no card available that can play future dx10 games with minimum 60fps , wait a year or two maybe and one will be released. Enjoy the wait.,..

Do you know something everyone else doesnt?

Shocky-FM · 23 Feb 2007 at 00:22

Azza said:
Do you know something everyone else doesnt?

Nope, just common sence.

Perfect_Chaos · 23 Feb 2007 at 00:26

Shocky-FM said:
Nope, just common sence.

i hate to say it but i agree with you here, i dont know why anyone else doesnt complain about it though.

Like ive been saying, if you want to play a new game with no slowdown then be prepared to buy a card thats out months later.

bfar · 23 Feb 2007 at 00:42

I've been involved in PC gaming since the beginning. I would have agreed with you a year ago, but we've got fantasic hardware available atm. I remember 3 items of hardware that absolutely and utterly owned every game available, had me shocked by the shear speed, and offered me a lot of faith in the platform.

1) 3dfx Voodoo II
2) Nvidia Geforce 2
3) Nvidia Geforce 8800

(By all accounts I should probably include ATI 9700, but I never had the pleasure of owning one myself

)

Right now is a good period for gaming hardware. A new 8800 or R600 would go very very well, looking at your current setup.

C2D cpu's are highly thought of atm, given their unusually phenomenal overclockability. X2/Opty cpus aren't all that far behind, if at all.

All told, with the right hardware, enthusiast PC gamers shouldn't have any performance woes whatsoever atm.

I can't predict the future, but I suspect that apart from your graphics card, there's at least another year in your rig

Without bragging, my signature rig completely destroys every game you can name. I haven't been able to say that for a few years (and I always have the latest hardware), so I agree with you up to a point.

Edit: Just a thought - I game at 1280*1024, which looks absolutely stunning to my eyes, but I realise a lot of newer gamers look for more. I thought I was spoiled when I started playing at 640*480! Those were the days.....

Ronaldo · 23 Feb 2007 at 00:45

so whats the point of the thread? you tell your self you need to buy high end cards all the time to get best performace?

Or do you mean that games developers dont make games gfx friendly?

A good example of good graphics and friendly to most cards are Source games such as HL2/css look great on most cards, i even had it on high settings with a Geforce ti4600 ultra @1024x768 45+ fps (cpu 2.4ghz amdXP)

Cyber-Mav · 23 Feb 2007 at 01:53

Shocky-FM said:
Nope, just common sence.

could do with some dictionary time though

geff_r · 23 Feb 2007 at 05:09

It's not the cards fault it's the game makers.
The best games are always very playable on low and high end machines.
But i do agree just look at supreme commander to max that out
with no loss in performance does'nt seem possible with the current top cards.

Corasik · 23 Feb 2007 at 05:33

If your PC cant handle 1024x768, then there's something seriously wrong with it, or else something wrong with the game. At that resolution, unless you have AAx16 and AF maxed out you should be 100% cpu/memory bottlenecked, graphics card shouldnt be overtaxed.

I play mostly at 1920x1200, and my Geforce 6800GT handled most games pretty well at that resolution, some games, which are system 'easy' like World of Warcraft would play 60fps with all settings maxed out. Others like Oblivion needed a bit more 'tuning' but were still well playable. Clearly not 60fps in obivion, but more than enough to enjoy and complete the game.

Jakus · 23 Feb 2007 at 12:04

Oh Dear, Sounds like a bit of a depression Loop !
I Play only FPS games, My monitor needs 1920x1200 I can play most of my games at the quality I want without even turning the Crossfire on !

Over the Years at lower resolution and various GFX cards I cannot recall ever being in the same position !

Kaiju · 23 Feb 2007 at 12:32

bfar said:
1) 3dfx Voodoo II

VOODOO! Man, I remember my first card, a Voodoo Banshee 16MB. Top of the line at the time, I somehow won it in a PC Zone competition write in and the rest, as they say is history.

Conroe @ 3.6GHz+ & 8800GTX SLI will do it.

jaykay · 23 Feb 2007 at 12:49

lol i have a voodoo banshee 16mb as well sitting in a wardrope behind me
i have to say though atm harware is evolving at a very fast rate
which i think is good
intel are pushing amd
nvidia are pushing ati
all these companies are building unique designs at a rapid pace
and it will always happen if you dont upgrade your computer the latest games will always play crap on old machines

Warbie · 23 Feb 2007 at 13:10

I've stopped upgrading to play the latest games simply because it can be so frustrating. Developers make games for the hardware of tomorrrow and in a matter of months games will arrive that your £1000+ gaming rig won't be able to handle at a high fps (or, more importanly, a high and constant minimum)

Now I miss out on pc games with the intention of playing them in 6-12+ months at a constant 60+ fps and at a more reasonable price. Add to this the fact that there are few decent games actually arriving on the pc these days and this type of buying with hindsight makes even more sense - the last two times I upgraded there was very little, bar the odd one or two games, worth playing. Very poor value for money. Next time I upgrade there will be a handful of decent games just waiting to be played - and all of them should look and run superbly

Skip your next upgrade and buy a console to tide you over.

Kaiju · 23 Feb 2007 at 13:20

Warbie said:
Skip your next upgrade and buy a console to tide you over.

Never!

Nah, good advice mate. Graphics cards are not worth their weight in gold if you only find a few games worth playing. a lot of people have the upgrade bug and spend hundreds to bench their scores for all to see, but is it really justified if you only end up playing a few games? Of course, it's user preference and whatever floats ya boat.

I've found a compromise by selling my card when it hits a price point that justifies selling it and making up the cost for a newer card. It's quite possible to stay at the forefront of the technological rift without having to pay and arm and a leg with a bit of research and analysis on market pricing.

~>Dg<~ · 23 Feb 2007 at 13:55

this is y in my opinion its pointless buying a top of range card always buy a middle card and upgrade more often .take for instance 8800gtxs 500 roughly two months ago can get em for 320 now some places, 200 loss in two months is crazee(could have brought 8800gts for the diff) and not a dx 10 game in site.i remember fear and peeps spending close to a grand to get reqiured frames so looked good for a 15 quid game ,but peeps will buy em no matter anyways so maybe its a pointless.