The most demanding game for your card?

man_from_uncle · 1 Nov 2006 at 10:41

malc30 said:
AMD64 3500 @ 2.4 with a Freezer 64 fitted.
Asus A8V Deluxe.
Ganiward 7800GS+ @ 495/715 Drivers 91.47's.
2Gig of Geil.
80Gb maxtor.
Antec Trueblue 480w PSU.
Windows XP home SP2 Up to date.
Ally KB and a MX1000 as handlebars.
Pulling
06 score of 4054.
05 of 8172.

Ah. In your above post you said you were on socket A. I think you meant AGP.

Still with that 7800gs+ you've got a card that should make almost any game playable at 1280x1024 with high/max settings. Even Oblivion should be mostly playable at Max, though you'll probably find some places outside bring your graphics card to a crawl and some places in some cities will do the same to your CPU. You'll fly through the openning dugeon though with 60fps+.

4T5 · 1 Nov 2006 at 10:44

My mistake and thanks for correcting me. Yes i meant AGP but got lost.
I must admit i am wandering around the early stages of Oblivion so if this is lighter then that would explain things. Will have to see as the game unfolds. At the moment it is just stunning. A gorgeous game visually.

It has to be said though that my set up would Not cost to much to buy and as you said will run any game out there.

man_from_uncle · 1 Nov 2006 at 10:50

malc30 said:
My mistake and thanks for correcting me. Yes i meant AGP but got lost.
I must admit i am wandering around the early stages of Oblivion so if this is lighter then that would explain things. Will have to see as the game unfolds. At the moment it is just stunning. A gorgeous game visually.

The underground areas are much easier on the hardware. But wait till you get outside. Performance will take a hit (you should look into reducing te amount of grass in the config file), but it'll look even better.

malc30 said:
It has to be said though that my set up would Not cost to much to buy and as you said will run any game out there.

Oh I know. But the difference between running at 1280x1024 x2AA x4 AF and 1600x1200 x4AA x16AF is about £500. And strangly there are a lot of us who really what to play with the later settings.

ins0mn1ac · 1 Nov 2006 at 10:53

worst FPS i've seen so far with full eye candy is defo on Call of Juarez, I saw 20's at times on the crawl level, tons of moving grass + lightning etc, you get the idea

4T5 · 1 Nov 2006 at 10:53

@ man from uncle

Agreed.

Any chance of a screeny at your settings. This is about the best GFX's i have ever seen. Show me what i am missing.

man_from_uncle · 1 Nov 2006 at 11:02

malc30 said:
@ man from uncle

Agreed.

Any chance of a screeny at your settings. This is about the best GFX's i have ever seen. Show me what i am missing.

I would do, but Oblivion needs some modding to the config file before you can take screen shots and upload them. And I have no idea what that mod. I'll look into it though.

man_from_uncle · 1 Nov 2006 at 11:30

You know a good place to host pics? These come out at 5.5mb each.

knowlesy · 1 Nov 2006 at 11:32

rhymin · 1 Nov 2006 at 11:33

fsx is the most demanding game yet i think, seems to be the cpu thats slowing it down tho, rather than the gfx card.

StevenG · 1 Nov 2006 at 11:41

F.E.A.R as it uses really complex lighting!! i get about 20-30FPS with MAX setting (Everything apart from vsync) at 1920x1200

MooSey-UK · 1 Nov 2006 at 11:46

malc30 said:
My mistake and thanks for correcting me. Yes i meant AGP but got lost.
I must admit i am wandering around the early stages of Oblivion so if this is lighter then that would explain things. Will have to see as the game unfolds. At the moment it is just stunning. A gorgeous game visually.

It has to be said though that my set up would Not cost to much to buy and as you said will run any game out there.

bear in mind i mean at max settings with at least 2 x AA and a minimum rez of 1280 x 1024.
the point of the post was despite the fact i should be able to hammer cod2 it still gives me grief at times. (thats with the same card as you and an x2 44 @ 48) and my rig is tunes throughout.

to change tack a bit....

i've just reinstalled Q4 to test it on my card (gainward 7800gs+ 512) to try the ultra high. there was the odd jerk due to textures coming from the hdd but. comparing to old screenies i had using an x800xl with less detail etc the difference is'nt astounding. its true that a good game can overcome poorer graphics. however if my card can do it then i want the eye candy! im not one of those folk that plays bf2 with lowest settings and shodows off in order to exploit a legal exploit. i pays me moolah and want to see the most glorious gfx i can

Raves · 1 Nov 2006 at 11:49

man_from_uncle · 1 Nov 2006 at 11:53

Screw it! I can't upload any bloody pictures. Image shack just confuses the life out of me.

mrthingyx · 1 Nov 2006 at 12:11

Gregster6 said:
X3 Reunion is the most demanding game that I posess both graphics and CPU wise.

On the graphics front, events such as a medium to large sized in-sector dogfight or a capital ship battle can slow frame rates right down. At these (not too frequent, thankfully) times X3 makes my PC's F.E.A.R. and Oblivion performance seem positively blistering.

On my PC at least (X2 4800 / 1950XTX / 1280 * 1024).

Hey, hey! A fellow X3-er!

That game definately brings my system down in flames: admittedly, my system is pants comparaed to just about everybody else's on this forum, but a massive Xenon invasion in Getsu Fune gives me about 0.5fps (no kidding). Everything on 'low' @ 1280x768.

Athlon XP Tbred @ 1800MHz
Radeon 9800Pro

melbourne720 · 1 Nov 2006 at 14:39

mrthingyx said:
Hey, hey! A fellow X3-er!

That game definately brings my system down in flames: admittedly, my system is pants comparaed to just about everybody else's on this forum, but a massive Xenon invasion in Getsu Fune gives me about 0.5fps (no kidding). Everything on 'low' @ 1280x768.

Athlon XP Tbred @ 1800MHz
Radeon 9800Pro

And I thought I had a slow system :eek:

Time for an upgrade...

Although saying that, has there ever been a card like the 9800 Pro for longevity?

Durzel · 1 Nov 2006 at 15:09

Oblivion at 2560x1600 with HDR+AA+Bloom taxes my PC quite hard.

BubbySoup · 1 Nov 2006 at 15:26

EverQuest 2 is the most demanding game I run. Not only is it graphically demanding, it is also very CPU intensive.

It can bring my X1900 xfired Conroe rig to its knees quite easily @ 1920x1200 - and that's not even at maxium detail. On a 15 or 20 man raid, my machine actually cries

Darg · 1 Nov 2006 at 15:54

COD2 like many has said is probably my worst but it's still playable at max settings on 1280x1024. Average fps seems to be around 30 but I haven't checked. I haven't noticed the fps drop so low as to stutter.

Oblivion when it's outside and beside an oblivion gate has produced the worst fps. Also when loading stuff in the background it can get bad. I'm playing with the .ini settings to try and fix that though. Overall though the fps is well up in the playable range. Full reflection and refraction in the water incl all static, trees and actor reflection and it looks amazing. I couldn't get over the ripples following me around in the water. I must have walked backwards past a floating boat a dozen times just to see the ripples distort the reflection.

I came from a 9800Pro to a 7600GT (AGP)

For those that say MS FSX is their worst that's most likely because of a buggy engine. MS even said themselves in a few interviews after the demo came out that they were working on trying to fix the stuttering issues. Obviously they never did before the full version was released. I hope for your sakes that a patch is released that helps. From the screenshots it doesn't seem that graphically intensive. Certainly not more then oblivion and that doesnt slow down even when you're looking right out across all of tamriel. I think they needed to have a better LOD system in MS FSX.

CoH.

Can't crack 30fps in that mother! And it ain't even an FPS title!

That's odd. I ran the game on full settings at 1280x1024 on my old 9800Pro and never had a real problem. Maybe some small stuttering when my entire clan was there firing up the effects.

mrthingyx · 1 Nov 2006 at 16:00

melbourne720 said:
And I thought I had a slow system Time for an upgrade...

I agree completely. Although - unfortunately - my house extension's flat roof needs re-doing more urgently.

And yes, the 9800Pro was (still is to a very limited extent) an awesome card.

melbourne720 · 1 Nov 2006 at 16:06

mrthingyx said:
I agree completely. Although - unfortunately - my house extension's flat roof needs re-doing more urgently.

Good call. If you bought a new PC, put it in the extension, and the roof collapsed flooding the PC, you'd feel pretty foolish (talk about water cooling... :eek:

)

Oh, and Titan Quest at 1280 x 1024 really pushes my PC. I'm addicted to the detail in this game more than any other!