deathwarder Posted March 26, 2006 Posted March 26, 2006 ok, I have a question, I am getting really good fps on far cry full settings 1024x786, but if I want to use a higher res, what should I do, I have 1gig of ram, intel 520, ati radeon x800pro 256
N1K Posted March 26, 2006 Posted March 26, 2006 What are ur current system specs? But, YES, you should have at least one gig of RAM, and stronger graphic card, like NVidia 6600GT, 6800GT or Pro, or even 7800GTX..
puntoMX Posted March 26, 2006 Posted March 26, 2006 Just put it on a higher res.? Or what is the problem? Can you tell us a bit more please
deathwarder Posted March 26, 2006 Author Posted March 26, 2006 the problem is that the fps dips too low, like under 30 when I set the res higher, are there any optimizations I can do?
ripken204 Posted March 26, 2006 Posted March 26, 2006 what res do u want and what game are u trying to playand can u give us a link for the graphics card?
puntoMX Posted March 27, 2006 Posted March 27, 2006 (edited) Ripken204, are you sleeping ; It´s the game Far Cry and he uses an ATI x800pro with 256MB RAM.deathwarder, I think It´s a texture problem you have there, try to set your aperture-size in your BIOS higher (klick on this link to see more information).Does your harddrive work a lot when you are in-game? Edited March 27, 2006 by puntoMX
ripken204 Posted March 27, 2006 Posted March 27, 2006 well thats why i wanted a link for that card, b/c it prolly cant handel a higher resolution..
puntoMX Posted March 27, 2006 Posted March 27, 2006 The X800pro is basicly the PCI-E version of the 9800pro (as far as I know), wich gives almost the same performance as a nVidia 6800.
nmX.Memnoch Posted March 27, 2006 Posted March 27, 2006 The X800 Pro is definitely faster than the 9800 Pro. Moving to a 6800GT or even Ultra probably wouldn't give him much. He'd have to go up to the X1800/X1900 or 7800GT/7800GTX to get appreciable gains.Before looking at new hardware though, try turning some of the graphics settings down. Like turn FSAA down a notch, and possibly even AF down a notch. FSAA is an FPS killer at higher resolutions on the "older" cards.
puntoMX Posted March 27, 2006 Posted March 27, 2006 Yeah, you are right, it´s the ATI 420 chip . I think I was sleeping
deathwarder Posted March 27, 2006 Author Posted March 27, 2006 ok, I figured out that ut was a memory issue, so moving to a better card wont help unless Iget a 512 version, thanks!
ripken204 Posted March 28, 2006 Posted March 28, 2006 u dont need 512, i have the evga 7800gt and i can play all games on full settings at 1280x1024
nmX.Memnoch Posted March 28, 2006 Posted March 28, 2006 so moving to a better card wont help unless Iget a 512 version, thanks!That's not what we said at all. Most games today aren't really taking advantage of the 512MB of graphics memory available on the extreme high-end graphics cards. There's a small performance gain, but it's not worth the extra money.If you really don't want to turn down the detail but still want higher resolutions then you're going to have to upgrade, but it doesn't have to be a 512MB card.
Jeremy Posted March 28, 2006 Posted March 28, 2006 ok, I figured out that ut was a memory issue, so moving to a better card wont help unless Iget a 512 version, thanks!Look, the 256/512 is far from everything in regards to how well your video card will perform. what matters is how much RAM you have, the Pixel Pipelines and Pixel Shader v3.0. I have the GeForce 6800GS 256MB and let me tell you, HL2, Far Cry, COD2, Elder Scrolls 4 - Oblivion, beauties. so, research the important factors before you think you have to get a 512MB to enjoy gaming... absolutely not true.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now