Anyone in here with a fast video card able to play Medal of Honor single player with no game lag?

[WyteWatt]

 

[cholley]

yes,
play it on my 900tbird w/geforce 256
no problems

 

[WyteWatt]

cholley but is there any little game lag during shooting scenes or anything else? what kind of fps you get and at what resolution?

 

[Oreo]

MOHAA mainly needs a fast CPU. With a 900MHz Athlon it will go down in the 20's in the Omaha beach scene for example so you really need a 1GHz+ CPU for smooth fps.

 

[paralazarguer]

Yeah, Um, MOHAA is just based on the quake 3 engine. Most video cards and modern systems will run it at over 100fps constantly.

 

[WyteWatt]

7757524 what about at 1024x768 with all details on max. and everything on with a GF4 ti 4600, a Athlon xp 1800+, and 256 mb of SDRAM pc133 ? It seems to have some lag at times.

 

[Oreo]

Originally posted by: 7757524
Yeah, Um, MOHAA is just based on the quake 3 engine. Most video cards and modern systems will run it at over 100fps constantly.

Are you joking, or what?! You obviously haven't played it since it does not go anywhere near 100 fps alot of the time. I played it on my old Duron 1GHz and it went under 30fps pretty often so it defenitly needs a fast CPU (like I said). Just cause a game is based on the Q3 engine doesn't mean it will play as fast as Quake 3. Try MOHAA and SOF2 and you'll understand...

 

[PH0ENIX]

Yes...

Check my rig, I ran it @ 1280x1024x32 - detail levels on max, 4x FSAA forced by nVidia drivers...

I never did a framerate test, but I played it through - and I never experienced lag, frame loss, tearing, or stuttering of any kind.

Im the kind of person who can't stand lag in any way so I definately would have noticed.

That system of yours looks more than capable of handling medal of honor, perhaps there are configuration options like memory and AGP latency in your BIOS that need adjustment?
The PC133 platform isn't exactly the fastest for the athlon, but I wouldn't say it was your bottleneck.

Im kent brockman and that's my .02

Ph0.

 

[CubicZirconia]

Most video cards and modern systems will run it at over 100fps constantly.

Right....unfortunately for a lot of people that isn't true.

Edit: I suppose we could have different views on what constitutes "modern", but that still is quite a statement.

 

[paralazarguer]

7757524 what about at 1024x768 with all details on max. and everything on with a GF4 ti 4600, a Athlon xp 1800+, and 256 mb of SDRAM pc133 ? It seems to have some lag at times.

I run the game at 1600x1200 full detail with no AA in excess of 50 fps all the time with a Norhtwood@2.13, 400mhz DDR and a lowly GF3 ti3200. If you're getting slowdown at 1024 there's something wrong.

 

[paralazarguer]

Check my rig, I ran it @ 1280x1024x32 - detail levels on max, 4x FSAA forced by nVidia drivers...

I never did a framerate test, but I played it through - and I never experienced lag, frame loss, tearing, or stuttering of any kind.

Im the kind of person who can't stand lag in any way so I definately would have noticed.

That system of yours looks more than capable of handling medal of honor, perhaps there are configuration options like memory and AGP latency in your BIOS that need adjustment?
The PC133 platform isn't exactly the fastest for the athlon, but I wouldn't say it was your bottleneck.

Yeah, this guy's got the right idea. THere's something going on with your system.

 

[novice]

I wonder if imtim83 is running a Via chipset motherboard without installing the Via AGP driver for the motherboard. That could explain some disappointing video performance from an otherwise strong looking system. I run MOHAH with a MSI K7T Turbo. XP1700+, 384 megs PC-133 ram and an original Visiontek Geforce 3 non-overclocked, and it runs fine without stuttering or skipping, but there is a little slow down during the most active scenes. Overall, though it looks/runs just fine.
Chuck

 

[BFG10K]

MOHAA is a very CPU limited game and even on a 2.2 GHz Northwood like mine gets framerates in the 30s in the beach level and the snowed forest level. If you want good performance you really have to buy the biggest baddest CPU you can afford. I'm sure this game would absolutely love a 2.53 GHz Northwood with PC1066 RDRAM.

Also there is a lot of misinformation in this thread posted by people who clearly don't have a clue about the game at all:

play it on my 900tbird w/geforce 256

Yeah? At what settings? And what are your framerates on the beach levels and the snowed forest level?

Yeah, Um, MOHAA is just based on the quake 3 engine. Most video cards and modern systems will run it at over 100fps constantly.

Utter rubbish. This is one of the most inaccurate statements that I have seen in a very long time.

I never did a framerate test, but I played it through - and I never experienced lag, frame loss, tearing, or stuttering of any kind.

Framerates in the 30s are more than enough for me to class as jerky. And I'm sure your rig would go that low because your CPU is slightly faster than mine but your video card is far slower than mine.

In fact I notice framerates below 60 FPS but I'm mildly annoyed until it gets to about 45 FPS and then it starts to really annoy the hell out me. Anything below 45 FPS is absolutely unacceptable and is a slideshow.

I run the game at 1600x1200 full detail with no AA in excess of 50 fps all the time with a Norhtwood@2.13, 400mhz DDR and a lowly GF3 ti3200.

Try the beach level or the snowed forest level. You'll probably get framerates as low as the 20s with a rig like yours.

 

[paralazarguer]

MOHAA is a very CPU limited game and even on a 2.2 GHz Northwood like mine gets framerates in the 30s in the beach level and the snowed forest level. If you want good performance you really have to buy the biggest baddest CPU you can afford. I'm sure this game would absolutely love a 2.53 GHz Northwood with PC1066 RDRAM.

LOL! You're a funny person! My system is much weaker than your and outperforms it in this game by several times!!!!

 

[BFG10K]

My system is much weaker than your and outperforms it in this game by several times!!!!

I have hard numbers to back up my claims from actual framerate counters and extensive game tests in a wide variety of situations. Where's your evidence?

"My system is much weaker than your and outperforms it in this game by several times!!!!"?

This is your evidence?

I'm afraid you're going to have to do better than that my friend.

 

[PH0ENIX]

10K,

I'm an avid FPS gamer, and one with no reason to lie also.

My earliest memory of battling against lag was trying to play Hexen on my 486 DX/33.
Once I slapped a 512k video card in, hey presto, no lag.

Now firstly, what is the frame limiter set at, in MOHAA?

I would have thought it would be around the 40fps mark but I could of course be wrong.

Obviously you're not going to get benchmarked frame rate results while you're playing the game; otherwise you'd be moving down narrow empty corridors at near light speed...

I HATE performance degredation. If I even SLIGHTLY notice frame tearing i'll start tweaking things until it's not noticeable.
Im rather pedantic about it actually.

So, if I, mr picky, can't notice it, then I figure it's not dropping below the frame limiter - and if it doesn't do an ungodly amount of FPS OVER the limiter (ie; in benchmarks) - why the hell do I care?

Also, you're comparing 2 systems based soley on the CPU, and the video.
For a start, my card isn't running at stock speeds, but it does mention that in my rig specs.
Secondly, you dont know any information with regards to latencies, memory clock, transaction delays, what drivers i'm using, what software 'tweaking' utilities are running (none, but you get my point), what priority I run the game process at, whether or not i'm using Vsync, what OS or game updates I have, etc. etc. etc...

Not having a go, but you cant exactly say 'well yours cant be lag free cuz mines not'

Didn't you just criticize 7757524 for that?

 

[WyteWatt]

How do i make sure my frame rates are to the max. for my GF4 ti 4400 video card in Medal of honor? Like do i have to set max. fps someway? Please let me know how thanks.

 

[paralazarguer]

I have hard numbers to back up my claims from actual framerate counters and extensive game tests in a wide variety of situations. Where's your evidence?

My "evidence" is that yours is "jerky" while mine is not. Totally smooth. I run two systems and both are totally smooth with all settings max 1600x1200. I'm pretty sensitive to even the slightest lag and there is none. if you're experiencing lag then both of my systems must be better performers.

 

[BD2003]

The overdraw is hardcore on levels with the trees in them. Especially the foggy forest, even on my system it still slows down a bit.

 

[Oreo]

Originally posted by: 7757524

I have hard numbers to back up my claims from actual framerate counters and extensive game tests in a wide variety of situations. Where's your evidence?

My "evidence" is that yours is "jerky" while mine is not. Totally smooth. I run two systems and both are totally smooth with all settings max 1600x1200. I'm pretty sensitive to even the slightest lag and there is none. if you're experiencing lag then both of my systems must be better performers.

You're just pulling numbers and statements out of your a$$. If you run the Omaha beach mission with the framecounter on I'm sure you'll drop down in the 30's. And your system ISN'T better configured or tweaked then 10K's for example, I'm pretty sure of that, you just might not be as sensitive to jerky frames.

 

[MikeMike]

My system slows down on omaha with slight stuttering when i make it to a bunker with lots of fighting if i try to turn fast. But thats at 16x12 w/ max everything no AA. the rig i use is SMELLY in my sig

 

[paralazarguer]

You're just pulling numbers and statements out of your a$$. If you run the Omaha beach mission with the framecounter on I'm sure you'll drop down in the 30's. And your system ISN'T better configured or tweaked then 10K's for example, I'm pretty sure of that, you just might not be as sensitive to jerky frames.

I'm not giving ANY numbers. I just reinstalled the game and played omaha beach at 1600x1200 no jerkiness whatsoever. I'm pretty sensitive to it. My room mate can't see any slow down either. I am running DDR400 at cas2 ras2 if that might help but it's smooth as a baby's butt. I don't know how you can say it's not just because yours isn't. Sorry your system doens't perform as well. That's too bad.

 

[paralazarguer]

wait a minute? What do you mean his system is faster then mine?! His processor runs 200mhz slower on a slower FSB. His ram is 266 comared to 400mhz. I'm running cas 2 and ras 2 and my video card is only slightly slower but it is overclocked. Also his soundcard is crap and drags down frame rates. How could you consider that a faster system? LOL!

 

[Oreo]

Originally posted by: 7757524

You're just pulling numbers and statements out of your a$$. If you run the Omaha beach mission with the framecounter on I'm sure you'll drop down in the 30's. And your system ISN'T better configured or tweaked then 10K's for example, I'm pretty sure of that, you just might not be as sensitive to jerky frames.

I'm not giving ANY numbers. I just reinstalled the game and played omaha beach at 1600x1200 no jerkiness whatsoever. I'm pretty sensitive to it. My room mate can't see any slow down either. I am running DDR400 at cas2 ras2 if that might help but it's smooth as a baby's butt. I don't know how you can say it's not just because yours isn't. Sorry your system doens't perform as well. That's too bad.

It might run smooth but the issue here was that if it was gonna run "well over 50 fps" on any new system. That isn't true. Run the Omaha beach again with the framecounter on and see what results you get. Just typ fps 1 in the console.

 

[paralazarguer]

will do in a few hours.