FX 5200 & Far Cry?

[cbehnken]

Why not just tell them to buy the 9800 Pro from Newegg and if they ever have trouble with the dell remove the card??

 

[SinfulWeeper]

Originally posted by: railer
Of course a 5200 will run FC. I run it on my laptop with an underclocked 5200, that only has 32 meg of RAM. It looks a bit like ass on my system, but it's playable. A real 5200 with a normal amount of RAM would run the game fine. Those of you who have never even owned a 5200, and have never even tried to play it on a 5200, why do you post ignorant responses?

Maybe compared to the original playstaion... it is playable . But dood, if you gaming with a laptop... you must be a constant travler. In which case yeah, a PC version of the 5200 would look like an upgrade from a 4MB SGI PCI video card to a 6600 GT PCIe

Seriously, before you make that statement again. Stand behind the wheel with a system powered with a 5900 or 9700/9800 for at least a couple hours, then try ur laptop. A home system with a 5200. It is so totally the suk.

 

[BFG10K]

Can this run far cry at a somewhat decent resolution?

Hell no, not even at 320x240.

 

[carlosd]

Decent resolution is at least 800x600. But In the FX5200 FarCry will run like crap even at 640x480. You can't pretend playing one of the most system hugry games in the chapest and slowest DX9 card.

 

[Kenazo]

my brother-in-law is running FC on a GF4 ti-4200 64meg @ 800x600 and it looks pretty sweet. For the uneducated computer user, it should work fine.

 

[jiffylube1024]

(Xbox specs/ 4 yr old archetecture (GF3)) I would be wiser to compare a computer to the next-gen prices (which i dont think anyone knows yet). The fact is that with all the "creative ways to obtain cheaper games" (demos, game images, etc) that pc users have, the cost to upgrade a computer system is around the same cost as to buy an entire new console each generation that can only play limited games.

For instance, i spent ~$400-$500 upgrading my computer. I baught a proc @3.3 gigs, 160gb hd, 9800p @ ~XT speeds, a gig of dual channel ram, nf7-s mobo, a case, antec psu, case fans, ide cables, Z640 speakers, MX500 mouse, heatsink/fan for cpu. And for the rest of my system, it had cost me around another $100 (i just had the rest beforehand. So lets say $70 mobo + $55 proc + $160 video card + $120 gig of ram. That's ~$400 for an upgrade later on (considering prices dont change and the market stays fairly steady) vs the cost of the initial retail price of a console. Not much different huh? In another 2-3 yrs ill be spending another $400 on components for my pc, while other ppl will be spending much more on the next consoles + games + controlers + network adapters + memory cards + some new stupid technology that u "must" have but have had on pcs for 3 yrs now + etc, etc ,etc... I'm sure u can see the difference now. The price really isnt that much different IF you upgrade your current pc every few yrs and know how to get the best bang for ur buck.

While this is true (PC's cost tons of money, and it's not just for games), you can't deny the fact that if you want at least "passable" gameplay on today's PC's you need to spend $150-200 on a good video card (9800 Pro/6600GT (soon)/X700 (soon) ), and if you want to be on the cutting edge, $300-400 for an X800/6800 series card.

That's a lot of dough.

Even if you consider stuff like WD Raptors, a gig of RAM, another huge HD, a fast processor and motherboard 'essentials' (like all us geeks do ), the video card alone is greater than the cost of a console. Then there's the fact that if we weren't playing cutting edge games we would probably be fine with a bit slower processor (2 Ghz range instead of 3 Ghz range) and half the amount of memory.


The devil is in the details with consoles for sure, though. Memory cards, extra controllers, $40+ a pop for new games, higher quality cables (Svideo/Component/Optical audio/etc), other assorted accessories (hey look, a remote to make my PS2 a sh!tty DVD player! Cool!), etc.

Originally posted by: Marsumane

You CANNOT compare like that. U have to compare apples to apples. A geforce 3, 700mhz processor, and 128mb of ram doesnt cost that much for a computer.

Yeah, but when that person tries to play any modern game like Far Cry or Doom 3 or whatever, then they have to pay out of their @ss to upgrade.

Even worse is the typical "noobie" user whose system is something like this:

P4 1.9 (or another pre-Northwood)
256MB RDRAM
GeForce 2 speed video card (often using the letters "MX"). Maybe GeForce 3 if they were savvy at the time.
Dell motherboard

or a slightly more savvy, thrifty user, ie:

P4 1.8A @ 2.2 to Athlon XP 2500+ @ 3200+
512MB DDR333
GeForce 4 Ti
Good Asus/Abit/etc motherboard


When the question comes up "How can I play Doom3 or Far Cry at a good resolution and with most of the eye candy on", they have to crack open the safe.

-They need a new video card because their old one won't cut the mustard
-They now are CPU limited, so they need to upgrade their CPU, however:
-In order to accomodate the new CPU, they need a new motherboard (and often, faster RAM)
-They may need to upgrade their PSU, their case, etc

So, keeping up with the latest and greatest on the PC is a costly affair, particularly for the layman user.

For instance, i spent ~$400-$500 upgrading my computer. I baught a proc @3.3 gigs, 160gb hd, 9800p @ ~XT speeds, a gig of dual channel ram, nf7-s mobo, a case, antec psu, case fans, ide cables, Z640 speakers, MX500 mouse, heatsink/fan for cpu. And for the rest of my system, it had cost me around another $100 (i just had the rest beforehand. So lets say $70 mobo + $55 proc + $160 video card + $120 gig of ram. That's ~$400 for an upgrade later on (considering prices dont change and the market stays fairly steady) vs the cost of the initial retail price of a console. Not much different huh?

How is $400 + 400 not much different from a console? And how does any CPU that overclocks to 3.3 Ghz cost $55?

---------------------------

As a quick side tangent (yes, I'm amazed at how off topic this thread got too! Posting late at night is dangerous), isn't it about frikkin time console manufacturers went with a standard for controllers, like, hmm, USB 2.0??? The buggers get us every generation for new controllers, when often we could just use older generations' controllers, or those from another system, etc.

While, for example, the Gamecube has a nifty controller for Nintendo-developed games, I'd like it much better if I didnt have to buy three more goofy controllers to play sports and party games with my buddies when my PS1/PS2 controllers would suffice.

Of course this will probably never happen, and I could just buy adaptors (often each costing around the price of a new controller), but it would be nice.

 

[jrphoenix]

Originally posted by: cbehnken
Why not just tell them to buy the 9800 Pro from Newegg and if they ever have trouble with the dell remove the card??

I will try to again... they seemed very hung up on "not voiding the warranty". If he yanked the card out, Dell wouldn't be any wiser. He is an honest guy I guess

 

[Sunbird]

I played to Far Cry demo repeatedly (for hours on end) on my Athlon XP 2600+ and nForce 2 with its INTEGRATED!!! gForce 4 MX. It was certainly playable, just not as cool looking with fish and stuff and bubbles and cool looking thick bush. I admit I now love it on my 5900XT, but could go back to the MX and still be happy.

Now my main point is, the game has such a cool storyline and the smart enemies, its still great to play on less than midrange graphics.

Since so many of you all feel so extremely strongly that the 5200 would be so bad, why don't you donate a great 6800 to the guy's relative. Come on! You chicken?

To the original poster (and considering last posters reference to warranty), its not a great buy, I admit, especially the price premium for a 256MB (which does nothing extra basically) model, can't he ask for a 128-bit 128MB model from Dell?

 

[fsstrike]

I would kill myself before playing Farcry on a 5200FX

 

[triQ]

Originally posted by: fsstrike
I would kill myself before playing Farcry on a 5200FX

LOL

 

[jrphoenix]

Originally posted by: fsstrike
I would kill myself before playing Farcry on a 5200FX

I hope I'm not the cause of my uncle's and cousin's death! :evil:

 

[Sunbird]

Originally posted by: jrphoenix

Originally posted by: fsstrike
I would kill myself before playing Farcry on a 5200FX

I hope I'm not the cause of my uncle's and cousin's death! :evil:

LOL

 

[carlosd]

Originally posted by: Kenazo
my brother-in-law is running FC on a GF4 ti-4200 64meg @ 800x600 and it looks pretty sweet. For the uneducated computer user, it should work fine.

The GF4 Ti 4200 is far superior in performance to the FX5200, even the 64MB version.

 

[JackBurton]

You CANNOT compare like that. You CANNOT compare like that. U have to compare apples to apples.

Oh yes I can. And it IS an apples to apples comparison.

A geforce 3, 700mhz processor, and 128mb of ram doesnt cost that much for a computer. (Xbox specs/ 4 yr old archetecture (GF3))

This is the MOST annoying arguement EVER made ever since the XBox was released. Yes, the XBox uses a ~700MHz processor, and GF3 type card, but it is in NO way comparable to a PC with a PIII 733 procesor with GF3 card. DOA3 was one of the first titles released on the XBox and has only recently been surpassed in the graphics department on the PC (IMO). Far Cry, Doom3, and a few other newer titles are a good step above the XBox.

But let's take a closer look at this. I paid $299 for my XBox in Nov of 2001. The ONLY thing I bought extra was the games I wanted to play. I had no need for memory cards (XBox has a built in hard drive), and did not need to pay for a network adapter (XBox came with one of those too). Later on I bought and extra controller if I wanted to play a friend, but I'd have to do that too on my PC if I wanted to play 2 players on MAME. So we won't add that into the cost of the console. The ONLY other thing I bought extra that can be added to the console cost comparison is XBox Live! which I think I paid $39-49. Also when the XBox came out, it slapped around all PC games, graphics wise.

Now let's take a look at the PC side. I think back then I had a GF2 with a PIII 600 @ 800MHz CPU with 512MB, which for back then was quite a bit of memory. Then I upgraded to a Athlon XP 1600+ @ 1800+ speeds, 1GB of DDR memory and an 8500. That was $100 for the CPU, $180 for the memory, $75 for the board and $299 for the video card. That's $654 for the "upgrade." Well guess what, now that Doom 3 and Far Cry are out, I needed to "upgrade" yet again to play the games the way they should be played (every visual setting maxed with 4X AA and 8X AF). So I did a relatively cheap upgrade and got a Athlon XP 2600+ Mobile @ 2.2GHz and a GeForce 6800GT. That's $100 for the CPU and $400 for the card, both combined, $500. Now if you are adding this up, that is over $1100 in PC "upgrades" since I bought my XBox. And you'll also notice I don't have a P4 or Athlon64 CPU in my upgrades, AND I skipped quite a few generation in video cards.

As far as...

creative ways to obtain cheaper games" (demos, game images, etc) that pc users have

Wow, I'm glad you threw stealing into the price comparison. Unfortunately you can steal games on the XBox too. So that doesn't factor in.

With the PC, you'll have to upgrade for new games. With a console, the graphics will get better but you can be assured, if it was made for the console, it will play great on the console. No upgrade needed.

Right now, the PC has a good lead on graphics over the XBox. But when XBox 2 and Playstation 3 come out, it will be time for "shock and awe."

So as you can see, playing games on a PC are MUCH more expensive than on a console. There is NO comparison there.