1280x1024 with all details on runs fine on my Barton 2500+@1.83 Ghz/9800 Pro computer. What was all the original complaining about when this game came out?
Halo Runs fine on my computer
- Thread starter venk
- Start date
Don't know. I'm running my 9800XT @ 1280x768 and the game runs flawlessly. I'm sure I could crank the reso and the AF and AA and still get descent frame rate. Love the game though.
Runs fine here as well. I think all the hubub was the poor benchmark scores that were that way because the benchmark itself wasn't really intended to give a true FPS indication. That said, the game does have steep system demands and all three of us are running top end video cards. Not everyone has a 9800 Pro or 5900. Doesn't help that it doesn't support AA either. Try enabling AA and watch your frame rate drop while you get no image quality benefit.
It really distrubs me that Halo is getting such low frame rates from the best video cards money can buy. How did this game ever play on a Xbox which has a nvidia Gforce2 graphics engine (if I recall correctly).
I was going to sacrifice a couple of the live stock to the gods to afford one, but Why?
Only to be sorely disappointed that it will be another year till a card with the power to play will arrive.
me very ...
I was going to sacrifice a couple of the live stock to the gods to afford one, but Why?
Only to be sorely disappointed that it will be another year till a card with the power to play will arrive.
me very ... 
No, you couldnt.
Halo doesnt do AA or AF. It`ll give you the performance drop, but not the added image quality.
I run a XP1800, 768mb PC133 ram, 9700pro@Stock. I can run at 1280x1024@max (except shadows) pretty well. I`m sure when i upgrade, i can run with shadows on perfectly fine.
the complaint is that halo doesnt support AA and AF which makes the game look like crap even @ 1280*1024
GeForce4 graphics, and the game played slowly. It wasn't too horrible as you are stuck with a controller on the Box so you can't exactly pull off a real quick spin or anything.
AF does work on the GeForce line(it is enabled anyway), and I believe the R300 boards do handle partial AF in Halo, but the visual benefit is questionable to negative a lot of the time and there is a decent performance hit.
It isn't getting framerates as low as the benches indicate, the way the bench is set up it spends a decent amount of time loading different segments which get factored in to you framerate score.
I have a Radeon9600Pro and it runs rather slowly at 1024x768. All of my other games run without slowdown with all details on, 1280x1024.
I think that considering the graphic quality of the game, the performance is bad.
I think that considering the graphic quality of the game, the performance is bad.
duh...enhanced gf3 = gf4...
No really. I am pretty sure they use a gf3 base, but the game runs smoothly because TV's only need a resolution of about 640x480 to look decent...anything higher than that will not show the crispness as the tubes are just bogus like that. Now on a HDTV...
However, also take into consideration that xboxes do not have windows environments to power on top of the games, then you'll get a very smooth running game.
As for VENK's original comment.
Duh, you have a 9800 and a 2.5ghz...
Now I should be complaining...even at 1024x768 with amy ti4600 and 2.5ghz it is choppy - not a happy camper here, since I now have to get a 5900 to enjoy the eye candy.
Great game though!
Ben
I gotta agree with clicknext. Considering that Max Payne looks significantly better (at least to me) and runs significantly better as well, I can't see denying that Halo is poorly coded.
It is a combination of GeForce 3 and GeForce 4 graphics cores. Mostly based on GeForce 3 but added some features from GeForce 4.
The NV2A packs dual vertex shaders, which was the main difference between the NV20 and NV25, it is much closer to a GF4 then it is a GF3(although both the NV2A and the GF4 are based on the GF3).
Welcome to the world of pixel shaders. Seriously, none of the boards around are fast enough to handle an honestly heavy shader load that looks comparable to 'out of date' rendering techniques for the overwhelming majority of instances. On the XBox this trade off makes sense as it only has 64MB of RAM total, not like you can rely on a lot of high quality textures to carry you.
It's not poorly coded(at least, that is certainly not the main issue it has with performance). Shut the pixel shaders off and your performance should more then double(significantly more in some areas). This is what we can expect with shader heavy games for the most part, there isn't a game out that uses as many shader effects as Halo that performs better.
The XBox version has framerate dips in to the teens regularly, single digits far too frequently for my tastes. I have both versions, and am running a GF4 and the PC port runs much smoother. Being limited by a controller it doesn't drive you as nuts as it does with a M/KB setup as you are so much slower in a FPS anyway, but even with that amplifying the difference the PC port is a much smoother running game then the XBox native game. Also, the XBox version in running on a HDTV(480p, so an EDTV will do) does not look as good as the PC version running 640x480 with all settings cranked.
Welcome to the world of pixel shaders. Seriously, none of the boards around are fast enough to handle an honestly heavy shader load that looks comparable to 'out of date' rendering techniques for the overwhelming majority of instances. On the XBox this trade off makes sense as it only has 64MB of RAM total, not like you can rely on a lot of high quality textures to carry you.
It's not poorly coded(at least, that is certainly not the main issue it has with performance). Shut the pixel shaders off and your performance should more then double(significantly more in some areas). This is what we can expect with shader heavy games for the most part, there isn't a game out that uses as many shader effects as Halo that performs better.
The XBox version has framerate dips in to the teens regularly, single digits far too frequently for my tastes. I have both versions, and am running a GF4 and the PC port runs much smoother. Being limited by a controller it doesn't drive you as nuts as it does with a M/KB setup as you are so much slower in a FPS anyway, but even with that amplifying the difference the PC port is a much smoother running game then the XBox native game. Also, the XBox version in running on a HDTV(480p, so an EDTV will do) does not look as good as the PC version running 640x480 with all settings cranked.
Your post is more of a statement of computer specifications rather than a question about Halo. Your specs are great, a 9800 Pro is nice.
I think the final conclusion on Halo was to turn off PS if you had anything other than the top 4 or 5 video cards. I personally have tweaked Halo to run nicely on an Athlon XP1700 and a Geforce 3 Ti200. If you are not critical of, if all you have is a GF3Ti200, shadows and Hi-Gloss surfaces, it will maintain 1024 x 768 without significant drops in framerates.
Enjoy
after a few patches it plays much better, but i have a canny poor computer, and Halo played fluidly straight out of the box on my 9500pro. i have a friend who bought a 9800np clocked it to pro speeds, has a slower cpu by 100 speed (i have xp2000 he has 1900 or 1800 not sure) but has faster ram, and halo was damn near unplayable! i jus laugh at him
SneakyStuff
Diamond Member
- Jan 13, 2004
- 4,294
- 0
- 76
Specular has a lot to do with HALO, any other game I play on my system runs flawlessly; Splinter Cell, Unreal 2003, Morrowind, Call of Duty, that kind of stuff. But HALO is an exception, when I turn off specular the game runs absolutely perfect, but with specular on, the game becomes really slow at certain points, I've heard rumors going around that the game has poor coding, I'm not sure how credible that is, but seeing the game in action makes me wonder. Great game nonetheless!
It runs fine on your machine because unlike certain other members you didn't pirate the game and the OS it's running on.
- M4H
- M4H
SneakyStuff
Diamond Member
- Jan 13, 2004
- 4,294
- 0
- 76
I also have both the XBox & PC version of this game. While playing XBox there was only a couple of instances where there was some stuttering - nothing that took anything away from the game.On my main PC (Dell 2.4ghz/533fsb/512 DDR ram) using my old 64mb Ti4200 the game would slow down in many areas unless running at 800x600. This while forcing Halo to run with PS 1.1! Since upgrading to a 5900SE, I run with PS 2.0 at up to 1280x1024 butter smooth.
To those trying to run this game smoothly, turn down some of the eye candy. My Dell 8200 Inspiron is 1.7ghz (1.2 on battery power) and has the 32mb GF4 440Go (440MX). The game runs perfectly at 1280x1024 with details set to medium. Keeping in mind that the 440MX does not support Pixel Shader (and thus Halo runs only in T&L) should tell you that Pixel Shaders take a tremendous toll on the frame rate. Honestly, my laptop (even on battery power @ 1.2ghz) runs Halo just as smoothly as my 2.4ghz/5900. Plus, there is not a large difference in graphics eye candy - the main thing I notice that is not there is specular lighting (shiny surfaces).
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter