is cod2 that demanding or what ?

[tvdang7]

http://firingsquad.com/hardware/nvidia_...e_8800_gtx_gts_overclocking/page11.asp

unless the benches are wrong. this game is pretty killer for the new cards. at 1600x1200 teh gts is around the the last gen cards........ although the gts does a lil better . but prob the only game where i dont see almost double the frame rate boost from last gen or a significant boost.

 

[Conky]

Those tests are at extreme resolutions with high AA/AF, etc.

Although COD2, my favorite game right now, is very demanding videocard-wise. It took a minimum of an X850XT to run the game right with all the eye-candy and my recent 7900GS is taking care of bidness too although I can't see a framerate difference as I am limited at 1280x1024. I can enable AA too but I am an old schooler and don't wanna give up any frames just for nothing... especially nothing that I can't actually see, lol.

 

[BFG10K]

It's a well know fact that the CoD 2 DirectX 9 renderer sucks balls because it's so slow.

Run the game under DX7 and it'll fly.

 

[SpeedZealot369]

Originally posted by: BFG10K
It's a well know fact that the CoD 2 DirectX 9 renderer sucks balls because it's so slow.

Run the game under DX7 and it'll fly.

Yepp I think it was ported from the xbox 360

 

[A554SS1N]

Never had any problem with dx9 with a 6600GT at 1280x1024 - I think some people are just too picky about their framerates....

 

[tvdang7]

well ive actually played the game with my x850xt x1800xt and x1900xt (dx9). i can feel the frames drop especially when sniping.
was just hoping that the new card woulda left the last gen in the dust. this is the only game that it doesnt do that,

Originally posted by: A554SS1N
Never had any problem with dx9 with a 6600GT at 1280x1024 - I think some people are just too picky about their framerates....

dang man u dont feel any drops? are u playing in small servers or big ones?

 

[Woofmeister]

COD2 is just a demanding game that cries out for DX9 optimization. I consistently saw frame rates in the low thirties using my old 7800GTs in SLI running at 1920x1200.

It's COD2's fault, not the hardware. Much better looking games like F.E.A.R. Quake 4 and even BF2 are easier to run at max settings.

 

[Munky]

COD2 with max settings in DX9 mode is awfully demanding, I even saw FEAR run faster than that on my old x850xt. I think there may be an issue with activating AA on 256mb cards, as I've seen a huge performance drop with AA, and saw the same thing happening in online benches, even at 1280 resolution. My x1900xt 512mb, however, ran the game much smoother, even with AA.

 

[josh6079]

*shrugs* I played it fine @1680x1050 with my X1900XTX.

 

[aka1nas]

Originally posted by: A554SS1N
Never had any problem with dx9 with a 6600GT at 1280x1024 - I think some people are just too picky about their framerates....

It's literally 4x faster running in Dx7 mode and the graphics look pretty much the same.

 

[TheRyuu]

Originally posted by: aka1nas

Originally posted by: A554SS1N
Never had any problem with dx9 with a 6600GT at 1280x1024 - I think some people are just too picky about their framerates....

It's literally 4x faster running in Dx7 mode and the graphics look pretty much the same.

That is so much BS
It doesn't look the same.
May be at low settings it does, but not on high.

My 7900GT's in SLI can play the game with 4xAA/16xAF all ingame settings MAX (texture settings on extra) @1680x1024
I get a nice smooth game
Hurray for me

But yea, even on my rig I kinda wish it ran better. Although yes I can play the game on high with max settings and sh!t, it's just barely in the realm of FPS playable (as in >50fps) So.....for the average computer, the game really is demanding.

 

[Matt2]

I played the game on 7800GT SLI 500/1200 at 1280x1024 max settings 4x/16 AA/AF and got around 60fps avg.

Kinda makes me wanna play it again at 1680x1050 on the XTX.

 

[xtknight]

That just goes to show you should always get the fastest card money allows. It doesn't matter if you only have a 19" LCD...sooner or later some game will stress your card to death at 1280x1024.

 

[BFG10K]

Never had any problem with dx9 with a 6600GT at 1280x1024

Everybody else certainly did.

A glorious 20.2 FPS for you. That's a lower framerate than pre-rendered movies with zero interaction.

It doesn't look the same.

Apart from a little lighting, water and normal mapping it does look pretty much the same. Of course under DX7 you can crank the details much more than under DX9.

 

[josh6079]

Apart from a little lighting, water and normal mapping it does look pretty much the same.

Eh, it's in the eye of the beholder I guess. I could tell a big difference between DX7 and DX9 (besides the performance hit).

 

[aka1nas]

Originally posted by: josh6079

Apart from a little lighting, water and normal mapping it does look pretty much the same.

Eh, it's in the eye of the beholder I guess. I could tell a big difference between DX7 and DX9 (besides the performance hit).

Yeah I guess so. I honestly couldn't tell a difference in detail between the two modes bsides very minor lighting differences.

 

[Hadsus]

It's been awhile since I played CoD2.....but I do remember DL'ing an optional patch that accelerated frames for dual processors (even my old 3 ghz intel with hyperthreading). It made a big difference. Don't know if this has been incorporated in the CoD2 official patches.

 

[Dkcode]

The point is when your spending high end money you want high end performance, not frame rates in the low thirties. CoD2's DX9 renderer does indeed suck balls! They should stick to Xbox if they cant be arsed to optimize.

 

[Matt2]

This is why I cant stand when people tell others that they "dont need a high end card because you're only runninf 1280x1024".

You never have too much horsepower. ANd if you find yourself in a position where you do, you obviously are not maxing out the IQ.

 

[lopri]

I don't know how badly COD2 was coded but DX9 mode looks better than DX7. Much better.

http://img68.imageshack.us/my.php?image=shot0028ms2.jpg
http://img256.imageshack.us/my.php?image=shot0003jw6.jpg

 

[BFG10K]

I don't know how badly COD2 was coded but DX9 mode looks better than DX7. Much better.

The only reason I know those screenshots are in DX9 mode is because you have snow in one and hideous jaggies in the other.

 

[xtknight]

Can someone post a COD2/DX7 screenshot?

 

[RussianSensation]

Originally posted by: xtknight
Can someone post a COD2/DX7 screenshot?

DX7
DX9

There is a difference, but it's not as drastic as say HL2 in DX7 vs. DX9 (notice the washed out textures and lack of detail in DX7 on the first pic)

 

[tvdang7]

well dx9 has snow falling aand 7 doesnt .....i could be wrong its been a while but i was playing dx7 the whole time. since 9 was too demanding......

 

[xtknight]

Originally posted by: RussianSensation

Originally posted by: xtknight
Can someone post a COD2/DX7 screenshot?

DX7
DX9

There is a difference, but it's not as drastic as say HL2 in DX7 vs. DX9 (notice the washed out textures and lack of detail in DX7 on the first pic)

Thanks for the screenshots. DX7 seems to totally eliminate the atmospheric effects and it looks like 'vertex lighting'. I agree the difference in HL2 between DX7 and DX9 is huge. The difference in COD2 is big enough that I wouldn't settle for DX7. In multiplayer/competition I probably wouldn't care about the effects. There's no HDR in DX7 either, right? Those little things actually make the image look twice as believable/realistic to me.