Lowest End system to run HL2?

imported_goku

Diamond Member
Mar 28, 2004
7,613
3
0
What is the slowest computer HL2 could run on (not slide show)? I was also wondering if HL2 could still run on a DX6 video card or not, I've seen articles back in '03 mentioning that it could but I don't know if that has been changed or not. I see options for changing the game's engine to DX8 and 7 but nothing is mentioned about 6.
 

nsafreak

Diamond Member
Oct 16, 2001
7,093
3
81
You need a card capable of T&L to run HL2. I highly doubt any DX6 based card has T&L capabilities. I'd say the slowest would probably be a P4 1.6 Ghz and a GeForce 2 series card.
 

0roo0roo

No Lifer
Sep 21, 2002
64,795
84
91
in dx7 mode you can get away with a lot. dx6 is probably pushing your luck.
 

shortylickens

No Lifer
Jul 15, 2003
80,287
17,081
136
The Freak is right. You need T&L at the minimum. And in DirectX 7 mode the game looks like butt.
Even at that, the lowest I have seen in testing was a GeForce 3. I forget who did the benchmark. I know it wasnt Anandtech or Toms Hardware.

They just wanted to see what they could get away with. I think they concluded that since the framerates were shiat and the game looked horrible anyway, the GeForce 3 was really not good enough.
I believe their recommendation was a GeForce 4 TI, for realisticaly trying to play it.

Damn. Now I have to go find that article.
 

Madwand1

Diamond Member
Jan 23, 2006
3,309
0
76
I ran HL2 on a 4400 Ti and Athlon XP 1800+ and it was fine for performance, and so-so for eye candy. I probably ran it at 1280 x 1024 with medium-high graphics from the point of view of the 4400 Ti.

Sort of echoing shorty..

But this low-end pursuit is a bit of a waste IMO -- HL2 has great eye candy and going to the deep low end is the wrong direction, esp. these days with the competition at the low-mid end. Better question would be which card gives playable bling level X at resolution Y.

So if the OP's question is which card give playable bling level 0 at resolution 640x480, who'd care? HL2's a good game, but you can only play it so many times (around once); might as well do it closer to how it's meant to be seen.

No offense intended -- just seems a bit of a waste to lose the eye candy to me. If you have some other reasons, then good luck with that.
 

imported_goku

Diamond Member
Mar 28, 2004
7,613
3
0
Originally posted by: inveterate
Lowest u'll need is a 6600gt or x800''''' seriously they're not expensive

6600gt? WTF? This game runs fine on a Geforce 4, why would one require a 6600GT?
 

TheRyuu

Diamond Member
Dec 3, 2005
5,479
14
81
Originally posted by: goku
Originally posted by: inveterate
Lowest u'll need is a 6600gt or x800''''' seriously they're not expensive

6600gt? WTF? This game runs fine on a Geforce 4, why would one require a 6600GT?

I agree with the 6600GT/X800. You CAN run it on a lower-end card, but since the 6600 and the X800 are so cheap, it makes sense to get one since you could probably run it with AA and AF too.
 

Regs

Lifer
Aug 9, 2002
16,666
21
81
Originally posted by: goku
Originally posted by: inveterate
Lowest u'll need is a 6600gt or x800''''' seriously they're not expensive

6600gt? WTF? This game runs fine on a Geforce 4, why would one require a 6600GT?

Because one would find it hard to find a card that's not in wide production anymore.... Or in any type of production.

One step lower would be a 9600XT or a 9600 . I wouldnt even recomment a 9800 since you cant find them anywhere and if you did they'll be the same price of a x800.

However I agree with the comments above. You want to go fowards, not backwards.
 

secretanchitman

Diamond Member
Apr 11, 2001
9,352
23
91
geforce3 here, ran on 1280x1024, medium quality, shadows off, no AA/AF (obviously), and other low settings. looked excellent IMO. in fact, im reinstalling HL2 so anyone would wants a screenshot of it running just tell me!
 

inveterate

Golden Member
Mar 1, 2005
1,504
0
0
Originally posted by: secretanchitman
geforce3 here, ran on 1280x1024, medium quality, shadows off, no AA/AF (obviously), and other low settings. looked excellent IMO. in fact, im reinstalling HL2 so anyone would wants a screenshot of it running just tell me!


I can understand people retro gaming with NEW cards, or retro game with old cards. But theres no such thing as foreshadow gaming. Aint' gonna happen
 

HamburgerBoy

Lifer
Apr 12, 2004
27,111
318
126
It ran fine on my friend's PIII 800Mhz and his ATi 8500 at medium settings. I'm sure that the videocard could be quite a bit slower, but the processor is probably pushing it.
 

inveterate

Golden Member
Mar 1, 2005
1,504
0
0
Originally posted by: HamburgerBoy
It ran fine on my friend's PIII 800Mhz and his ATi 8500 at medium settings. I'm sure that the videocard could be quite a bit slower, but the processor is probably pushing it.

HUn??????? guys are u seriously trying to play any games pass 2001 on anything less than a 9600pro 5700Ultra???

Comon STOP making me feel bad.
 

fireontheway

Golden Member
Jul 8, 2003
1,480
0
0
Originally posted by: inveterate
Originally posted by: HamburgerBoy
It ran fine on my friend's PIII 800Mhz and his ATi 8500 at medium settings. I'm sure that the videocard could be quite a bit slower, but the processor is probably pushing it.

HUn??????? guys are u seriously trying to play any games pass 2001 on anything less than a 9600pro 5700Ultra???

Comon STOP making me feel bad.

My wife's pc with a 9500 pro & 3200XP runs Day of Defeat Source with medium settings (2x AA even) smoothly.
 

duragezic

Lifer
Oct 11, 1999
11,234
4
81
Depends how crappy of graphics you are willing to accept.

Some of the lowest recommendations are ridiculous, like a X800 or 6600, but then say they played at 1280x1024+. I don't remember where such a high res was a requirement to play a game.

My bro played HL2 for quite a while with his GF4 MX. Yes DX7, 800x600, but it was good enough to play through the game. And I don't find DX7 to look all that bad but then again I never had to put up with it, but from what I seen on his it wasn't horrible.

Look into used cards. I'd say 9600 Pro for 1024x768 or so, and those are only around $40-50. Of course it depends on the CPU a bit with HL2 so make sure that is up to snuff. I'd say 2400+ or higher for a good resolution, otherwise 1.5ghz/1500+ minimum. I played at 1680x1050 middish details with my 9800 Pro.
 

conlan

Diamond Member
Jan 27, 2001
3,395
0
76
We run HL2 just fine on our back-up rig w/ a 9800Pro. In the past we ran it using a 9600pro, a 9600XT, then a 9700Pro before the 9800Pro. You can pick up any of these cheaply these days.
 

igowerf

Diamond Member
Jun 27, 2000
7,697
1
76
Originally posted by: ryan256
Hmm.. so how would HL2 run on this rig?
P4 1.8GHz
512MB RDRAM
9800Pro

??

Your rig should run it fine, but not with max settings. I've run it on my laptop which is a P4 1.7, 384MB, GeForce 4 440Go (basically an overclocked Geforce 2). It wasn't pretty, but it ran well at lower settings.
 

inveterate

Golden Member
Mar 1, 2005
1,504
0
0
dude just stop the notion of upgrading anything agp,, anything socket A,, anything 478. Don't play games till u got the necessary hardware

i'd say the more u do it,, the more u read this forum, the more you want a S939, then a 79 or x19.
 

igowerf

Diamond Member
Jun 27, 2000
7,697
1
76
Originally posted by: inveterate
dude just stop the notion of upgrading anything agp,, anything socket A,, anything 478. Don't play games till u got the necessary hardware

i'd say the more u do it,, the more u read this forum, the more you want a S939, then a 79 or x19.

The necessary hardware to run HL2 doesn't need to be fast. I could say that even you don't have the necessary hardware to run F.E.A.R. because "u gotta play it at 1920x1200 rez wit 32x FSAA and 16xAF or u dun even try."

The "necessary hardware" is purely subjective because it's up to the OP how much graphical eye candy he wants or needs.
 

Madwand1

Diamond Member
Jan 23, 2006
3,309
0
76
Yes, you can take this in at least three different directions:

1. Try to low-ball the hardware as much as you can
2. Try to get some middle-of-the-road hardware that's currently "good" performance/price.
3. Try to get top end hardware, giving up the best performance/price ratio for performance first, and price second.

Nobody's suggesting (3) here. It's just a straw man argument.

Most are suggesting avoiding (1) here because of various reasons. I'll repeat/elaborate:

A. HL2 has very nice eye candy, why lose it to save a few $; you don't have to spend at the (3) level to get it.

B. The ancient hardware is now very poor performance / price. You should not buy really old hardware unless you absolutely don't want performance. Performance/price goes up a lot in computers over time; performance goes up, price goes down.

C. If you're playing HL2, you'll probably want to move on to other games, such as Far Cry, the newer HL2 episodes, maybe Oblivion, etc., etc. What was relevant two years ago in terms of hardware needs is not really relevant now.

I played HL2 with a 4400 Ti. That card wasn't the cheapest in its day, and gave me a lot of value over time. I also played HL2 again with a 6800 GT. I don't think I finished it, because the game's not the same the second time around. I wish I'd played the entire thing with the 6800 GT in the first place; it looked noticeably better to me. A 6600 GT can probably give you very comparable same image quality as the 6800 GT.

We all understand here that playability and image quality are two related but separate issues. We all understand that you can play HL2 at low image quality with very poor gear. The issue is why would you if you don't have to, and can get a lot more for not a lot more money. If what we're calling "not a lot more money" here is a lot of money to you, then of course, these points aren't valid -- do what you can, and enjoy the game! Of course you can do that without all the eye candy.
 

secretanchitman

Diamond Member
Apr 11, 2001
9,352
23
91
Originally posted by: inveterate
dude just stop the notion of upgrading anything agp,, anything socket A,, anything 478. Don't play games till u got the necessary hardware

i'd say the more u do it,, the more u read this forum, the more you want a S939, then a 79 or x19.

whoa...no one is forcing him to upgrade...and besides, socket 478 is plenty fast. its still one of the best processors intel has produced, quite honestly (better than presHott thats for sure). what chip overclocked more than 1Ghz on stock cooling?

"dont play games until you have the necessary hardware?" wtf are you smoking? people play games on their intel gma 950 or x1300 or fx 5200 or whatever and still they have fun. as long as you can play the game/enjoy it, who cares what the graphics are like...yes there are people who want graphics as well as fun gameplay, but for the most part, people like to have fun playing the game.
 

Trevelyan

Diamond Member
Dec 10, 2000
4,077
0
71
Originally posted by: ryan256
Hmm.. so how would HL2 run on this rig?
P4 1.8GHz
512MB RDRAM
9800Pro

??

My system was comparable to that, and I played the whole game with it... overall a great experience.
 

SleepWalkerX

Platinum Member
Jun 29, 2004
2,649
0
0
I played HL2 on a 9200 with 512 megs of ram and an athlonxp 3200 with 1024x768 just fine, except for alt+tabbing though..