my FX5200 is sweet

[ShadowBlade]

not kidding. I was playing HL2, UT2k4 and some other not so impressive games at 1024x768, medium to high settings and it ran smoothly, looked great.

128MB onboard ram 250MHz core/332MHz ram
it might be OC'ed by a couple MHz (no more than 5) because i was messing around with the clock freq. settings the other day

 

[WaxHaX0rS]

Originally posted by: ShadowBlade
the human eye only registers 20 fps, so as long as its atleast 21, youre ok

 

[ShadowBlade]

^damn straight

 

[Todd33]

Is this a joke thread?

 

[ShadowBlade]

no

 

[imported_Kensai]

 

[MX2]

I remember my 5200 that I had like three years ago could barely play Halo

 

[stnicralisk]

I think I hate you.

 

[BlacKJesuS]

Originally posted by: WaxHaX0rS

Originally posted by: ShadowBlade
the human eye only registers 20 fps, so as long as its atleast 21, youre ok

thats a lie..i can tell the diff all the way up to around 70

 

[the splat in the hat]

hahahahaha, check out the latest science on what the human eye can actually see , if l remember right its closer to 80 fps, it was on discovery, but it was pretty convincing, but anyways as i understand it fps on a tv screen and fps in a game are so totally different, if you think 20 fps will do it in a high intencity game, l think ya kidding.
At 20 fps you are only going to see a choppy mess, and at 40 its nice and at 80 its awsome, cant tell the difference with the human eye, i recon ya can, and refresh rate on ya screen, well you can tell the difference between 65 and 100 so stuffs me, i must be on drugs maybe ?
l drink alot but drugs...

 

[CP5670]

This thread is funny.

I can notice up to about 115fps. Anything below 60 (minimum) is too choppy as far as I am concerned. It's different for everyone.

 

[dug777]

as long as the minimums are not much lower than 35, and the average is mid 30s or above i am quite happy for d3/hl2/farcry...for sims2 anything above 20 is fine...

but for UT i like at least a 60fps average...it's just so much quicker.

 

[kylebisme]

Saying how high the human eye can see is like saying how far the human leg can jump.

 

[rbV5]

I was playing HL2, UT2k4 and some other not so impressive games

I also noticed you can't pull off a proper rig link, so now I know how much weight to give your posts.

 

[nick1985]

this thread HAS to be a joke

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: nick1985
this thread HAS to be a joke

i'll go as far as to say a fx 5200 brutally overclocked is quite ok for UT and hl2 providiing you keep the eyecandy down at 1024

 

[hans030390]

....5200 is teh su><orz

though i find hardly any difference between 30fps and 60fps since we're talking about that. i guess everyone is different

 

[Hacp]

Diablo 2 plays fine on 24 fps .

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Originally posted by: ShadowBlade
^damn straight

lol. Twenty frames per second is playable IMO, but how couldn't you tell the difference? As the others are saying, try changing your monitor from 60Hz to pretty much any level higher and there will be a pretty noticeable difference.

 

[Jon855]

Originally posted by: TheSnowman
Saying how high the human eye can see is like saying how far the human leg can jump.

My personal record is at 21' 11 1/2"...

 

[the splat in the hat]

hahahahaha , is getting quite funny but....
l cant play bf2 or bfv or hl at 25 odd fps, thats a joke , l can record ingame action at 10 20 30 40 50 60 fps with fraps, and straight up you can tell the difference between 20 fps 30 , 40 , 50 , 60, quite easily, at 20 its a touch choppy , at 40 its real nice, at 60 it EATS my hard drive ! 3.96 gig files........
You cant really compair old games in the same sence, try it on hl2 or bf2 , and see if you can tell the difference between 20 and 50, bet you can.
Old games are not coded, to as many moving objects on the screen and or pollygons, so they are a bad exsample, test it on a high intensity game and truelly see the difference.

 

[secretanchitman]

my geforce 3 plays CSS at 67.34fps on medium quality and is on all the asterisk thingys in the video tab.

im happy, but i want nfsu2 to play 1280x1024 WITH light trails on.

 

[Crescent13]

my 9000igp on my laptop plays halflife 2 fine. It's because halflife scales itself down from dx9 to dx8 or dx7 so the card can run it smoothly. I've even run it at 16xaf with high quality on my 9000igp. But my 6600GT looks MUCH better.

 

[haveblue]

Originally posted by: MX2times
I remember my 5200 that I had like three years ago could barely play Halo

Yeah, Halo hurt my FX5200 (13fps).. oddly it wasn't horrible in Doom 3 or Half-life 2, at 800 x 600 on medium.. it really wasn't that bad.. Haven't tried either Doom 3 or Half-life 2 on my 7800GTX yet, but I'm assuming it'll be playable.. haha

 

[ShadowBlade]

im not kidding at all
it plays those games great and the speeds I posted are what it shows in the "Clock Frequency Settings"

I can also play halo, but I havent played it recently