Video card on a Budget for Battlefield 2

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

iwearnosox

Lifer
Oct 26, 2000
16,018
5
0
Originally posted by: Emultra
6600GT not being enough for Battlefield 2 is unthinkable.

Have you seen the BF2 videos? Seems like it would be rather taxing on the GPU, although it will probably scale down as needed. My bet is the issue isn't that it's "not enough" but rather what the image quality and framerate are on it.
 

Pr0d1gy

Diamond Member
Jan 30, 2005
7,774
0
76
Well I doubt you'll get 60fps at 1600x1200 in BF2, but it should be able to play the game nicely. If anyone is interested in joining a mature BF2 clan, send me a PM. We already have quite a few AT members in the clan & are looking to add about 20 more players to our current roster of 20+.
 

dripgoss

Senior member
Mar 13, 2003
496
0
0
6600GT will be fine at 1024x768 with decent LOD and shadows. I'm telling you though, you WILL want 2GB of DC RAM, decent CPU and decent 7200/8MB HDD. I know some might scoff at this, but with a 6600GT your GPU will not be your bottleneck. The textures are pretty big and loading them is where the bog down occurs.
 

Emultra

Golden Member
Jul 6, 2002
1,166
0
0
No, but if I can play it with good detail at 1024x768 with good FPS, then I'm happy with that. :)
 

BillyBobJoel71

Platinum Member
Mar 24, 2005
2,610
0
71
bf2 is supposed to run better on ati cards but wait till you get it! then you can test it out. if they made it the way bf1942 came out then any card can handle it (1942 was very texutreless and plain)
 

AMCRambler

Diamond Member
Jan 23, 2001
7,714
31
91
I just bought an XFX 6600GT agp version so I could play this game when it comes out. Upgraded from a GF4 Ti 4600 so we're practically in the same boat. I don't anticipate any problems with the video card. It surprises me that the recommended requirement is the beefiest video card Nvidia makes now. I find it hard to believe that EA was able to close the gap between hardware performance and software demands that quickly. It sounds like overkill to me. I think with a 6600GT you will be very happy with how the game runs. With DC the major bottleneck for me wasn't the video card, it was ram. It freakin ate memory up when I used to play it. I had to upgrade to a gig from 512 and when I jump out while I have the game going I check the memory usage and it's usually around 500mb. I can only assume BF2 is going to use even more. So if I were you as well as the card I'd make sure to have at least a gig of memory going at it.
 

Killrose

Diamond Member
Oct 26, 1999
6,230
8
81
BF1942 looks so Ugly with-out AA/AF, so I would imagine the same to be true with BF2. Do yourself a big favor and at least get a 6800 series or X800XL. I'm guessing that with your Ti4200 you are not able to run BF1942 with 4xAA/8xAF @1024x768?

I have played BF1942 with a 8500 on a 2.4gig AMD machine and it won't do any real amount of AA/AF to clean it up and make it look good with-out struggling terribly. And I have also had the same experience on a Ti4200 and with a 2600+ (2.08gig) AMD machine.

With a 9700pro I was able to crank it up to and it looks so much better (100 times). I now have a 6800U and of course it is no issue with anything. BF1942 has all those towers and palm trees and hillside ground textures in it, it really looks so much better with AA/AF :)
 

Creig

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
5,170
13
81
Looks like my soft-modded 9500 will continue to live on for a bit longer. :)
 

Drako357

Junior Member
Jun 13, 2005
13
0
0
I recently got rid of my Nvidia Ti 4200 and got a Geforce 6600 AGP 8x 256. Will this work with BF2? I saw that it supports the 6600 (pcie) card, and can't see why it would not support the AGP version.
 

malG

Senior member
Jun 2, 2005
309
0
76
Rest assured that in BF2, the 6600GT's performance is equivalent to the X850XT PE - thanks to NV :p
 

D3xx

Member
Nov 17, 2002
63
0
0
So whats the verdict? Does BF2 actually run on a GF4 albeit with reduced eye candy?
 

Johnbear007

Diamond Member
Jul 1, 2002
4,570
0
0
NO it does not run at all on a gf4. However it runs great on an 8500. Haha to all you that poo pooed the 8500

wieners
 

Keysplayr

Elite Member
Jan 16, 2003
21,211
50
91
If you plan on keeping this new card for 3 years like you did with your Ti4200, best not get the 6600GT. You should get the most powerful card available (G70, or R520) when they come out. G70 will be available in a few weeks if all goes well.

In my opinion, if you don't upgrade very often, buy BIG.
 

cmitchell17

Member
Jun 12, 2005
63
0
0
I have a Ge Force 4 MX 64MB I really never thought of upgrading only a little bit. I plaed half Life 2 fine on it. Once the BF2 demo came out i realized it would never work. After I found this forum I started asking about what card I should get. Yesterday I ordered a 6800 for $189.
Anyway my friend has a pretty old computer.
He has like a 1.5GHz processor with like 380 somthing MB of RAM.
He has a Radeon 9600 I cant remember if it is 256MB or 128MB.
But he downloaded them demo and played it. It ran fine on low settings so we cranked it up to meduim settings and it had a little lag at first but once he got around the map and started playing it ran with no lag. I was very suprized after seeing all of this other stuff on the game.
But mabey it only ran that good becuase the map is pretty small and there was only 16 players with no planes or helicoptors or anything. I was stuprized though.
 

So

Lifer
Jul 2, 2001
25,923
17
81
I personally have a 6800GT and am VERY happy with it perforance wise. Runs BF2 w/ high everything @ 1680x1050 smooth as silk.

If you can get a 6800 and have a decent chance of unlocking it, I'd say go that route.
 

Insomniak

Banned
Sep 11, 2003
4,836
0
0
Originally posted by: Emultra
6600GT not being enough for Battlefield 2 is unthinkable.



6600GT is fine. Everything on high except textures, effects, and lighting, and I run 2xAA and High texture filtering, which i think is 4xAF. This is at 10x7. I could run high textures if I had 2GB of RAM, which will be occurring shortly.
 

RussianSensation

Elite Member
Sep 5, 2003
19,458
765
126
Originally posted by: Johnbear007
NO it does not run at all on a gf4. However it runs great on an 8500. Haha to all you that poo pooed the 8500

wieners

Hmm I have 8500. I downloaded the demo not long ago. I can play 800x600 with all settings to high except 2 (that it wont let me even select anything above low - i think dynamic lights and shadows or something). This is with noAA/AF. At this quality, the game looks worse than Call of Duty and Medal of Honour. It actually looks WAY uglier than BF1942 at 1600x1200 on the same card. If i put the game at 1024x768 and medium it's too choppy to play. So I wouldnt say 8500 runs it great. It barely runs it.
 

Insomniak

Banned
Sep 11, 2003
4,836
0
0
Originally posted by: RussianSensation
Originally posted by: Johnbear007
NO it does not run at all on a gf4. However it runs great on an 8500. Haha to all you that poo pooed the 8500

wieners

Hmm I have 8500. I downloaded the demo not long ago. I can play 800x600 with all settings to high except 2 (that it wont let me even select anything above low - i think dynamic lights and shadows or something). This is with noAA/AF. At this quality, the game looks worse than Call of Duty and Medal of Honour. It actually looks WAY uglier than BF1942 at 1600x1200 on the same card. If i put the game at 1024x768 and medium it's too choppy to play. So I wouldnt say 8500 runs it great. It barely runs it.



I don't know what BF2 you're playing, but mine looks GOBS better than Call of Duty, which to be honest was graphically outdated when it came out.
 

RussianSensation

Elite Member
Sep 5, 2003
19,458
765
126
Originally posted by: Insomniak

I don't know what BF2 you're playing, but mine looks GOBS better than Call of Duty, which to be honest was graphically outdated when it came out.

I dont think you understood what I was saying. Please look here:

BF2 - FUGLY

Look at the top picture. That is what the game looks like on my 8500 in order for it to be playable (as opposed to bottom pic on 6800GT). HUGE difference.

This is what Call of Duty looks like on my comp LINK

I am not saying BF2 is worse looking than Call of Duty on all videocards. Just on crap ones it looks way worse than older games which you can actually max out in settings.
 

Insomniak

Banned
Sep 11, 2003
4,836
0
0
Originally posted by: Acanthus
A FX5600 even runs the game alright, they can be had well under $100. (For the love of god dont buy one, im just saying you can get away with pretty low end)

I would say 6600 vanilla or higher for a pleasant BF2 experience (6600 would push 1280x960, all high settings, high aniso, no AA).

6600 @ newegg in your price range

Leadtek 6600GT with HDTV-out also in your price range


You'll only get high textures with more than a GB of RAM. Anything less, and you get hardcore swapping.

Although, I will note that my calculations take into effect 2xAA. As far as I'm concerned AA is not optional.

 

Acanthus

Lifer
Aug 28, 2001
19,915
2
76
ostif.org
Originally posted by: Insomniak
Originally posted by: Acanthus
A FX5600 even runs the game alright, they can be had well under $100. (For the love of god dont buy one, im just saying you can get away with pretty low end)

I would say 6600 vanilla or higher for a pleasant BF2 experience (6600 would push 1280x960, all high settings, high aniso, no AA).

6600 @ newegg in your price range

Leadtek 6600GT with HDTV-out also in your price range


You'll only get high textures with more than a GB of RAM. Anything less, and you get hardcore swapping.

Although, I will note that my calculations take into effect 2xAA. As far as I'm concerned AA is not optional.

AA does cause the swapping, you can do high textures on a 6600 with 1GB. I know from experience :( upgrading to 2GB right before the game comes out.