Will Counter Strike 1.6 and Condition Zero get performance gains from X800 XT

[Jincuteguy]

Will Counter Strike 1.6 and Condition Zero get performance gains from X800 XT ??? thx

 

[screw3d]

It probably will, what what would you benefit from, say, 300fps as compared to let's say 100fps?

 

[Pete]

That's almost like asking if Starcraft will improve with a X800. CS is so old that pretty much anything $50 and up will give you 60+fps, and anything $100 and over should clear 100fps easily.

But gains from what? What card do you have now?

Anyway, here are some benches of an X800XT in CS. As you can see, you're basically going to be CPU-limited in a game so old (DX6-class, and the X800 is DX9).

 

[imported_Kckazdude]

If upgrading from PII/K6-2 and anything less than a GF2 series, then yes you will see an improvement. Other wise keep in mind this is a 5 year old engine that doesnt stress current hardware much more than say...MS Word.

 

[jagec]

you're thinking about buying a $500 card to play CS?

 

[vshah]

Originally posted by: Jincuteguy
Will Counter Strike 1.6 and Condition Zero get performance gains from X800 XT ??? thx

absolutely not. never would it do such a thing. not under any circumstances. in fact the x800xt is designed to be slower at CS1.6


bahaha
jk it'll be a bit faster, but cs is like q3 at this point.

-Vivan

 

[kylebisme]

i have a 9800xt i still don't have cs maxed out, 1600x1200 with x16af but i can only manage x2aa before the framerates go bad. i'd bet an x800 could get away with x6aa, so ya there is room for improvment.

 

[magomago]

yeah but cs 1.6 is coded horribly or something...cs1.5 runs much faster

 

[biostud]

doesn't the HL engine have a cap of 99 FPS normally set to 85?

 

[boran]

man, my old GF 3 Ti 200 could run CS at 1024x768 with 2xAniso and 2xFSAA, at over 100 fps... we're talking modified quake 1 engine here....

 

[ShinX]

STEAM SUX T3H ASS !

 

[Avalon]

Originally posted by: ShinX
STEAM SUX T3H ASS !

Roger!

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: magomago
yeah but cs 1.6 is coded horribly or something...cs1.5 runs much faster

it seems you messed something up on your end, 1.6 runs just as fast as 1.5 did for me.

Originally posted by: biostud666
doesn't the HL engine have a cap of 99 FPS normally set to 85?

normaly fps_max is 72 and 99fps is as high as you can set it without going into developer mode. but with framrate that high it doesn't really matter anyway, i am talking about keeping away from lowspots in framerate. at 1600x1200, x16af and x2aa i get fps in the 30s if someone tosses a smoke grenade in most demanding spot of de_aztec, so there is still room for the new cards to be better for cs.

 

[LuDaCriS66]

jincuteguy hacks anyway.. he doesn't need anymore fps lol. I'm not joking either.

As long as you have a decent card now, you don't need to upgrade to a 800XT just for CS

 

[EarthwormJim]

Originally posted by: biostud666
doesn't the HL engine have a cap of 99 FPS normally set to 85?

Developer 1 and I believe fps_max 999... will take care of that.

 

[0marTheZealot]

doesn't matter.

Believe it or not, CS/HL uses the CPU to render. If you had a P3 500 with an X800, it'd run slower than a P4 2.8ghz with a GF2.

 

[DarkKnight]

Originally posted by: TheSnowman

Originally posted by: magomago
yeah but cs 1.6 is coded horribly or something...cs1.5 runs much faster

it seems you messed something up on your end, 1.6 runs just as fast as 1.5 did for me.

On my roomates laptop, CS 1.6 runs much worse than 1.5. I bet you cant notice the difference cause ur system is good.

 

[kylebisme]

ya good point, i think it might be a ram thing or something becuase i have a few friends who had some slowdowns with the update to steam and they all are light on ram. but on a funny note, i installed cs retail without any patchs the other day just for the heck of it and i got a few dips in framerate running around oilrig where as i can play oilrig in cz with the new models and all and it runs better. so i guess a lot has changed in cs over the years makeing it run better in some ways and worse in others.

Originally posted by: 0marTheZealot
doesn't matter.

Believe it or not, CS/HL uses the CPU to render. If you had a P3 500 with an X800, it'd run slower than a P4 2.8ghz with a GF2.

that is nonsense, you can run the game off the cpu useing software mode but if you run in opengl or even d3d it is done on the card.

 

[TripleChaser]

Personally I think the question is perfectly legit. Unless you've wrestled with problems with ATI video cards and CS/CZ/HL I wouldn't comment on this. Many people with very high end setups cannot achieve constant high FPS. My rig included. I have a dual Xeon 1.7Ghz, 512 RDRAM, two 10k SCSI 9GB hds, and an ATI Radeon 9800 Pro 128. You would think I could get some decent frame rates. I have had fps drop to below 30 on de_aztec_cz with weather turned off and running at 1024x768 AA off. So saying that the X800 is going to improve on this...I personally wouldn't call it a no brainer. Unless ATI fixes their drivers for CS this is far from a sure bet.

Rage3d forum

 

[killedradiostar]

i enjoy stress testing my GT on CS - i see how many smokes can be out at the same time before my fps decide to drop to 98

in the CT spawn on train i think i got off something like 15-20 SGs before noticing any drop whatsoever at 800x600. i'm pretty sure the same thing happened at 1024x768

 

[boran]

we're talking quake 1 engine here ppls, even intel extreme graphics would run this at playable framerates.