• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

WTF? Is my PC possessed? Runs HL2 absolutely fine!?!

L

LOLyourFace

Banned
My friend tells me he can barely run HL2 on his system and is just playable- everything low @ 800x600. He has the following:
XP2200+
Geforce 5900XT
768mb DDR

Well I got the game anyway, hoping for the best. My system spec is as follows:
XP 1700+ (1.46ghz)
Geforce 3 Ti200 128mb
512mb mushkin value ram

I automatically assumed the worst and played the game at 800x600 and everything low. But I decided to crank things up just for the hell of it..... and guess what I found out... my PC can run the following at more than playable framerates!

All of this at 35-55 fps:
1024x768
medium texture
medium model
trilinear filtering
high sound quality
high shadow
render world water

WTF? How is this the case? I am pleasantly surprised. I can't believe I can get by without spending a dime on upgrades to play this game! Is there something wrong with my friend's system?
 
At a guess, its running under dx7 mode, which means it wont be rendering much of the eye candy, where as your friends 5900XT will be attemping to run at dx8.1 level.
 
Originally posted by: LOLyourFace
My friend tells me he can barely run HL2 on his system and is just playable- everything low @ 800x600. He has the following:
XP2200+
Geforce 5900XT
768mb DDR

Well I got the game anyway, hoping for the best. My system spec is as follows:
XP 1700+ (1.46ghz)
Geforce 3 Ti200 128mb
512mb mushkin value ram

I automatically assumed the worst and played the game at 800x600 and everything low. But I decided to crank things up just for the hell of it..... and guess what I found out... my PC can run the following at more than playable framerates!

All of this at 35-55 fps:
1024x768
medium texture
medium model
trilinear filtering
high sound quality
high shadow
render world water

WTF? How is this the case? I am pleasantly surprised. I can't believe I can get by without spending a dime on upgrades to play this game! Is there something wrong with my friend's system?
Click to expand...

Runs fine on my system...
Athlon tbird 1.2ghz
512ddr
128mb 9600pro
 
Originally posted by: txxxx
At a guess, its running under dx7 mode, which means it wont be rendering much of the eye candy, where as your friends 5900XT will be attemping to run at dx8.1 level.
Click to expand...

It's running at dx8.1, i think you meant dx9 vs 8?
 
I ran that game on a GF3 ti 200 with 512 ram and a 2500+ CPU (vid card is the limited anyway). It ran ok on 800X600 and dx7 on low graphic settings. You say you can "get by", and technically you can. My brother is playing it on a radeon something or rather with 32 megs. But the thing about HL2 is it scales like crazy. Check out the screenshots on anand's Dx8/9 review (video section) and you'll see exactly why I only played the game for about 30 min on my gf3 before upgrading my video card.
Runs fine on my system...
Athlon tbird 1.2ghz
512ddr
128mb 9600pro
Click to expand...
For HL2 that's a better system, because of your vid card.
It's running at dx8.1, i think you meant dx9 vs 8?
Click to expand...
mine said that too, but based on anand's review I have reason to believe it was 7!
 
R9600Pro-EZ (Crippled RAM, purchasing mistake) 128mb
XP1900
768mb

Full settings, playable FPS (30+?) 1152xwhatever

R9600XT 256mb
XP2000
512mb

Full settings, playable FPS. 1152xwhatever

In short, HL2 was SO NOT WORTH the $1billion that it's fanbois spent on upgrades "just to be able to play it"

And yes, I know 1152xwhatever is a strange reso, but it's because I use crappy 17" monitors that can't do higher than 60hz @ 1280x960+
 
probably dx7. u can force dx7, its hideous... comparatively atleast. unless you are just very tolerant of very low frame rates...
i run radeon 9000pro at 8.1 lowest settings at 1024x768. i've forced dx7 just to see.. ick.
 
It runs on my laptop's mobile 9700 which is clocked at 9600XT speeds at 1280x800 , so no doubt it scales very very well. Agree with EyeMWing, funny how all the enthuasiasts wasted money just for this game 🙂
 
Originally posted by: txxxx
It runs on my laptop's mobile 9700 which is clocked at 9600XT speeds at 1280x800 , so no doubt it scales very very well. Agree with EyeMWing, funny how all the enthuasiasts wasted money just for this game 🙂
Click to expand...

I didn't waste a dime😀 ..well, expect for actually paying for the game...

😎
 
Originally posted by: Goosemaster
Originally posted by: txxxx
It runs on my laptop's mobile 9700 which is clocked at 9600XT speeds at 1280x800 , so no doubt it scales very very well. Agree with EyeMWing, funny how all the enthuasiasts wasted money just for this game 🙂
Click to expand...

I didn't waste a dime😀 ..well, expect for actually paying for the game...

😎
Click to expand...

Maybe not, but a quick search in general hardware reveals who did.
 
Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
probably dx7. u can force dx7, its hideous... comparatively atleast. unless you are just very tolerant of very low frame rates...
i run radeon 9000pro at 8.1 lowest settings at 1024x768. i've forced dx7 just to see.. ick.
Click to expand...

nope, it is clearly 8.1 and the only diff between 8.1 v 9 is:

Anandtech article
While you could argue that there?s not too big of a difference between DX9 and DX8 (other than the water), everything looks significantly worse in DX7 mode.
 
amd64 3400+, 1GB of Mushkin 222, 74GB Raptor, 6800 Ultra... runs smooth @ 1600x1200 4xaa 8xaf... all the bells and whistles.
 
Originally posted by: Skoorb
I ran that game on a GF3 ti 200 with 512 ram and a 2500+ CPU (vid card is the limited anyway). It ran ok on 800X600 and dx7 on low graphic settings. You say you can "get by", and technically you can. My brother is playing it on a radeon something or rather with 32 megs. But the thing about HL2 is it scales like crazy. Check out the screenshots on anand's Dx8/9 review (video section) and you'll see exactly why I only played the game for about 30 min on my gf3 before upgrading my video card.
Runs fine on my system...
Athlon tbird 1.2ghz
512ddr
128mb 9600pro
Click to expand...
For HL2 that's a better system, because of your vid card.
It's running at dx8.1, i think you meant dx9 vs 8?
Click to expand...
mine said that too, but based on anand's review I have reason to believe it was 7!
Click to expand...

I know for sure mine's 8.1 because it has awesome looking bump-mapping throughout the game.

proof: rollover image for DX8.1 vs 7

7 looks just hideous, it's definitely 8.1
 
Originally posted by: LOLyourFace
Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
probably dx7. u can force dx7, its hideous... comparatively atleast. unless you are just very tolerant of very low frame rates...
i run radeon 9000pro at 8.1 lowest settings at 1024x768. i've forced dx7 just to see.. ick.
Click to expand...

nope, it is clearly 8.1 and the only diff between 8.1 v 9 is:

Anandtech article
While you could argue that there?s not too big of a difference between DX9 and DX8 (other than the water), everything looks significantly worse in DX7 mode.
Click to expand...
Trust me when I say that GF3 is not playing HL2 fast and pretty at the same time. One or the other. I was playing it on the GF3 a week ago and now simply at 1024X768 even at medium the textures are simply incomporable.

You look on posters on walls for instance and they're nasty. Now, you can make them look good, but your frame rate will be unusable when you get in a battle of any size, or an environment with peculiar lighting, etc.

 
Originally posted by: EngenZerO
amd64 3400+, 1GB of Mushkin 222, 74GB Raptor, 6800 Ultra... runs smooth @ 1600x1200 4xaa 8xaf... all the bells and whistles.
Click to expand...

:Q

My god man....can I come over to your house?!


My mom has a 300+ I bought her and a gig of ram..I winder ifthat would add anythign to my 9800 vs the 2500+ I am using right now.....I overclocked it to 3200+ but the results were minimal
 
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Originally posted by: LOLyourFace
Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
probably dx7. u can force dx7, its hideous... comparatively atleast. unless you are just very tolerant of very low frame rates...
i run radeon 9000pro at 8.1 lowest settings at 1024x768. i've forced dx7 just to see.. ick.
Click to expand...

nope, it is clearly 8.1 and the only diff between 8.1 v 9 is:

Anandtech article
While you could argue that there?s not too big of a difference between DX9 and DX8 (other than the water), everything looks significantly worse in DX7 mode.
Click to expand...
Trust me when I say that GF3 is not playing HL2 fast and pretty at the same time. One or the other. I was playing it on the GF3 a week ago and now simply at 1024X768 even at medium the textures are simply incomporable.

You look on posters on walls for instance and they're nasty. Now, you can make them look good, but your frame rate will be unusable when you get in a battle of any size, or an environment with peculiar lighting, etc.
Click to expand...

I don't see what point you're trying to make. Of course Dx9 impossible on my GF3, all I'm saying is that game runs beautifully on 8.1. And as Anandtech pointed out, there's very difference in quality between 8.1 vs 9 besides reflective water surface and at Dx7, things start to look very hideous.

All I'm saying is my system can humbly handle the game very well @ medium textures and relatively good resolution and high minor details. That's pretty damn good for 8.1, not 7 on my PC.
 
Originally posted by: txxxx
It runs on my laptop's mobile 9700 which is clocked at 9600XT speeds at 1280x800 , so no doubt it scales very very well. Agree with EyeMWing, funny how all the enthuasiasts wasted money just for this game 🙂
Click to expand...

You see, I knew it was going to be a 2-year-old game with 2-year-old graphics by the time it came out. Everyone should have. So a 2-year-old midrange system would logically play it very well - and guess what, they do!
 
I don't see what point you're trying to make. Of course Dx9 impossible on my GF3, all I'm saying is that game runs beautifully on 8.1. And as Anandtech pointed out, there's very difference in quality between 8.1 vs 9 besides reflective water surface and at Dx7, things start to look very hideous.

All I'm saying is my system can humbly handle the game very well @ medium textures and relatively good resolution and high minor details. That's pretty damn good for 8.1, not 7 on my PC.
Click to expand...
Well I guess the point is one man's trash is another's treasure; beauty in the eye of the beholder, etc. I played the game on a GF3. It did run shockingly well for a GF3, but it looked _much worse_ than it looks at 1024X768, medium textures, dx9. We may have had different standards for acceptable frame rate. I'm not sure...but I will say the game runs over 100fps now normally (I always have the speed up top) and even now it drops sometimes into the 40's.
 
Originally posted by: EyeMWing
Originally posted by: txxxx
It runs on my laptop's mobile 9700 which is clocked at 9600XT speeds at 1280x800 , so no doubt it scales very very well. Agree with EyeMWing, funny how all the enthuasiasts wasted money just for this game 🙂
Click to expand...

You see, I knew it was going to be a 2-year-old game with 2-year-old graphics by the time it came out. Everyone should have. So a 2-year-old midrange system would logically play it very well - and guess what, they do!
Click to expand...

Indeed, any big title needs to run well, otherwise Valve would be faced with a bucketload of returns.
 
Originally posted by: Skoorb
I don't see what point you're trying to make. Of course Dx9 impossible on my GF3, all I'm saying is that game runs beautifully on 8.1. And as Anandtech pointed out, there's very difference in quality between 8.1 vs 9 besides reflective water surface and at Dx7, things start to look very hideous.

All I'm saying is my system can humbly handle the game very well @ medium textures and relatively good resolution and high minor details. That's pretty damn good for 8.1, not 7 on my PC.
Click to expand...
Well I guess the point is one man's trash is another's treasure; beauty in the eye of the beholder, etc. I played the game on a GF3. It did run shockingly well for a GF3, but it looked _much worse_ than it looks at 1024X768, medium textures, dx9. We may have had different standards for acceptable frame rate. I'm not sure...but I will say the game runs over 100fps now normally (I always have the speed up top) and even now it drops sometimes into the 40's.
Click to expand...

Show off. 😛 Well, mister. I'm just gonna go back to my Dx 8.1, McDonald's and my pizza box I call home. 😀
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top