X1950pro AGP - FEAR

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Paratus

Lifer
Jun 4, 2004
17,522
15,566
146
I'd say he's CPU bound but unplayable is in the eye of the beholder. I played FEAR online with an 9600XT! (at 800x600) ;)
 

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,890
1
0
alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: Paratus
I'd say he's CPU bound but unplayable is in the eye of the beholder. I played FEAR online with an 9600XT! (at 800x600) ;)

i am using the OP's definition ...

he *wants* 35FPS as a minimum for 12x10
:Q

Core2Duo and 8800GTS?
:confused:

heck Core2Duo and 9600p ... the FPS are mostly determined by the CPU
... there just won't be any 'detail' ... but it will be smooth as butter


:D
 

aircool

Member
Mar 24, 2007
28
0
0
Sorry for lookin an ass, but you could of at least stated a lower fsb mean lesser fps.

Sorry.

Anyway, i think i expect WAYYY to much (as yuove said) so i got stalker and this is so that i know what 30 fps looks like.

Thanks
 

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,890
1
0
alienbabeltech.com
no prob :)

i did try to correlate CPU speed including lack of bandwith with Frame-rate :p

STALKER !!!
:Q

it's a real resource hog if you have *everything* maxed :p


make *sure* you put (1) grass way down ... (2) grass shadows off and (3) AA to min ... runs good for me with *everything else* maxed
 

Paratus

Lifer
Jun 4, 2004
17,522
15,566
146
Originally posted by: aircool
Sorry for lookin an ass, but you could of at least stated a lower fsb mean lesser fps.

Sorry.

Anyway, i think i expect WAYYY to much (as yuove said) so i got stalker and this is so that i know what 30 fps looks like.

Thanks

No problem!

I missed yours was a 2.8'A' in your OP. That would have saved us all some time.

You still have a good rig but your going to have to trade some eye candy for FPS.
 

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,890
1
0
alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: Paratus
Originally posted by: aircool
Sorry for lookin an ass, but you could of at least stated a lower fsb mean lesser fps.

Sorry.

Anyway, i think i expect WAYYY to much (as yuove said) so i got stalker and this is so that i know what 30 fps looks like.

Thanks

No problem!

I missed yours was a 2.8'A' in your OP. That would have saved us all some time.

You still have a good rig but your going to have to trade some eye candy for FPS.

*this* is why i was confused ... from your P4 thread:

http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...&STARTPAGE=6&FTVAR_FORUMVIEWTMP=Linear


Originally posted by: aircool
Hello, can you help me.

My computer:

-Pentium 4, prescott core, running (OC'ed to) 3615mhz, from 2800 stock.
-1.5gb ram
-ASUS P4C800-E DELUXE
-200gb HDD, in total.
-500w dual railed psu, 18a each.
-Sapphire X1950pro AGP

I cannot play fear smoothly, even at low settings.

1280x960 at low settings, even minimal, plays bad.

i score 7.5k ~ in 3dmark05.

i don't believe ANY Prescotts were P4-A :p

they were *after* Northwood ...
:roll:

no wonder there was confusion ;)



Paratus, he has no trade-off of eye candy for FPS
... His CPU renders FEAR unplayable (for him at even 10x7 ... he is gonna have to DROP his resolution to 800x600 [or even 4x6] to get 35FPS as the *minimum* Frame Rate
--of course he can probably get *maximum* eye-candy and detail plus 8xAA/16xAF at 8x6
;)
 

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,890
1
0
alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: aircool
there really is a P4 'A' at 2.8ghz pressie core'd.

it must not have been popular .. i can certainly see why :p

:D

actually ...

Prescott was always called "E" but you are *right* there was a further "A" [533 FSB] designation in the line

http://techreport.com/reviews/2004q1/p4-prescott/index.x?pg=1
Prescott clock speeds will initially range from 2.8GHz to 3.4GHz. To keep Prescott-based P4s distinct from older "Northwood" cores, Intel is tacking an "E" on to the product names, so they'll be called the Pentium 4 2.8E or 3.2E. The product mix gets most confusing at 2.8GHz, where one could buy four different Pentium 4s: the 2.8GHz (a Northwood core with a 533MHz front-side bus), the 2.8C (Northwood again, but with an 800MHz bus), the 2.8A (Prescott with a 533MHz bus), or the 2.8E (Prescott with 800MHz bus). Clear as mud?

it makes little sense to have a fairly high-clock CPU completely *crippled* by its FSB ...
:confused:
that's when AMD pulled ahead with A64

but yeah, faster CPU for better frame-rates in FEAR
or turn the resolution way down ... now

glad that's clear now :)