chris82

Well it all really depends on how low they have made the lowest settings in GTA IV. For all we know R* could have made it as compatible as possible so that more people would buy it. I don't really think it is accurate though... I mean... 3.8 GB to 18!? Like I've previously stated and will continue to state, if you CAN'T RUN SAN ANDREAS ON MAX SETTINGS WITH ABSOLUTELY NO LAG, YOU WILL NOT BE PLAYING GTA IV ON PC AT ALL. Last I checked, a Pentium III with 256mb of RAM and a GeForce 3 were the minimum requirements for San Andreas. GTA IV having the same minimum specs is impossible in every sense of the word.

Saints Row 2 looks pretty good, although the graphics aren't comparable to GTA IV's. I liked the first Saints Row a lot. I'm buying both for the PC.

Your computer is probably overheating. It's usually either the CPU or even more likely, the GPU. Your computer will shut itself off to prevent damage. Try getting a monitoring program to see your temperatures. A program called SpeedFan should tell you your CPU temperatures and there are many tools you can get for your GPU depending on the model. What kind of processor and graphics card do you have?

Not true at all. People saying PC gaming is dying is a myth. Games sold on Steam make up over 80% of online game play time, yet Steam's sales aren't accounted for. Now if you have a platform with 80% of its games not being counted towards sales, the numbers are obviously going to look shitty. PC gaming is very much alive.

That sounds incorrect. And I certainly hope it's not delayed, but December 2nd isn't that much longer.

Sorry I don't think it will.

This actually looks like an interesting game, I labeled it as vaporware but this new media looks good...I will be sure to pick up the PC version.

Except activity to pick up, I'll certainly be more active due to the PC releases of Saints Row 2 and GTA IV right around the corner

That makes it difficult, but you might be able to at that resolution.

Excellent, added to the index.

Yours is fine, it's just not the best because the second number is low.

No.

It's called multitasking.

High and high, although Windows XP Professional >>>>>> Home

It's a good series and I really liked all of them except 3, but since this one is being developed by the developers of 3, fuck it.

Yes, Semprons were the lower end processors. That doesn't mean they were bad. How the hell was the Pentium 4 THE gaming processor? That would be the Athlon 64, which, according to the lovely graph you provided, beats the everliving shit out of the Pentium 4s. Now I'm not saying EVERY Athlon beat EVERY Pentium 4, but the fact that a Sempron at 1.8GHz matches the performance of a Pentium 4 at 3GHz? How does that make the Pentium 4 a better processor? Give me one good reason the Pentium 4's architecture wasn't absolute shit and I'll show you my dangly parts. I'm not right because I'm a moderator, I'm right because I build PCs and I know which ones are shit and which ones aren't. Pentium 4 = horrible. You're the one who needs to grow up. If I didn't like what components I had, I wouldn't have them would I? I built this machine with the components I chose because they are good. Not the best, but suitable for what I do. My next processor? Probably a Phenom. My next video card? Probably a 4870. Just because you have a bad processor (which you admit to), you shouldn't feel bad. I used to have a Pentium 4 and it was pig disgusting. Oh and you want to talk about poor financial performance? nVidia is doing just phenomenal financially. Another thing, the nVidia 6100 is an INTEGRATED GRAPHICS CARD. As in, your friend might as well have Intel integrated graphics, you are obviously going to do better when you have a 6800GT. So, by your logic, him having a much worse graphics card equates to you having a much better processor?

What? All Pentium 4s are garbage, Athlons and even Semprons beat the shit out of them.

No advertising.

Very nice fan on that card, by all means get it, but keep in mind you'll be sacrificing a little performance because it has GDDR3 memory instead of GDDR4 or 5.

November 10th, according to the various retailers. According to Volition, the developer, it's all THQ's fault...keep in mind the guy who posted this is a bit of a douchebag. Link

Not resolution, settings like texture quality, draw distance, shadows, etc... Half-Life 2 does not support multi-core at all yet but the Orange Box version of the engine does, but it's disabled by default, so you wouldn't see any benefits from a dual-core there yet.

Ok, I don't like them precisely because they don't make great products. But that isn't always the case. When the P4 was Intel's flagship, Intel was effectively horrible. Now they're on top. You may think U3 is fun, a lot of others don't. And there are several reasons why Source is the best engine for first person shooters, namely: 1. Scalability. Runs decently on shitty computers, runs amazingly and looks amazing on amazing computers. 2. Upgradability. The code is modular. Engine updates, graphical or otherwise can be slipped in without causing major breaks in backward compatibility. As for the Unreal engine becoming viable in the future, should be fun. All of those articles are either old or concern OLD hardware. The Diamond one is related to the reseller. Yes, some resellers are better than others, but that mainly affects reliability and cooling components, not performance. I've used nVidia cards and it hasn't affected what I think; I'm not going to buy one because I'd rather have a card that performs similarly for less money. Historically with GTA, the GPU has mattered more, but in this case I'm not sure, I'd say they will both be important. You shouldn't have drastic issues with a single-core processor, it probably just won't do as well as a multi-core.

lol? ATI's drivers are excellent...not the CCC of course, but I don't install that anyway. In your experience nVidia cards have been great? I'm happy for you, but the opposite has been true for me and there are quite frequently news stories about defective nVidia parts being common, like here and also here. And "60% of gamers" aren't loyal to nVidia either, hence the popularity of the 4000 series. You call PhysX support taking off? The Unreal engine blows and the Quake engine (and derivatives of it, such as the Source and GoldSrc engines, which makes it the most popular engine in existence for first person shooters) doesn't support it. Sure, there are a fair amount of games which use the Unreal 3 and 4 engines, but how many of those games actually make heavy use of physics? For that matter, how many of those games are even played frequently? There are currently around 250 people playing Unreal Tournament 3. There are currently around 58,000 people playing Counter-Strike, 25,000 people playing Counter-Strike: Source, 8,500 playing Team Fortress 2, 17,000 playing Call of Duty 4, 7,500 playing Battlefield 2, and those are easily the most popular online first person shooters. Until it's used in more than just the Unreal engine, GG PhysX. And when I say Intel graphics chipset I obviously mean integrated graphics. And even if I didn't, it's irrelevant, xoonky's DXDIAG reported it as being an Intel graphics chipset. Would it report that if he had an nVidia or ATI graphics card? No. Yes, I am an ATI fan, because every nVidia graphics card I've owned has either overheated or performed badly. I'm an AMD fan as well. Same reasons. Not that Intel's current processors are bad. I'm not going to go and buy a new motherboard just to use one, but they aren't bad. Yes, the Catalyst Control Center is horrible. Not the drivers themselves. You don't HAVE to install CCC. A GTX 260/280? No thanks, I currently have a 3870 and if I did pick up a new graphics card soon, it would be a 4870 because IT'S BETTER AND CHEAPER. Yes, a 4870 will in some cases outperform the 280 which costs over $100 more. Even if the 280 wins by a few FPS in certain games, I would still rather save money that could go towards a better processor or more RAM.

AS for nVidia sucking, they absolutely do, horrible drivers and a high defectiveness rate. Also not very many things support PhysX, it's a fail technology IMO.