JoetheSchmoe Posted October 25, 2008 Share Posted October 25, 2008 Thanks for the extra information on graphics card, but i never got my original questions answered.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WRX22B1998 Posted October 25, 2008 Share Posted October 25, 2008 ok joe 1. i doubt it 2. of course 3. maybe not super jesus (does that mean max settings), but depending on your res, youd be able to run it on medium/high im thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carbon Posted October 25, 2008 Share Posted October 25, 2008 oke, I have bought a new graphics card I really hope it runs on my PC Specs: Intel Pentium 4 3.00GHz 1022Mb RAM NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GTS 256.0 Mb 68.0GB free Space (If needed I can get 30GB free anyways rofl) I want opinions, if it would run with everything on low Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WRX22B1998 Posted October 25, 2008 Share Posted October 25, 2008 hmm good u have 1gb ram (well its better than having 512), the 8600GTS isnt a bad card imo. free space, well...lol. but the p4 will drag you down maybe. you definitely should be able to run it however. is it a pentium 4 or a pentium D ? i would think pentium D 3ghz would do a bit better... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carbon Posted October 25, 2008 Share Posted October 25, 2008 hmm good u have 1gb ram (well its better than having 512), the 8600GTS isnt a bad card imo. free space, well...lol.but the p4 will drag you down maybe. you definitely should be able to run it however. is it a pentium 4 or a pentium D ? i would think pentium D 3ghz would do a bit better... Processor: Intel® Pentium® 4 CPU 3.00 GHz (2 CPUs) Idk that's what the line says in DxDiag... I'm just hoping to run it When I got San Andreas, it ran with like 15fps, but I was happy I could get some more ram, if that would matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shortbus Posted October 25, 2008 Share Posted October 25, 2008 (edited) Does SA still run with 15 FPS? Seems like it should run better with an 8600. Edited October 25, 2008 by Shortbus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoetheSchmoe Posted October 25, 2008 Share Posted October 25, 2008 ok joe1. i doubt it 2. of course 3. maybe not super jesus (does that mean max settings), but depending on your res, youd be able to run it on medium/high im thinking. Thanks man. I am considering to up my power supply to run a better graphics card though. And yes, Super-Jesus meant max settings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cosbuster Posted October 25, 2008 Share Posted October 25, 2008 (edited) The 8600 can handle 5x SA running on max at the same time. Edited October 25, 2008 by cosbuster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris82 Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 The 8600 can handle 5x SA running on max at the same time. And I'm the Pope. Also the reason why the Xbox 360 sometimes does better than the PS3 is because even though they both have multi-core processors, not everything is programmed to take advantage of that. Especially not seven cores, which is ridiculously hard to code for. Also the 360 has double the PS3's RAM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WRX22B1998 Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 Also the 360 has double the 360's RAM. sooooooo the 360 has double the 360's ram eh? LOL 5 x sa running on max at same time,,thats a bit too far. it is a 8600GTS, so its in between 8600GT and 8800GT, but yeah. carbon, it looks like you got a pentium D 3ghz ... does it show as 2 CPU's if you have hyperthreading enabled? maybe thats why...im not sure. yeah 7 cores is a bit weird lol. meh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carbon Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 Also the 360 has double the 360's RAM. sooooooo the 360 has double the 360's ram eh? LOL 5 x sa running on max at same time,,thats a bit too far. it is a 8600GTS, so its in between 8600GT and 8800GT, but yeah. carbon, it looks like you got a pentium D 3ghz ... does it show as 2 CPU's if you have hyperthreading enabled? maybe thats why...im not sure. yeah 7 cores is a bit weird lol. meh. This is what I found at My Computer Properties... A little bit noob question, but what's hyperthreading? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gtafan09 Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 (edited) An ATI 4850 is an excellent card which can be had for under $150, and it will undoubtedly play GTA IV.Just be sure your motherboard has a PCI-express x16 slot. Thank you again. Just checked the Motherboard. It was an Asus M2N4-SLI. Not a very good one, but it had exactly PCI express x16 I noticed that the chipset was Nvidia Nforce4 Will this motherboard be better with an NVidia card? The cheapest I have found from Nvidia in my country was a VGA 9800 512 MB for 139 Euros. Although I am an ATI and AMD fan... Edited October 26, 2008 by gtafan09 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gtafan09 Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 I checked just for curiosity and I found this. So, the Nvidia 9800 must be GX2 and not GTX to be better than ATI HD 4850 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustADummy Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 Processor: Intel® Pentium® 4 CPU 3.00 GHz (2 CPUs) Idk that's what the line says in DxDiag... I'm just hoping to run it When I got San Andreas, it ran with like 15fps, but I was happy I could get some more ram, if that would matter. It does matter and you could run GTA IV at low settings, I guess. Also, if it says "2 CPU's" it's a dual core which is a great processor too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carbon Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 (edited) Processor: Intel® Pentium® 4 CPU 3.00 GHz (2 CPUs) Idk that's what the line says in DxDiag... I'm just hoping to run it When I got San Andreas, it ran with like 15fps, but I was happy I could get some more ram, if that would matter. It does matter and you could run GTA IV at low settings, I guess. Also, if it says "2 CPU's" it's a dual core which is a great processor too. I don't think it's a dual core... I did some Googleing, and found this : (Some random forum) Your CPU has hyperthreading.Ie, Your PC has 1 physical CPU, and 2 Logical ones Edit: Does SA still run with 15 FPS? Seems like it should run better with an 8600. San Andreas runs fine now with max graphics( Draw Distance:MAX; Frame limiter: Off; Visual FX quality: Very high; Mip Mapping: off; AA: 3; Resolution: 1280x1024[MY monitor is a limit] ) 25-40FPS in populated area. That 15 fps was in old times, I had Pentium 3 500GHz, and the Graphics card was very bad, ram was worse... Edited October 26, 2008 by Carbon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonewᶲlf Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 The 8600 can handle 5x SA running on max at the same time. And I'm the Pope. Also the reason why the Xbox 360 sometimes does better than the PS3 is because even though they both have multi-core processors, not everything is programmed to take advantage of that. Especially not seven cores, which is ridiculously hard to code for. Also the 360 has double the PS3's RAM. C'mon Chris even my shit ass 8500 can run SA on max without lag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris82 Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 A little bit noob question, but what's hyperthreading? Hyperthreading just makes your processor go a bit faster, but it's irrelevant. Thank you again.Just checked the Motherboard. It was an Asus M2N4-SLI. Not a very good one, but it had exactly PCI express x16 I noticed that the chipset was Nvidia Nforce4 Will this motherboard be better with an NVidia card? The cheapest I have found from Nvidia in my country was a VGA 9800 512 MB for 139 Euros. Although I am an ATI and AMD fan... No, it won't work better with an nVidia card, that's just who makes your motherboard chipset but it won't affect your graphics card. I have an nforce chipset as well and my ATi 3870 works wonderfully. I checked just for curiosity and I found this.So, the Nvidia 9800 must be GX2 and not GTX to be better than ATI HD 4850 You realize that the GX2 sells for between $300-$500 and the 280 is between $350-$700 For the 4850, a card THAT much cheaper to be that high on the benchmark list, makes it an absolutely astounding card. that or it makes nvidia look even worse lol C'mon Chris even my shit ass 8500 can run SA on max without lag. You notice he said 5x...as in 5 San Andreas processes. I don't care what kind of graphics card you have, you're not running 5 instances of a game without taking a performance hit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gtafan09 Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 (edited) You realize that the GX2 sells for between $300-$500 and the 280 is between $350-$700For the 4850, a card THAT much cheaper to be that high on the benchmark list, makes it an absolutely astounding card. that or it makes nvidia look even worse lol Yes, you're right... didnt' realize that there was such a big difference in price. So, the ATI seems the best deal. I have to get sth before GTA IV PC gets out. Thank you very much. It was a lot of help. Edited October 26, 2008 by gtafan09 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RaverJeroen1992 Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 A little bit noob question, but what's hyperthreading? Hyperthreading just makes your processor go a bit faster, but it's irrelevant. Thank you again.Just checked the Motherboard. It was an Asus M2N4-SLI. Not a very good one, but it had exactly PCI express x16 I noticed that the chipset was Nvidia Nforce4 Will this motherboard be better with an NVidia card? The cheapest I have found from Nvidia in my country was a VGA 9800 512 MB for 139 Euros. Although I am an ATI and AMD fan... No, it won't work better with an nVidia card, that's just who makes your motherboard chipset but it won't affect your graphics card. I have an nforce chipset as well and my ATi 3870 works wonderfully. I checked just for curiosity and I found this.So, the Nvidia 9800 must be GX2 and not GTX to be better than ATI HD 4850 You realize that the GX2 sells for between $300-$500 and the 280 is between $350-$700 For the 4850, a card THAT much cheaper to be that high on the benchmark list, makes it an absolutely astounding card. that or it makes nvidia look even worse lol C'mon Chris even my shit ass 8500 can run SA on max without lag. You notice he said 5x...as in 5 San Andreas processes. I don't care what kind of graphics card you have, you're not running 5 instances of a game without taking a performance hit. Yes, you're right... didnt' realize that there was such a big difference in price. So, the ATI seems the best deal. I have to get sth before GTA IV PC gets out. Thank you very much. It was a lot of help. Keep in mind, that some games perform better with ATI's than Nvidia's Bioshock does much better with ATIcards then with Nvidia cards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gtafan09 Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 (edited) Keep in mind, that some games perform better with ATI's than Nvidia's Bioshock does much better with ATIcards then with Nvidia cards In fact, I have played Bioshock with good graphic level with the ATI X1550 I have, and also Call Of Duty 4. I had problems with Crysis and Assasin's Creed with graphics at medium, but in minimum I could play them very well. I think that with minimum graphics I could play even GTA IV, but there's no fun at all without shadows and lights and reflexions. Edited October 26, 2008 by gtafan09 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shortbus Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 but there's no fun at all without shadows and lights and reflexions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gtafan09 Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 (edited) but there's no fun at all without shadows and lights and reflexions. sorry for my english what I mean is that I could play Assassin's Creed with all graphics at minimum, and get more than 15 fps. But when I set the shaders and the shadows ON, and the other graphic levels at high, the view was very realistic, but only 6 or 8 frames per second. Same thing with crysis. And Crysis is not any special game. The graphics make it beautiful. Without graphics at High Level it's not worthy playing it, Edited October 26, 2008 by gtafan09 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonewᶲlf Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 You notice he said 5x...as in 5 San Andreas processes. I don't care what kind of graphics card you have, you're not running 5 instances of a game without taking a performance hit. My bad Sorry mate i didn't notice that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shortbus Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 but there's no fun at all without shadows and lights and reflexions. sorry for my english what I mean is that I could play Assassin's Creed with all graphics at minimum, and get more than 15 fps. But when I set the shaders and the shadows ON, and the other graphic levels at high, the view was very realistic, but only 6 or 8 frames per second. Same thing with crysis. And Crysis is not any special game. The graphics make it beautiful. Without graphics at High Level it's not worthy playing it, I wasn't saying your english is bad, I was just a little stunned that you said that games aren't worth playing without full graphics Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gtafan09 Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 (edited) I wasn't saying your english is bad, I was just a little stunned that you said that games aren't worth playing without full graphics OK, I misunderstood it. In fact, you're right, but it's just because personally I am more fond of graphics. than gameplay. I got Bioshock and Crysis and Frontlines Fuel of War only for the graphics. I just admire going around and seeing the details. I stopped playing Bioshock when the themes started repeating. I didn't play Crysis and Frontlines at all. I didn't delete only Crysis from my PC, because of the Sandbox World Editor. Can't wait to get the good VGA and do some stuff there. I play only on GTA and Call of Duty. These are the only games I can't stop playing. The other seem all same to me, except when they got cool graphics like Assassin's Creed. Edited October 27, 2008 by gtafan09 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now