Down to brass tacks. It's your OS.

I never reveal my specs because ppl wont believe me/ ppl dont know what a Radeon 2900 Pro is. The Radeon 2900 pro is basically an underclocked and super discounted ($) 2900 XT, released during that period in time when Nvidia 8800GT's were selling out so fast the card cost was above MSRP. So this is my rig. Intel Core 2 Duo 1.86 stock clocked to 2.35. Radeon 2900Pro clocked past XT speeds. 3 gigs underclocked RAM. Windows XP 32bit.

Crysis Warhead, GTA4, Red Faction: Guerrilla. All run fine for me at max monitor resolution (mine is 1680x1050 or whatever). All settings high (not very high, not max).

Now you guys with the 5890 XT or whatever, having problems. Well it may just be your OS. Plain and simple.

Sooo many PC gamers with issues using the latest and greatest... I haven't had a problem with a single game. (Granted I started GTA4 at the 1.004 patch) using the same hardware for the past 3-4 years... Try using Windows XP to play games.

Unless crazy spastic flag animations and dynamic water behavior you will not even notice while playing are really important to you, at this point there is no compelling reason to use Win 7 or Vista for gaming.

Sorry..but who are these supposed people that are having trouble running games on Windows 7?

Every game I have tried thus far has worked flawlessly, including the mentioned GTA IV. Most of your post sounds like complete bull. Gaming performance between XP and Windows 7 is roughly the same ..framerates vary by only a couple percent between the two from game to game, sometimes in favor of XP, sometimes in favor of Win7. XP just does not offer better performance on a modern machine as you're suggesting.

I have old Nvidia 5200 FX also runs Crysis on max

every time i close my eyes i see all that :D

F1_2004,
you didn't even need to say anything. Your .gif is the most eloquent and appropriate response to this thread.

What is a 5890XT? Also you do not play Crysis on high with a 2900. That series is a joke and disgrace to PC hardware.millerlight89

Its a pretty inefficient piece for sure. Thats why they re-labelled 'em Pro, took off $200 from the XT. Its akin to an American muscle car. I kinda like all the heat it throws out, close my door, keeps the room warm and toasty.

If you went through the trouble of making an entire thread about it, you could have at least shown some pics of what card you actually have and what FPS you're getting.F1_2004

No i'm on a writing rampage after being suspended a week, no trouble at all really. I'll get back to you on the pics and whatnot.

[QUOTE="F1_2004"]If you went through the trouble of making an entire thread about it, you could have at least shown some pics of what card you actually have and what FPS you're getting.jackandblood

No i'm on a writing rampage after being suspended a week, no trouble at all really. I'll get back to you on the pics and whatnot.

Maybe some people's tech problems are OS related. Simple premise but I gotta flesh it out. Why are you here? Forums are fun right?

Well it may just be your OS. Plain and simple.

Sooo many PC gamers with issues using the latest and greatest... I haven't had a problem with a single game. (Granted I started GTA4 at the 1.004 patch) using the same hardware for the past 3-4 years... Try using Windows XP to play games.

Unless crazy spastic flag animations and dynamic water behavior you will not even notice while playing are really important to you, at this point there is no compelling reason to use Win 7 or Vista for gaming.jackandblood

I use xp, i used the latest gtaiv 1.004 patch and i use new hardware, plus format my pv every year and i do have problems, so what your point?

Maybe some people's tech problems are OS related. Simple premise but I gotta flesh it out. Why are you here? Forums are fun right?

jackandblood

F1_2004,
you didn't even need to say anything. Your .gif is the most eloquent and appropriate response to this thread.

cybrcatter

Ya I managed to impress Heath Ledger (may he RIP). I outdid myself. Thanks.

[QUOTE="jackandblood"]

Maybe some people's tech problems are OS related. Simple premise but I gotta flesh it out. Why are you here? Forums are fun right?

millerlight89

Are you or are you not posting into this topic at your own freewill? Who controls your time allocation? Me?

I never reveal my specs because ppl wont believe me/ ppl dont know what a Radeon 2900 Pro is. The Radeon 2900 pro is basically an underclocked and super discounted ($) 2900 XT, released during that period in time when Nvidia 8800GT's were selling out so fast the card cost was above MSRP. So this is my rig. Intel Core 2 Duo 1.86 stock clocked to 2.35. Radeon 2900Pro clocked past XT speeds. 3 gigs underclocked RAM. Windows XP 32bit.

Crysis Warhead, GTA4, Red Faction: Guerrilla. All run fine for me at max monitor resolution (mine is 1680x1050 or whatever). All settings high (not very high, not max).

Now you guys with the 5890 XT or whatever, having problems. Well it may just be your OS. Plain and simple.

Sooo many PC gamers with issues using the latest and greatest... I haven't had a problem with a single game. (Granted I started GTA4 at the 1.004 patch) using the same hardware for the past 3-4 years... Try using Windows XP to play games.

Unless crazy spastic flag animations and dynamic water behavior you will not even notice while playing are really important to you, at this point there is no compelling reason to use Win 7 or Vista for gaming.

jackandblood

no your right however you need to consider the following games are starting to drop dx9 support.. shatt5ered horizons, dirt 2, mass effect 2, battlefield bad company 2 battlefled 1943 all no dx 9 support.

alos im not out to start a war i own an hd 2400pro (underclocked x1600 with dx10 support) which i use for testing gpu intergrity.. its a sturdy old cards thats done me alot of good n bad times. im calling it my no.10 best gpu of all time behind the hd 4850, 8800gt, hd 3870x2, x1950, hd 5970, and gtx 260

For a visual representation of how the Great 2900 pro stacks up against all cards over the last several years, look for the 586 score. . . .
towards the bottom of the chart

[QUOTE="jackandblood"]

I never reveal my specs because ppl wont believe me/ ppl dont know what a Radeon 2900 Pro is. The Radeon 2900 pro is basically an underclocked and super discounted ($) 2900 XT, released during that period in time when Nvidia 8800GT's were selling out so fast the card cost was above MSRP. So this is my rig. Intel Core 2 Duo 1.86 stock clocked to 2.35. Radeon 2900Pro clocked past XT speeds. 3 gigs underclocked RAM. Windows XP 32bit.

Crysis Warhead, GTA4, Red Faction: Guerrilla. All run fine for me at max monitor resolution (mine is 1680x1050 or whatever). All settings high (not very high, not max).

Now you guys with the 5890 XT or whatever, having problems. Well it may just be your OS. Plain and simple.

Sooo many PC gamers with issues using the latest and greatest... I haven't had a problem with a single game. (Granted I started GTA4 at the 1.004 patch) using the same hardware for the past 3-4 years... Try using Windows XP to play games.

Unless crazy spastic flag animations and dynamic water behavior you will not even notice while playing are really important to you, at this point there is no compelling reason to use Win 7 or Vista for gaming.

aura_enchanted

no your right however you need to consider the following games are starting to drop dx9 support.. shatt5ered horizons, dirt 2, mass effect 2, battlefield bad company 2 battlefled 1943 all no dx 9 support.

alos im not out to start a war i own an hd 2400pro (underclocked x1600 with dx10 support) which i use for testing gpu intergrity.. its a sturdy old cards thats done me alot of good n bad times. im calling it my no.10 best gpu of all time behind the hd 4850, 8800gt, hd 3870x2, x1950, hd 5970, and gtx 260

[QUOTE="jackandblood"]

I never reveal my specs because ppl wont believe me/ ppl dont know what a Radeon 2900 Pro is. The Radeon 2900 pro is basically an underclocked and super discounted ($) 2900 XT, released during that period in time when Nvidia 8800GT's were selling out so fast the card cost was above MSRP. So this is my rig. Intel Core 2 Duo 1.86 stock clocked to 2.35. Radeon 2900Pro clocked past XT speeds. 3 gigs underclocked RAM. Windows XP 32bit.

Crysis Warhead, GTA4, Red Faction: Guerrilla. All run fine for me at max monitor resolution (mine is 1680x1050 or whatever). All settings high (not very high, not max).

Now you guys with the 5890 XT or whatever, having problems. Well it may just be your OS. Plain and simple.

Sooo many PC gamers with issues using the latest and greatest... I haven't had a problem with a single game. (Granted I started GTA4 at the 1.004 patch) using the same hardware for the past 3-4 years... Try using Windows XP to play games.

Unless crazy spastic flag animations and dynamic water behavior you will not even notice while playing are really important to you, at this point there is no compelling reason to use Win 7 or Vista for gaming.

aura_enchanted

no your right however you need to consider the following games are starting to drop dx9 support.. shatt5ered horizons, dirt 2, mass effect 2, battlefield bad company 2 battlefled 1943 all no dx 9 support.

alos im not out to start a war i own an hd 2400pro (underclocked x1600 with dx10 support) which i use for testing gpu intergrity.. its a sturdy old cards thats done me alot of good n bad times. im calling it my no.10 best gpu of all time behind the hd 4850, 8800gt, hd 3870x2, x1950, hd 5970, and gtx 260

Mass effect 2 is dropping dx9? Well then I guess we found a compelling reason.

[QUOTE="aura_enchanted"]

[QUOTE="jackandblood"]

I never reveal my specs because ppl wont believe me/ ppl dont know what a Radeon 2900 Pro is. The Radeon 2900 pro is basically an underclocked and super discounted ($) 2900 XT, released during that period in time when Nvidia 8800GT's were selling out so fast the card cost was above MSRP. So this is my rig. Intel Core 2 Duo 1.86 stock clocked to 2.35. Radeon 2900Pro clocked past XT speeds. 3 gigs underclocked RAM. Windows XP 32bit.

Crysis Warhead, GTA4, Red Faction: Guerrilla. All run fine for me at max monitor resolution (mine is 1680x1050 or whatever). All settings high (not very high, not max).

Now you guys with the 5890 XT or whatever, having problems. Well it may just be your OS. Plain and simple.

Sooo many PC gamers with issues using the latest and greatest... I haven't had a problem with a single game. (Granted I started GTA4 at the 1.004 patch) using the same hardware for the past 3-4 years... Try using Windows XP to play games.

Unless crazy spastic flag animations and dynamic water behavior you will not even notice while playing are really important to you, at this point there is no compelling reason to use Win 7 or Vista for gaming.

jackandblood

no your right however you need to consider the following games are starting to drop dx9 support.. shatt5ered horizons, dirt 2, mass effect 2, battlefield bad company 2 battlefled 1943 all no dx 9 support.

alos im not out to start a war i own an hd 2400pro (underclocked x1600 with dx10 support) which i use for testing gpu intergrity.. its a sturdy old cards thats done me alot of good n bad times. im calling it my no.10 best gpu of all time behind the hd 4850, 8800gt, hd 3870x2, x1950, hd 5970, and gtx 260

Mass effect 2 is dropping dx9? Well then I guess we found a compelling reason.

[QUOTE="jackandblood"]

[QUOTE="aura_enchanted"]

no your right however you need to consider the following games are starting to drop dx9 support.. shatt5ered horizons, dirt 2, mass effect 2, battlefield bad company 2 battlefled 1943 all no dx 9 support.

alos im not out to start a war i own an hd 2400pro (underclocked x1600 with dx10 support) which i use for testing gpu intergrity.. its a sturdy old cards thats done me alot of good n bad times. im calling it my no.10 best gpu of all time behind the hd 4850, 8800gt, hd 3870x2, x1950, hd 5970, and gtx 260

millerlight89

Mass effect 2 is dropping dx9? Well then I guess we found a compelling reason.

[QUOTE="cybrcatter"]

For a visual representation of how the Great 2900 pro stacks up against all cards over the last several years, look for the 586 score. . . .
towards the bottom of the chart

magicalclick

For a visual representation of how the Great 2900 pro stacks up against all cards over the last several years, look for the 586 score. . . .
towards the bottom of the chart

cybrcatter

Never said it was great. Its damn good for its age though. Look i'm talking the 2900 Pro. Only software limited clock speeds. Mine runs about 20 percent higher than an XT. The Pro was the relabelled model, picked it up for 150 years ago when 8800GTs were going 250 (then one month later Nvidia caught up with demand and the price went back to reasonable) (Yes, on hind-sight I should have waited for the 8800GT). **** what a tangent...

My main point, try problematic games (Stalker, prenumbra, GTA 4, etc.) on the good ol' XP.

Take it easy fellas, we're on the same side here. I'm just seeing a trend across message boards. Threads asking why their games perform poorly on good hardware tend to coincide with using the Vista OS.

[QUOTE="cybrcatter"]

For a visual representation of how the Great 2900 pro stacks up against all cards over the last several years, look for the 586 score. . . .
towards the bottom of the chart

jackandblood

Never said it was great. Its damn good for its age though. Look i'm talking the 2900 Pro. Only software limited clock speeds. Mine runs about 20 percent higher than an XT. The Pro was the relabelled model, picked it up for 150 years ago when 8800GTs were going 250 (then one month later Nvidia caught up with demand and the price went back to reasonable) (Yes, on hind-sight I should have waited for the 8800GT). **** what a tangent...

My main point, try problematic games (Stalker, prenumbra, GTA 4, etc.) on the good ol' XP.

Take it easy fellas, we're on the same side here. I'm just seeing a trend across message boards. Threads asking why their games perform poorly on good hardware tend to coincide with using the Vista OS.

[QUOTE="cybrcatter"]

For a visual representation of how the Great 2900 pro stacks up against all cards over the last several years, look for the 586 score. . . .
towards the bottom of the chart

jackandblood

Never said it was great. Its damn good for its age though. Look i'm talking the 2900 Pro. Only software limited clock speeds. Mine runs about 20 percent higher than an XT. The Pro was the relabelled model, picked it up for 150 years ago when 8800GTs were going 250 (then one month later Nvidia caught up with demand and the price went back to reasonable) (Yes, on hind-sight I should have waited for the 8800GT). **** what a tangent...

My main point, try problematic games (Stalker, prenumbra, GTA 4, etc.) on the good ol' XP.

Take it easy fellas, we're on the same side here. I'm just seeing a trend across message boards. Threads asking why their games perform poorly on good hardware tend to coincide with using the Vista OS.

I think the main problem was that it was unclear what you were trying to say with your first post. With that said I doubt it's so much Vista as it's 'everything else'. However your point is certainly valid, you can play pretty much every game out there at decent to good graphics with a mid range dual core cpu, 3gb ram and a 8800gt.

However, if you're running tons of programs in the background it's going to eat memory, cpu cycles and drive read / search speed. A poorly defragged drive is going to lower performance, old drivers is going to cause issues and last but probably one of the most common, don't max out everything if you're trying to get a good playable frame rate. You don't need x16AA, go for x4, you're not likely to see a diffrence in your actual gameplay and being willing to cut back just a bit will go a long way towards making a game playable.

[QUOTE="jackandblood"]

[QUOTE="cybrcatter"]

For a visual representation of how the Great 2900 pro stacks up against all cards over the last several years, look for the 586 score. . . .
towards the bottom of the chart

Mazoch

Never said it was great. Its damn good for its age though. Look i'm talking the 2900 Pro. Only software limited clock speeds. Mine runs about 20 percent higher than an XT. The Pro was the relabelled model, picked it up for 150 years ago when 8800GTs were going 250 (then one month later Nvidia caught up with demand and the price went back to reasonable) (Yes, on hind-sight I should have waited for the 8800GT). **** what a tangent...

My main point, try problematic games (Stalker, prenumbra, GTA 4, etc.) on the good ol' XP.

Take it easy fellas, we're on the same side here. I'm just seeing a trend across message boards. Threads asking why their games perform poorly on good hardware tend to coincide with using the Vista OS.

I think the main problem was that it was unclear what you were trying to say with your first post. With that said I doubt it's so much Vista as it's 'everything else'. However your point is certainly valid, you can play pretty much every game out there at decent to good graphics with a mid range dual core cpu, 3gb ram and a 8800gt.

However, if you're running tons of programs in the background it's going to eat memory, cpu cycles and drive read / search speed. A poorly defragged drive is going to lower performance, old drivers is going to cause issues and last but probably one of the most common, don't max out everything if you're trying to get a good playable frame rate. You don't need x16AA, go for x4, you're not likely to see a diffrence in your actual gameplay and being willing to cut back just a bit will go a long way towards making a game playable.

Thank you. I'm not gloating about my rig or anything. It plays said games smooth at high settings (not very high, not ultra, not max), I made no claim to anti-aliasing or that i'm getting ludcrious framerates. I am trying to inform ppl that may have purchased or upgraded a gaming computer but are unhappy with the results, that they dont need to throw more money at the thing to get it going. It maybe a resource sapping OS, malware or unecessary proccesses, or a combination of both.

I'm trying to address the whole "PC gaming is too expensive" misconception. My rig is 4 years old and going strong. Laymen may abandon the platform if the only advice they get from tech snobs is: "buy this, upgrade that".

I'm trying to address the whole "PC gaming is too expensive"jackandblood

Why don't you try posting computer hardware discussions in the PC hardware forums? This forums is strictly for PC game discussion only.

Why don't you try posting computer hardware discussions in the PC hardware forums? This forums is strictly for PC game discussion only.

L1D3N

[QUOTE="aura_enchanted"]

[QUOTE="jackandblood"]

I never reveal my specs because ppl wont believe me/ ppl dont know what a Radeon 2900 Pro is. The Radeon 2900 pro is basically an underclocked and super discounted ($) 2900 XT, released during that period in time when Nvidia 8800GT's were selling out so fast the card cost was above MSRP. So this is my rig. Intel Core 2 Duo 1.86 stock clocked to 2.35. Radeon 2900Pro clocked past XT speeds. 3 gigs underclocked RAM. Windows XP 32bit.

Crysis Warhead, GTA4, Red Faction: Guerrilla. All run fine for me at max monitor resolution (mine is 1680x1050 or whatever). All settings high (not very high, not max).

Now you guys with the 5890 XT or whatever, having problems. Well it may just be your OS. Plain and simple.

Sooo many PC gamers with issues using the latest and greatest... I haven't had a problem with a single game. (Granted I started GTA4 at the 1.004 patch) using the same hardware for the past 3-4 years... Try using Windows XP to play games.

Unless crazy spastic flag animations and dynamic water behavior you will not even notice while playing are really important to you, at this point there is no compelling reason to use Win 7 or Vista for gaming.

millerlight89

no your right however you need to consider the following games are starting to drop dx9 support.. shatt5ered horizons, dirt 2, mass effect 2, battlefield bad company 2 battlefled 1943 all no dx 9 support.

alos im not out to start a war i own an hd 2400pro (underclocked x1600 with dx10 support) which i use for testing gpu intergrity.. its a sturdy old cards thats done me alot of good n bad times. im calling it my no.10 best gpu of all time behind the hd 4850, 8800gt, hd 3870x2, x1950, hd 5970, and gtx 260

its still on sale online and gets sold in droves because it can fit any slot pci, agp x8 pci-e.. without sacraficing quality or ports (hdmi, dvi (select models)) along the way i say nut to the man who disses it. me and my hd 2400pro are gonna hold out until hell freezes over.. or until another card attempts the same feat without neglecting preformance somewhere.. btw there isnt!

I have old Nvidia 5200 FX also runs Crysis on max

every time i close my eyes i see all that :D

pecanin

[QUOTE="pecanin"]

I have old Nvidia 5200 FX also runs Crysis on max

every time i close my eyes i see all that :D

somegtalover

no hes lying through his teeth the thing will barely get fable or ff11 offr the ground haha

Maybe some people's tech problems are OS related. Simple premise but I gotta flesh it out. Why are you here? Forums are fun right?

jackandblood

My OS is fine, but thanks for posting this.

I hate threads like this, that machine cant play those games "fine", unless you have very low standards.

[QUOTE="millerlight89"][QUOTE="aura_enchanted"]

no your right however you need to consider the following games are starting to drop dx9 support.. shatt5ered horizons, dirt 2, mass effect 2, battlefield bad company 2 battlefled 1943 all no dx 9 support.

alos im not out to start a war i own an hd 2400pro (underclocked x1600 with dx10 support) which i use for testing gpu intergrity.. its a sturdy old cards thats done me alot of good n bad times. im calling it my no.10 best gpu of all time behind the hd 4850, 8800gt, hd 3870x2, x1950, hd 5970, and gtx 260

aura_enchanted

its still on sale online and gets sold in droves because it can fit any slot pci, agp x8 pci-e.. without sacraficing quality or ports (hdmi, dvi (select models)) along the way i say nut to the man who disses it. me and my hd 2400pro are gonna hold out until hell freezes over.. or until another card attempts the same feat without neglecting preformance somewhere.. btw there isnt!

[QUOTE="aura_enchanted"]

[QUOTE="millerlight89"] The 2k series from ATI should not be in any top 10 lists except: TOP 10 worse GPU series.TerroRizing

its still on sale online and gets sold in droves because it can fit any slot pci, agp x8 pci-e.. without sacraficing quality or ports (hdmi, dvi (select models)) along the way i say nut to the man who disses it. me and my hd 2400pro are gonna hold out until hell freezes over.. or until another card attempts the same feat without neglecting preformance somewhere.. btw there isnt!

in your opinion which is smarter?

scrap a whole pc due to a pci slot and spend hundreds of dollars to make it gaming worthy

or

spending 75 bucks on a lower end gpu and living with the graphical limitations..

i rest my case.

just because your prebuilt has an agpx8 slot hardly makes it necissary to gut it if you want to game..

1 slot shouldnt define a pc.

thats why we should care..