Bw0mp's forum posts

  • 24 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Avatar image for Bw0mp
Bw0mp

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

2

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 Bw0mp
Member since 2007 • 25 Posts
unless you have vista 64 and youre doing 3d modeling/animation, you won't notice a bit of difference between 2gb and 4gb... let alone 4 and 8
Avatar image for Bw0mp
Bw0mp

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

2

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 Bw0mp
Member since 2007 • 25 Posts

I DONT THINK that codezer0 cares about maxing out the game but being able to play game on high descently!!!!!! The game is a peice of crap on a optminzation front !! Using some commands does fix some of the lag but dont fix totally. Ive ran the game on low with Sempron 3300+ 1.5 DDR and a 7600GS which looked worse than games made back in 2002. Then Now seen It on high with a X2 6000+ 2 Gb DDR2, and a XFX Extreme Edition 8800GT and Its plays between 30-45 Fps average and can dip below 30 at 1024x768 at times and its a new card. Geforce 8800's of any sort are still the best cards you can buy even if they are a year oldand still cant play this game on high fluidly. "SMART" deves always allow 2 year old tech to play the game good. Just by focusing on the top 5% of Pc gamers that are able to play the game on high Crytek are losing money hand over fist. If you have any thing less than a 7800 gtx or ati equal the game isnt even playable for the most part. Even with my old 7600GS I could play games on high until Crysis,Stalker which are poor optminized games. Yea Crysis is top dog on graphics but for what cost? The gameplay is lacking but the story has a spark that could take off. Maybe just maybe when the Crysis patch that comes next year performance might be fixed but im not holding my breath.

04dcarraher

I'm getting into this late, but I have 3+ year old hardware and I can play this game at a relatively good fps with a few things set to high. I have to keep the texture/object quality on low same with the shadows and shaders cause my gpu is just too old to handle all of it. I do get slow downs in certain areas (~20fps) mainly when theres a lot of things blowing up and the screen is filled with smoke and soft particles.. the only time the game is truely unplayable for me is at the very end, it goes into single digits when outside.

oh and my hardware.. cpu: amd fx55 stock, ati x800xt stock, 1 gb of ddr400, 480 watt psu and I'm running the game at 1280x1024

Avatar image for Bw0mp
Bw0mp

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

2

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 Bw0mp
Member since 2007 • 25 Posts
well, there hasn't been any HD videos of farcry 2 yet, so you can't really judge how the game looks, because crysis didn't exactly look 'great' until you saw it in HD. Hopefully they won't rush it out.. we'll just have to see
Avatar image for Bw0mp
Bw0mp

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

2

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 Bw0mp
Member since 2007 • 25 Posts

he'll prolly just laugh at you for losing your cool..

but at least you'll feel better

Avatar image for Bw0mp
Bw0mp

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

2

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 Bw0mp
Member since 2007 • 25 Posts

[QUOTE="Bw0mp"]it affects load times more than fps, and since you play all of them still you shouldn't worry about itMotherRussia

Thanks, also I use as antivirus Symatec Antivirus corporate edition....I think it uses too much memory but I am not sure, should I remove it and install AVG?

I use AVG free myself, but I never have it running unless I'm doing a scan and I'm not familiar with Symatec so I can't really comment on it.

Avatar image for Bw0mp
Bw0mp

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

2

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 Bw0mp
Member since 2007 • 25 Posts
it affects load times more than fps, and since you play all of them still you shouldn't worry about it
Avatar image for Bw0mp
Bw0mp

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

2

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 Bw0mp
Member since 2007 • 25 Posts
well, the more you have on your HDD in general is going to affect performance, since it will have more information to sort through. it prolly won't be a drastic performance hit, but the more thats on there, the longer it will take for larger files to load. Defrag your drive regularly and anything that you don't need on there you should take it off.
Avatar image for Bw0mp
Bw0mp

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

2

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 Bw0mp
Member since 2007 • 25 Posts
I don't see why they bothered with vista if theyre just gonna release a new one within 3 years of it.. at least vista was 6 years after xp
Avatar image for Bw0mp
Bw0mp

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

2

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9 Bw0mp
Member since 2007 • 25 Posts

[QUOTE="hacker_xyzzy"]PCI-E 2.0 is backwards compatible with PCI-E 16x.manic111

I may be wrong but I thought they were only backwards compatible with PCI-E 1.1, which you get on P35 mobos but not before?

nope, its compatible with pci-e 1.0 and 1.1

Avatar image for Bw0mp
Bw0mp

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

2

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10 Bw0mp
Member since 2007 • 25 Posts
theyre backwards compatible, so you don't have to worry about it
  • 24 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3