MikoyanPT Posted July 24, 2007 Share Posted July 24, 2007 Originally posted by Sergei: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by MikoyanPT: I don´t understand why people are so worried with CM:SF requirements, it´s certainly not the most demanding game in the market. Oblivion, Crisys, Unreal Tournament 3 are demanding games, CM:SF is not. Any midlerange videocard in the market should handle CM:SF properly.Actually, CM:SF can bring any system down on its knees depending on the scenario (and graphic settings). Make a 4km x 4km map full of detail and pour in several battalions, and I'll be damned if your rig runs it smoothly once hell breaks loose. However, a normal sized scenario should run without problems on a mediocre system. </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sam0t Posted July 24, 2007 Share Posted July 24, 2007 Geez where some of the people in this thread been living for the past year. Go ahead and google some year old information from the Internet if you will, but todays situation is quite different than some individuals here claim. I have monitored some of the most popular hardware sites/forums out there daily and all of them pretty much tell you the same story, which is: Nvidias driver quality has taken a nose dive after they released the 8800 series. They have slowly been getting better for 8800 series but because of that the pre 8800 cards have been almost totally forgotten. Last time it took Nvidia 6 months to update drivers for these cards, which can hardly be called an archievement. On the other hand ATI/AMD has steadily gotten better drivers due to their monthly driver program and their driver stability can be considered excelent nowdays. ATI/AMD did rewrite their openGL drivers reacently which resulted in a performance increase, so things are not so bleak in openGL land either. The only place when Nvidias drivers beat the ATI/AMD clearly is in Linux world, that I do not doubt. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikoyanPT Posted July 24, 2007 Share Posted July 24, 2007 Originally posted by sam0t: Geez where some of the people in this thread been living for the past year. Go ahead and google some year old information from the Internet if you will, but todays situation is quite different than some individuals here claim. I have monitored some of the most popular hardware sites/forums out there daily and all of them pretty much tell you the same story, which is: Nvidias driver quality has taken a nose dive after they released the 8800 series. They have slowly been getting better for 8800 series but because of that the pre 8800 cards have been almost totally forgotten. Last time it took Nvidia 6 months to update drivers for these cards, which can hardly be called an archievement. On the other hand ATI/AMD has steadily gotten better drivers due to their monthly driver program and their driver stability can be considered excelent nowdays. ATI/AMD did rewrite their openGL drivers reacently which resulted in a performance increase, so things are not so bleak in openGL land either. The only place when Nvidias drivers beat the ATI/AMD clearly is in Linux world, that I do not doubt. I couldn´t say it better. Everibody got trouble with the first generation of directx10 cards. Nvidia suffered more because they launched first. I think most people unsure about hardware requirements in this forum are usualy playing old games and are not used to create their own pc, and when hearing techies with gamerigs of thousands of dollars looking unsure about how the game will run at a 1900 resolution, they get scared. You can play a game at 800, 1024, 1280 resolutions and looking great. In fact my pc screen can´t handle resolutions over 1400. [ July 24, 2007, 02:49 PM: Message edited by: MikoyanPT ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted July 24, 2007 Share Posted July 24, 2007 Originally posted by MikoyanPT: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Redwolf: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by MikoyanPT: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Mike Churchmoor: Not just the fog: In near future I will upgrade my old geforce 6600 gt to either gf 8600 gt or to radeon x1950 pro. Which one is running cm:sf better will be crucial. Does ati-cards still have 'issues' with cm:sf compared to gf-cards? The radeon x1950 pro should run the game better because has better directx9 performance. The Geforce 8600GT is directx10 compatible if running with Vista. </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted July 24, 2007 Share Posted July 24, 2007 Originally posted by MikoyanPT: I don´t understand why people are so worried with CM:SF requirements, it´s certainly not the most demanding game in the market. Oblivion, Crisys, Unreal Tournament 3 are demanding games, CM:SF is not. Any midlerange videocard in the market should handle CM:SF properly. But if you buy a 500 dolars top notch card, get ready to some driver issues. Actually this doesn't have to be true. Fact is that the weight of games like STALKER and other modern FPSes is now not in number of polygons and textures, but in the shaders. CM:SF doesn't make advanced use of shaders at all, but it certainly pushes a honkload of polygons, and textures. And since CM:SF has no LOD (level of detail) management that means if you place a lot of junk (buildings, units) in visible range than you will really really need raw polygon rate ... ... and memory bandwidth - which is why the decaf video cards with high clocks but low memory bandwidth like the low-end 8xxx and 7xxx are a bad buy, in particular for CM:SF. For CM:SF you need to buy video cards by memory bandwidth, and if you want high AA/AF settings get some more memory bandwidth. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikoyanPT Posted July 24, 2007 Share Posted July 24, 2007 Redwolf What i am saying is that 8800 is too blody expensive to most people, 8600 as you rightly said is a lame duck. So GF 7600GT and Radeon x1950pro are excellent price\performance options. Believe me the radeon x1950pro is excellent, i play lots of games, it doesn´t have trouble with directx9 or openGl. Is the GF 8800 better, certainly, once the driver issues are solved, the problem is that they cost 3 or 4 times more than a x1950pro. All that said i agree with sam0t post, he his absolutely right. And for me the midlerange cards are always the price\performance best choice. And GF8600 and Radeon2600 series kind of lack in quality but not in price. About the 8800GT, i found obscene the watts required to make this beauty run, stick this on an old pc and he goes down, need a new and powerfull power supply. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikoyanPT Posted July 24, 2007 Share Posted July 24, 2007 Originally posted by Redwolf: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by MikoyanPT: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Redwolf: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by MikoyanPT: The radeon x1950 pro should run the game better because has better directx9 performance. The Geforce 8600GT is directx10 compatible if running with Vista. </font>OK, first of all, do you want to imply that DirectX10 cards run DirectX 9 any worse? Second, CM:SF uses OpenGL, not Direct3D from DirectX. I won't rant here, it is sufficient that you put "ATI" and "OpenGL" into google. </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nidan1 Posted July 24, 2007 Share Posted July 24, 2007 Will a GeForce 6600 give me decent performance for CM:SF?, I'm not ready to go out and buy a new graphics card. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikoyanPT Posted July 24, 2007 Share Posted July 24, 2007 Originally posted by Nidan1: Will a GeForce 6600 give me decent performance for CM:SF?, I'm not ready to go out and buy a new graphics card. My old gaming rig is running ToW with one of those, great litle piece of hardware. i will certainly run cm:sf in that as well. Just have to fiddle the settings of the game i guess. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steiner14 Posted July 24, 2007 Author Share Posted July 24, 2007 No fog in CMSF? If CMSF has no foggy weather, please could someone from Battlefront comment on fog in the following game or modules? Because i don't play games anymore and CMSF will be the only game (and so will CMx2-WWII) and this means i buy a graphics card for CMx2 only. So it would be nice to know, if there is maybe a preferrable product to get fog definately and beautifully. I was screwed once when i upgraded to a Radeon for CMBO. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nidan1 Posted July 24, 2007 Share Posted July 24, 2007 Originally posted by MikoyanPT: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Nidan1: Will a GeForce 6600 give me decent performance for CM:SF?, I'm not ready to go out and buy a new graphics card. My old gaming rig is running ToW with one of those, great litle piece of hardware. i will certainly run cm:sf in that as well. Just have to fiddle the settings of the game i guess. </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.