Gf4 and opf

[bogo 0]

Ok is it just me or you need cia's computer to play resistance. I just bought Daytona Gforce 4

4200. And my computer has :

Amd 1800

Ram 512

Winxp

Dx 8.1

Nvidia the newest

And it's still slow.

[kegetys 2]

maybe cos you have visiblity set to 2400 and terrain detail as normal?

Edit: and even your visual detail is at the max

Edit2: and you have HW T&L disabled

[Cloney 0]

Yes, what kind of Geforce 4? Im thinking that a ti4600 could handle that. But if its an MX or a lesser Ti, your comp would choke on it like a bottlecap.

[ALDEGA 0]

Yeah, enabling T&L would be a wise thing to do!

[ZenIT_SWE 0]

Well I have the following specs:

AMD XP 2100+

1 GB RAM

LeadTek A250 Ultra (Ti-4600)

Win XP

I'm running at 1280x1024 and with H T&L enabled. For the game to run smoothly I have to have my Frame rate and visual quality at the lower part of the bar. Visibility at around 1000. In the prefs I have been changing some parameters from the default values to a lower value, example max lights, max objects and textures. I thought that by buying such a computer would result in playing with allmost everything at the highest lever but no. Obviously you actually have to play on CIA's computer.

[Mister Frag 0]

That's not typical. I can run 1600x1200x32 with a GeForce3 Ti200 at over 30FPS on my P4 2.26MHz. That's with AF, a negative LOD bias, but without FSAA. Turning on FSAA drops the FPS to about 15 to 20. All the eye-candy is turned on, the visual quality slider is maxed out, and the frame rate slider set to the minimum to avoid having trees change shapes in the distance. The view distance is 2039.

If your motherboard uses a VIA chipset, make sure you have the latest 4-in-1 drivers installed.

[kegetys 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Mister Frag @ Aug. 28 2002,18:33)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">my P4 2.26MHz<span id='postcolor'>

Now thats what I call a slow cpu ;P

[Mister Frag 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Kegetys @ Aug. 28 2002,09:35)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Mister Frag @ Aug. 28 2002,18:33)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">my P4 2.26MHz<span id='postcolor'>

Now thats what I call a slow cpu ;P<span id='postcolor'>

Doh! (Slaps self on forehead) That's a 2.26GHz CPU, of course.

Actually, I've had more than one computer with a processor clocked slower than 2.26MHz. I guess I'm really showing my age.

[Lt_Damage 0]

Hmm,, I've always avoid the via 4in1's, I always thought they were kind of dodgey, is the performance increase pretty good, and has anyone notice much of a realibility issue once they were installed?

[Mister Frag 0]

The VIA 4-in-1 drivers used to have lots of problems, but they have matured quite a bit, and are pretty much essential these days. They can significantly improve stability and performance for systems based on VIA chipsets.

[kegetys 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Mister Frag @ Aug. 28 2002,19:50)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Kegetys @ Aug. 28 2002,09:35)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Mister Frag @ Aug. 28 2002,18:33)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">my P4 2.26MHz<span id='postcolor'>

Now thats what I call a slow cpu ;P<span id='postcolor'>

Doh! (Slaps self on forehead) That's a 2.26GHz CPU, of course.

Actually, I've had more than one computer with a processor clocked slower than 2.26MHz. I guess I'm really showing my age.  <span id='postcolor'>

I still have my C64 here, runs at a whooping 0,985 MHz