Is the geforce 4 ti4200 good enough for ofp?

[David Shipley 0]

I'm wondering what I should do here.

I have a Celeron 1.3 Gigahertz processor, 700 MB of RAM and a GeForce 2 video card.

I plan on getting either the Radeon 9500 PRO or the GeForce 4 TI4200. All I care about is whether the GeForce can handle Operation Flashpoint: Resistance at absolutely the highest levels of graphics - excluding View Distance levels.

Can the GeForce handle it? Or will I have to fork out more dollars for the Radeon?

Oh, and I think it's not a processor problem, because it's blazing fast when the graphics are toned down.

[RED 0]

I would go for a Gf4 Ti4200 and spend the rest of your money on a cpu upgrade.

The GF4 can cope with all graphics at the heighest exculding view distance and geometry performance.

RED

[-WKK--SkyQuake 0]

A GF4 TI4200 shuld easily be able to run OFP in 1600*1200, even with 4x Antialising on!

Dont expect your viewdistance and detail-settings to change! Viewdistance is mostly a matter of raw CPU-power!

Detail-settings (not resolution) is mostly a matter of Ram (and its speed).

OFP isnt a game like CS or other normal FPS-shooters where u gain a huge advantage with a kickass 3d-card. So dont expect a huge boost in performance, the game will only look nicer, not go faster!

[ralphwiggum 6]

well what a coincidence! i have 750mhz AMD Duron and used to have GF2 MX 200.

i recently upgraded it to GF 4Ti 4200, and i say graphicwise, it just helps you a bit more. but that's it.

i usually had shadows off, but now i can play with shadows on, and less stuttering in usual cases.

so i can't help you on your choice btew Radeon and GF, but Ti4200 is worth it in my opinion(costed me 150 bucks though)

edit: OFP's graphics, in my opinion is affected by CPU power too. i say anything above GF3 is good enough and spend more money on CPU if possible.

[David Shipley 0]

Really? I remember upgrading from a 900 mhz to the 1.3, and didn't see any difference. If I upgrade to a 2.0, it'll make all the difference?

With the G4, of course.

[-WKK--SkyQuake 0]

You dont mention what kind of geforce 2 u have! My maks playable resolution with a GF2 GTS 64 MB was 1024*768 with everything on in normal detail-settings.

On my GF4 TI4600 i can easy run the game in 1600*1200 with 4*AA. My Screen dossent like it though

As i see it, if u use a 17" screen, you dont need higher resolutions than 1024*768, maybe 1280*something at maks. So figure out how much resolution u actually need/want and maybe save some money for a faster CPU and new mobo. On the other hand a good 3d-card boosts other games, but we ofp'ers dont play other games

As i wrote somewhere else, if u want viewdistance, upgrade CPU. Going from a Athlon 1200 to a XP1800 gave me 4-500 meters more, without experiencing stutter ingame!

The detail-settings are very Ram-restricted! I have 512 MB of ram. Running the game in "normal"-mode results in my PC using 380 MB's of ram.

In "high" details (nice realistic world) it uses 490 MB's of ram and playable if I turn the viewdistance down to 1100.

In "very high" detailsettings (over-bumpy world i wuld hate beeing a farmer on nogova), not tested this much, laggy as hell for me! But a 2 minutes alt-tab to windows explained why. OPF was using 830+ MB on my machine, meaning it was swapping on my harddrive.

[ralphwiggum 6]

well, i can't guarantee anything since each system varies a lot. but usually, rule of thumb is more CPU power means better performance.

[-WKK--SkyQuake 0]

>>David Shipley,Dec. 30 2002,09:20]Really? I remember >>upgrading from a 900 mhz to the 1.3, and didn't see any >>difference. If I upgrade to a 2.0, it'll make all the difference?

Both celeron's? If so i culd understand why. That isnt much of a upgrade in OFP-terms

Depending on your money-situation. There are many nice upgrades you culd make! U say "if i upgrade to 2.0", that means you have to change motherboard to! a celeron 1.3 Ghz uses socket 370 (pIII socket) if i remember correctly. If u want pentium and speeds over 1.4 Ghz u need a new motherboard to. A socket 478 is needed, and please dont buy a celeron again. Buy a P4 at least. And if you change Mobo, u might have to aquire new ram-modules. So it can quickly get expensive.

The Athlon XP's are very very cheap now and outperforms any Celerons and some/many P4's on the market. I culd easy recommend some cheap good hardware, but i wuldnt like to start a fan-boy/flamewar over this.......

And as Wigum explain. Its hard giving any answers, because so many things inflict on the outcome. To mixed hardware from different "centuries" seldom gives any noticeable results. BUT OFP is a very CPU-needy game....... thats a fact.....

Do we need a OFP-hardware forum? Upgrading questions get more and more common!

SQ

Wuhuuuuuu ive reached a postcount of 10...... with my old login that wuld make 15 posts in 2 years weeeeeee. Be ware of the great spammer!!!!! And i mess up a quote completely! Big applause!

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (David Shipley @ Dec. 30 2002,09:46)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Can the GeForce handle it? Or will I have to fork out more dollars for the Radeon?<span id='postcolor'>

Search both this forum and The FAQ for "9700" or "8500" and you'll find plenty of whining, legitimate for a change.

GeForce cards always seem to working unless you have too old or too new a set of Detonator drivers.

[Major Fubar 0]

I've got a P4 1.8G processor with 256MB PC2100 ram. My OFP really sucks at long view distances, but seems to do OK with all other settings (resolution, detail etc.).

I have a GF2 video card. I am thinking of buying a GF4 Ti4600. Are you telling me this won't make any difference to the maximum viewdistance I can use without slowing up the game?

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Major Fubar @ Dec. 30 2002,12:43)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I've got a P4 1.8G processor with 256MB PC2100 ram.<span id='postcolor'>

Have you thought about spending the money on another 256MB of RAM instead?

BTW, why the creepy avatar, Major? You''ve always been more inventive than that.

[ALDEGA 0]

Increasing terrain detail and viewdistance takes:

a - alot of memory

b - alot of cpu power

I don't think any pc can run Resistance with maximum viewdistance and detail. The game won't even let you do highest detail and 5000 m anyway

[Skunk Monkey 0]

I agree with Ms Avon

My personal belief with OFP/OFP-R is that top prioity should be minimum of :

512 RAM - most important

GeForce 2 - non-MX version

1Ghz Prcessor

Also the slowest part of any system is your Hard Drive, especially important with a low-Ram system. Make sure your HDD is not fragmented too much and even completely re-install your operating system to get better performance. If your Hard Drive is slow consider a new one with faster access, as i say the HDD is the "weakest link" so improving other things will make little differance if your whole computer is being slowed down by a slow HDD.

If you have the money or want to upgrade, and your system meets the above then consider.

768/1024 RAM

G4 4400 ( 4600 is too much for the extra, 4200 is no better than a G3-128, stay well claer of MX versions)

The best prcessor you can afford with a motherboard that will take full advantage of all the power - ie with DDR RAM and fast bus speeds.

[Major Fubar 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ Dec. 30 2002,11:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Major Fubar @ Dec. 30 2002,12:43)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I've got a P4 1.8G processor with 256MB PC2100 ram.<span id='postcolor'>

Have you thought about spending the money on another 256MB of RAM instead?

BTW, why the creepy avatar, Major? You''ve always been more inventive than that.<span id='postcolor'>

What can I say, I'm a Terminator fanboy.

As for the RAM, I'm running Win 98, which can only utilise 256mb RAM. When I upgrade to Win 2000 or Win XP, I will get some more RAM.

[David Shipley 0]

There's no problem with memory, because I have 758 MB of SD RAM.

It's not a hard-disk problem, as I have a Seagate 40 GB 4500 RPM hard-disk.

I don't really care about view distance - nobody ever fights in such long ranges, and you could simply say it's a foggy day. *Laughs*

All I care about is if I have a GeForce 4 4200, 1.3 Gigahertz Celeron processor, 768 MB of RAM and a good hard-disk, *can* I play OFP: Resistance at the absolute highest settings of graphics EXCEPT for view distance?

- Very High terrain settings

- 1200x900 resolution (maximum on my "17 monitor)

- x4 anti-aliasing

- Everything else maximum

Will it work? Will it work smoothly?

[Guest BratZ]

Hmm ,

I have a AMD Tbird 1333 ,512m ram and a Geforce4 Ti4200 and I can FAR from max anything out.G4 Ti 4200 isnt as fast as you think.I currently run OFP in 1024x768 at 2300m view(been flying) and the lowest quality setting.

And for the Celeron hater ,BTW the new celerons are p4 socket and they are cheaper than a AMD and not a bad buy

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (David Shipley @ Dec. 30 2002,18:22)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">- Very High terrain settings<span id='postcolor'>

That should be your only limitation. Again, search The FAQ for "terrain detail stutter".

[r71 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote ([WKK]-SkyQuake @ Dec. 30 2002,08:57)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">A GF4 TI4200 shuld easily be able to run OFP in 1600*1200, even with 4x Antialising on!

Dont expect your viewdistance and detail-settings to change! Viewdistance is mostly a matter of raw CPU-power!

Detail-settings (not resolution) is mostly a matter of Ram (and its speed).

OFP isnt a game like CS or other normal FPS-shooters where u gain a huge advantage with a kickass 3d-card. So dont expect a huge boost in performance, the game will only look nicer, not go faster!<span id='postcolor'>

When OFP first came out I had a P3 600 with 512ram and a TNT2 32mb card. I would get mouse lag and the game would run a bit slow with high settings. I went out and bought a GF3 and I could run the game with lots of AI and 3000 view and have a smoth game with no mouse lag. So yes it does make the game run faster..

[Black Knight 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Major Fubar @ Dec. 30 2002,12:22)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">As for the RAM, I'm running Win 98, which can only utilise 256mb RAM. When I upgrade to Win 2000 or Win XP, I will get some more RAM.<span id='postcolor'>

What do you mean it can only utilise 256mb RAM? I have Win 98 SE with 512 ddr. Does this mean i need to upgrade to XP

btw does my avatar show up?

[David Shipley 0]

I don't think terrain detail is a processor problem. Task Manager records high and continuous processor use no matter what terrain detail I use. Even 'Very Low' terrain detail.

High terrain detail is more of a video card memory problem, according to the computer people I talk to. I need a 128 MB video card instead of the 32 MB I have because, without it, it has to access my main memory; that has to go through my AGP, which is what slows down the game (e.g. red light blinking).

View Distance/Visibility *IS* A PURELY PROCESSOR PROBLEM, according to Task Manager. Processor power goes down by BY HALF when I have, say, 500 View Distance compared to the normal 1000.

That's my testing so far.

Since I *can't* get another processor until next year - because then I have to buy an expensive new motherboard and new memory type with it - my only hope is a video card and MAYBE regular new memory right now.

I'm hoping a new video card and new memory will allow me to use good FSAA (it doesn't even work at all in the GeForce 2 GTS) and the 'Very High' terrain detail.

I'm going with the Radeon 9500 PRO, by the way, since the price difference here isn't very different than the GeForce 4 ti4200, and I heard the GeForce 4 has slowness problems with maximum resolution and high FSAA.

Plus, I'm hoping the Radeon 9500 PRO will last two years. :-)

My GeForce 2 GTS lasted three!

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (David Shipley @ Dec. 30 2002,21:11)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I'm going with the Radeon 9500 PRO, by the way<span id='postcolor'>

Rotsa ruck!

[David Shipley 0]

I'm a tweaking freak, so I can handle any technical problems pretty well. *Grin* Anything for speed, man.

God be with Israel! ;-)

[Cloney 0]

I have a Geforce Ti500 but I now have some extra cash and I'm thinking about another processor *or* a Geforce 4 Ti4400. I'm not too sure about the performance difference though.

[Blademun 0]

Dang rich kids...All I got is a 800Mhz AMD, 32MB TnTPro card and 128 MB ram. baisicly, I perfectly meet recommended stats. No more or less.

I'll be getting Cable soon, I hope to play online..

[S_Z 0]

I think you made the right choice. The 9500 Pro has support for DirectX 9.0 (good for future games) and as you said it handles FSAA much better than the geforce. About the issues (flashing texture) ATI cards have with OFP its hopefully soon fixed, they have found the problem and are working on it.

As people has said before don’t expect to much improvement in OFP. I switched from a geforce2 gts to a R9700 Pro and it did make improvements when there aren’t too many AI around but if I play missions were there are alot of AI soldier it doesn’t matter what that the graphic card is fast, it up to the CPU.

You will probably see more improvement in new games that supports techniques like vertex/pixel shaders.