The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
This thread has been linked to the game 'Unreal Tournament 2004'.
i have a celeron, its causing massive frame rate problems. im thinking about buying a new cpu
i have 2 questions
1) my friend bought a 2.8ghz 800fsb 512cache p4 with hyperthreadding
he has 750mb of ddr ram
however his game plays worse than mine.
is there anything about this i should know (ie are celerons not as bad as people think)
2)
should i buy a
2.8ghz 800fsb 512cache p4 with hyperthreadding
or
2ghz (3.2ghz actual speed) 1mb cache, 1300 fsb amd64
i have 2 questions
1) my friend bought a 2.8ghz 800fsb 512cache p4 with hyperthreadding
he has 750mb of ddr ram
however his game plays worse than mine.
is there anything about this i should know (ie are celerons not as bad as people think)
2)
should i buy a
2.8ghz 800fsb 512cache p4 with hyperthreadding
or
2ghz (3.2ghz actual speed) 1mb cache, 1300 fsb amd64
Page:
YESSS!!!! I have it!!! The Special Edition of UT2004 came today, sealed and everything too!!!! W00T
edit: wooootttt
edit: wooootttt
>
> The cheapest high performance set up would be based on the Athlon XP.
> £70 for a top of the range motherboard, £55 on an Athlon
> 2500XP, a decent heatsink and you'll get 3200XP speeds.
I agree but AMD have started super-locking there CPU's now so you can't change the mulitplier.
> The cheapest high performance set up would be based on the Athlon XP.
> £70 for a top of the range motherboard, £55 on an Athlon
> 2500XP, a decent heatsink and you'll get 3200XP speeds.
I agree but AMD have started super-locking there CPU's now so you can't change the mulitplier.
Notorious Biggles wrote:
> You can get a 3 GHz, 533 MHz FSB, P4 for only £11 more than the
> 2.8 GHz, 800 MHz FSB version.
>
Also most of the 3 GHz chips on the market are overclockable to 3.5 GHz with minimal effort and ~4 GHz if you're determined enough
> You can get a 3 GHz, 533 MHz FSB, P4 for only £11 more than the
> 2.8 GHz, 800 MHz FSB version.
>
Also most of the 3 GHz chips on the market are overclockable to 3.5 GHz with minimal effort and ~4 GHz if you're determined enough
Walks in proudly...
I wasnt sure how well this would run on my 2.8 @ 3.22 (1:1 RAM)
WoW!! With everything set to at least high (Most on Highest) at 1280x1024 my poor beat up Radeon 9600 @ way over spec clock speeds is chucking about polys in a highly satisfying display of antialised smoothness even in the most colourful of fights!!
Oh - How do I get the FPS counter up?
YAY!! (*holds off buying that budget 9800 pro for a while longer)
I wasnt sure how well this would run on my 2.8 @ 3.22 (1:1 RAM)
WoW!! With everything set to at least high (Most on Highest) at 1280x1024 my poor beat up Radeon 9600 @ way over spec clock speeds is chucking about polys in a highly satisfying display of antialised smoothness even in the most colourful of fights!!
Oh - How do I get the FPS counter up?
YAY!! (*holds off buying that budget 9800 pro for a while longer)
Silent Scope wrote:
> The maps are just badly optimised.
I can run it on max settings at 1280x960 and run well over 100 fps in deathmatch. Can easily do 60-70 fps in the middle of a massive firefight. Have no slow down at all on onslaught.
This game like Far Cry as well does run bad on some computers, even if there top notch systems, even better than mine and they cant run Far Cry or UT2004 as well as I can.
Dont forget the orginal poster says his friends got a PCI Geforce 4, probably a low MX. Now I have seen UT2004 on my friends MX440 which I think is AGP and on a XP2000, 512mb DDR RAM he can only play it on 800x600 and on low/medium settings. In the case of the person in the post his CPU is decent but the graphics card is going to make the game unplayabe at decent settings.
> The maps are just badly optimised.
I can run it on max settings at 1280x960 and run well over 100 fps in deathmatch. Can easily do 60-70 fps in the middle of a massive firefight. Have no slow down at all on onslaught.
This game like Far Cry as well does run bad on some computers, even if there top notch systems, even better than mine and they cant run Far Cry or UT2004 as well as I can.
Dont forget the orginal poster says his friends got a PCI Geforce 4, probably a low MX. Now I have seen UT2004 on my friends MX440 which I think is AGP and on a XP2000, 512mb DDR RAM he can only play it on 800x600 and on low/medium settings. In the case of the person in the post his CPU is decent but the graphics card is going to make the game unplayabe at decent settings.
The maps are just badly optimised.
Why not just stick to the same one? Who were you before?
£160 for a Radeon 9800 Pro. Overclock it to XT speeds with software. Bingo, you've saved £100.
£160 for a Radeon 9800 Pro. Overclock it to XT speeds with software. Bingo, you've saved £100.
Think I'm on my fifth username now.
Ah, my computer.
Athlon 3000
512MB DDR RAM
120GB Hard Disk
A feckin GeForce FX5200!!!
I neeeeeeeeeeeeed that 9800XT.
Athlon 3000
512MB DDR RAM
120GB Hard Disk
A feckin GeForce FX5200!!!
I neeeeeeeeeeeeed that 9800XT.
dark child wrote:
> 2)
> should i buy a
> 2.8ghz 800fsb 512cache p4 with hyperthreadding
> or
> 2ghz (3.2ghz actual speed) 1mb cache, 1300 fsb amd64
I looked up your first topic. You say your motherboard only supports up to 533 MHz FSB. In that case, you don't want to get an 800 MHz FSB version unless you get a new motherboard, otherwise it will only run at 1.86 GHz!
You can get a 3 GHz, 533 MHz FSB, P4 for only £11 more than the 2.8 GHz, 800 MHz FSB version.
It is all about what you want to spend. Athlon 64 outperforms P4s in most gaming benchmarks, but it also doesn't look like having a long life.
The cheapest high performance set up would be based on the Athlon XP. £70 for a top of the range motherboard, £55 on an Athlon 2500XP, a decent heatsink and you'll get 3200XP speeds.
> 2)
> should i buy a
> 2.8ghz 800fsb 512cache p4 with hyperthreadding
> or
> 2ghz (3.2ghz actual speed) 1mb cache, 1300 fsb amd64
I looked up your first topic. You say your motherboard only supports up to 533 MHz FSB. In that case, you don't want to get an 800 MHz FSB version unless you get a new motherboard, otherwise it will only run at 1.86 GHz!
You can get a 3 GHz, 533 MHz FSB, P4 for only £11 more than the 2.8 GHz, 800 MHz FSB version.
It is all about what you want to spend. Athlon 64 outperforms P4s in most gaming benchmarks, but it also doesn't look like having a long life.
The cheapest high performance set up would be based on the Athlon XP. £70 for a top of the range motherboard, £55 on an Athlon 2500XP, a decent heatsink and you'll get 3200XP speeds.
Page: