quote:

Originally posted by Quantized Ok so FEAR is my fav single player game ever and HL2 a close 2nd. Considering buying this but i dunno yet, is there a big difference in the fun department compared to FEAR/HL2 or is it not that bad? How does the atmosphere compare to FEAR? Also, this is my comp: AMD X2 4200+ (2 x 2.2 GHz) 2GB DDR2 667 MHz RAM ATI X1600 Pro (512 MB / GDDR2) think i'll be able to run it in med -> high settings?

I haven't played it yet haha but when I get my new PC...it'll be able to play it at the highest settings. As far as your PC is concerned, you could probably play it fine at 1200 x 960/1024 (whatever the resolution is) which is a pretty playable/nice looking frame-rate. You might be able to do 2x or 4x Anti-Aliasing, and Anistrophic filtering, but maybe not as much at 1600 x 1200...might have to lower the details in the game like shadows or ambient lighting to get a good frame-rate (like perhaps 60 fps). The game is really designed for something like a GeForce 8800 GTX or Ultra, or an ATI 2900XT video card in Crossfire mode.

quote:

Originally posted by Quantized Ok so FEAR is my fav single player game ever and HL2 a close 2nd. Considering buying this but i dunno yet, is there a big difference in the fun department compared to FEAR/HL2 or is it not that bad? How does the atmosphere compare to FEAR? Also, this is my comp: AMD X2 4200+ (2 x 2.2 GHz) 2GB DDR2 667 MHz RAM ATI X1600 Pro (512 MB / GDDR2) think i'll be able to run it in med -> high settings?

You should be able to run this game fine.

I picked it up today, and am loving it so far.

I have a AMD Dual Core 4600+, 2 gig of ddr2 ram, geforce 7600 GT 256 MB and I've got everything up pretty high and it runs well

I'm only a few hours into it but it's definitely entertaining, loving the atmosphere.. I don't know.. just something about being underwater always has my vote lol.

Cool, thanks for the info guys, just ordered it online

Might as well also ask, will upgrading my processor to AMD X2 6000+ (2 x 3 GHz / 2Mb L2) improve gaming performance at all? Or would it be more worthwhile getting a new graphics card?

quote:

Originally posted by Quantized Cool, thanks for the info guys, just ordered it online Might as well also ask, will upgrading my processor to AMD X2 6000+ (2 x 3 GHz / 2Mb L2) improve gaming performance at all? Or would it be more worthwhile getting a new graphics card?

Upgrade graphics first, before processor. They are easier to upgrade usually (unless you need a new motherboard..say AGP to PCI Express, older ones from four years ago or more don't support PCI Express, but most from 2005 on do). I think you will get more benefit, gaming wise, if you were to get say a GeForce 8800 GTX or the ATI 2900 XT in Crossfire (seems like one alone can't compete with the 8800 GTX or Ultra, and forget about competing with them in SLI).

Once games surpass your processor's speed/type (more are making use of dual core technology, soon they will require it) then it's time to upgrade. Definitely if you have a single core processor..it's worth upgrading to dual or quad. They won't be around much longer. But you seem to already have a dual core, so not worth the upgrade right now.

If you really want to upgrade your processor though, wait till AMD's new quad core processors come out (November or December) and by then their other processors will come down in price...or just wait and buy one of their Quad's..though you may need a new motherboard for that. Games may not really make use of Quad core technology yet, but in a year or two they will....so it's future proof. If anything, I would look into the AMD FX-74 to really see a huge difference.

With today's games they are usually dependent on graphics card first, then processor, then memory, then HD. Games used to be more HD dependent, but not as much anymore...most run fine on 5,400 or 7,200 RPM (the ideal). 10,000 RPM drives are great, but the benefit of those would be in applications like for audio or video editing.

Last edited by Spirit5 on Aug-30-2007 at 02:35

The GeForce 8800 GTX you mentioned costs about £310 in the UK. The AMD X2 6000+ costs only £100 which is why i was considering buying it. I suppose it wouldnt improve gaming much but i think i do other stuff on my pc more than play games. I usually buy a game, play it once then not touch it for ages so it probably wouldnt be worthwhile spending that much on a gfx card but i'll get a good one eventually. The only game i play constantly online is UT2004 which i already have all settings maxed out for.

My Motherboard only supports AM2 processors which means AMD dual core only, so i cant get a quad but since there being released soon, i'll wait for them to come out and then buy the best AM2 dual core processor which will hopefully be even cheaper.

quote:

Originally posted by Quantized The GeForce 8800 GTX you mentioned costs about £310 in the UK. The AMD X2 6000+ costs only £100 which is why i was considering buying it. I suppose it wouldnt improve gaming much but i think i do other stuff on my pc more than play games. I usually buy a game, play it once then not touch it for ages so it probably wouldnt be worthwhile spending that much on a gfx card but i'll get a good one eventually. The only game i play constantly online is UT2004 which i already have all settings maxed out for. My Motherboard only supports AM2 processors which means AMD dual core only, so i cant get a quad but since there being released soon, i'll wait for them to come out and then buy the best AM2 dual core processor which will hopefully be even cheaper.

That's fine, if you want more power for other things like video or audio editing, graphic design etc. But you won't see a huge difference between processors unless there's a large difference in the core clock speed of the processor (there is a difference I see but I don't think the difference is as noticeable on Dual Core vs. Single Core). In games, like I said, the biggest difference would come from the GPU (or graphics card). You might gain a few FPS with a better processor, but ultimately it's in the GPU where you'll find the biggest difference.

Last edited by Spirit5 on Aug-30-2007 at 20:27

quote:

Originally posted by Spirit5 Upgrade graphics first, before processor. They are easier to upgrade usually (unless you need a new motherboard..say AGP to PCI Express, older ones from four years ago or more don't support PCI Express, but most from 2005 on do). I think you will get more benefit, gaming wise, if you were to get say a GeForce 8800 GTX or the ATI 2900 XT in Crossfire (seems like one alone can't compete with the 8800 GTX or Ultra, and forget about competing with them in SLI). Once games surpass your processor's speed/type (more are making use of dual core technology, soon they will require it) then it's time to upgrade. Definitely if you have a single core processor..it's worth upgrading to dual or quad. They won't be around much longer. But you seem to already have a dual core, so not worth the upgrade right now. If you really want to upgrade your processor though, wait till AMD's new quad core processors come out (November or December) and by then their other processors will come down in price...or just wait and buy one of their Quad's..though you may need a new motherboard for that. Games may not really make use of Quad core technology yet, but in a year or two they will....so it's future proof. If anything, I would look into the AMD FX-74 to really see a huge difference. With today's games they are usually dependent on graphics card first, then processor, then memory, then HD. Games used to be more HD dependent, but not as much anymore...most run fine on 5,400 or 7,200 RPM (the ideal). 10,000 RPM drives are great, but the benefit of those would be in applications like for audio or video editing.

No point getting a top of the line GPU if the processor is crap. It will just bottleneck and still be shit.

___________________
Like Progressive and Deep House? Grab my latest mix below
http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...s=#.UAv1rbRo3h4

played the demo for a bit on my buddy's elite, his new tv helped too - but it was quite fun.

i was hooked by forza 2 tho...|

___________________
'That's like telling a Kodiak bear to stop fcking older men.'

quote:

Originally posted by Fledz No point getting a top of the line GPU if the processor is crap. It will just bottleneck and still be shit.

Yeah but a 2.2 ghz Dual Core is not shit...that's quite adequate for "most" games. Granted Bioshock might lag some with it, but i'm sure at the lower resolutions it would be fine. Not saying someone should have a shit processor and a great graphics card, but having a good graphics card always helps more than having an insanely OCed processor.

I have the 360 version and every now and then when i get a new plasmid/upgrade it will lock up the game completely. Twice now after a long playing session (with no saves) ive had to go back and start a new level over (in one case i had to go back 2 levels 5 big daddy kills i have to do over along with all the goals i have to do again.)
My fault for not saving more, but the game shouldnt lock up like that.

Other than that, the game is awesome. Going to try to hypnotize a big daddy and take out another one with him.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by Swamper If you want to bitch and whine about your sig being edited then PM me with what it was and I'll look into it. Posting a thread about this wastes everyone's time

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN i wouldnt expect a serb to understand.

Wow, dude you just totally fuckin' stepped over the line. You and your brainwashed and clearly limited knowledge of serbs have no fuckin' place in this thread. Jedi govna pizdo!


As for bioshock, I just picked up a copy a couple of days ago, but haven't installed yet. From what I've seen, it looks awesome. Spent a few hours playing it on a friend's 360.

I've got an E6600, 4gb mushkin ran, nVidia 8800gtx system just begging to have this loaded, so over the weekend I finally get to see it in all its glory.