OK, let's try this .. CoD2 maxed out

[johns]

I need an honest answer. Does anybody have a video card
that can run CoD2 maxed out in all settings under dx9
with frame rate above 50 fps and no dropouts or choppy
screens ? CoD2 is a pretty honest benchmark. It should
separate the so-so cards from the "real" game cards.

johns

 

[KCB]

I need an honest answer. Does anybody have a video card
that can run CoD2 maxed out in all settings under dx9
with frame rate above 50 fps and no dropouts or choppy
screens ? CoD2 is a pretty honest benchmark. It should
separate the so-so cards from the "real" game cards.

johns

does it have a built-in benchmark demo?

 

[johns]

None of the game demos are written to the standard of the
game itself. As a matter of fact, the CoD2 demo is famous
for not meeting the in-game standard of CoD2. And as far
as I can tell CoD2 is the top game regards demands on
a video card. If you have a card that can use maxed out
settings in this game, you have a CARD. As for telling how
your card performs in this game, try level 3 with any advanced
settings at all. My ATI 9800 Pro has a frame rate of about
3 fps in that level. One nVidia 6800 I tested had fps of
about maybe 10. Another 6800 pci-e had fps of about
15 to 20. I could drop my 9800 back to dx7, and the fps
went in the 60s. When I tried that on both nVidia cards,
they simply crashed due to auto-enable of some of
their junkola. I still had to cut those 2 cards back to
640x480 and AA off to prevent the problem. Then they
ran well, but not as well as my 9800. I would like to
learn more about whatever card can handle CoD2
maxed out. CAUTION HERE: some kid is going to
swear his brothers 6800 in CoD2 has no problems
at all .... he won't know that the settings are at
minimum, so don't believe the hype.

johns

 

[KCB]

None of the game demos are written to the standard of the
game itself. As a matter of fact, the CoD2 demo is famous
for not meeting the in-game standard of CoD2. And as far
as I can tell CoD2 is the top game regards demands on
a video card. If you have a card that can use maxed out
settings in this game, you have a CARD. As for telling how
your card performs in this game, try level 3 with any advanced
settings at all. My ATI 9800 Pro has a frame rate of about
3 fps in that level. One nVidia 6800 I tested had fps of
about maybe 10. Another 6800 pci-e had fps of about
15 to 20. I could drop my 9800 back to dx7, and the fps
went in the 60s. When I tried that on both nVidia cards,
they simply crashed due to auto-enable of some of
their junkola. I still had to cut those 2 cards back to
640x480 and AA off to prevent the problem. Then they
ran well, but not as well as my 9800. I would like to
learn more about whatever card can handle CoD2
maxed out. CAUTION HERE: some kid is going to
swear his brothers 6800 in CoD2 has no problems
at all .... he won't know that the settings are at
minimum, so don't believe the hype.

johns

OK, I tried level 3 (Stalingrad) @
1280*960,Anisotropic,4xAA,DX9,Shadows-On,Number Dynamic Lights-High,Soften
Smoke Edges-Everything,Number of Corpses-Insane.

This is on a AMD XP 2700+, X850XT PE, 2GB RAM, everything stock speeds. (Not
nearly a high end system)

My FPS varied from 17-42, hovering between 20-25 mostly. What was weird was
that it felt playable the whole time. I usually tell people they have to be
over 40, preferably 60, to enjoy a game. That being said, I won't continue
to play it like this to the end. I'll give up the Aniso and AA to smooth
the frames out and enjoy it even more.

Another thing, if this was MP, with me trying to kill other gamers, I would
never live with that framerate.

 

[TonyC]

I need an honest answer. Does anybody have a video card

that can run CoD2 maxed out in all settings under dx9
with frame rate above 50 fps and no dropouts or choppy
screens ? CoD2 is a pretty honest benchmark. It should
separate the so-so cards from the "real" game cards.

johns

I don't think frame rates are huge even on the latest hardware. Smoke also
seems to kill FPS. The DirectX9 option is the main FPS killer, though it
seems pointless running it as DirectX7. May as well be playing CoD1. Can't
remember my high/low/averages for CoD2, though I only ever play online and
it rarely drops below 30fps on highest settings I believe @ 1280x1024.

Spec as below...

CPU- Opteron 146 2Ghz CAB2E 0546FPMW @ 2.7Ghz (9x300) 1.45v reads 1.41v
Motherboard- DFI LanParty NF4 SLI-DR R.AA0 702-3
Case- Antec P160
PSU- Hiper Type R Modular 580w
CPU Cooler- Akasa AK913 Evo33
RAM- 2x 1Gb Crucial PC3200 16VDDT12864AG40BDB @ 225Mhz 8-3-3-3-1T @ 2.6v
Videocard- ATI Radeon X800XT (R423) 256Mb PCI-e 16x (560/540) Arctic
Silencer5 Rev2
Soundcard- SB X-Fi Platinum
DVD-RW- NEC ND-4550a
Hard disk(s)WD Caviar SE WD2000JB 200Gb 7,200rpm 8Mb IDE
Hard disk(s)WD Caviar SE WD2500JS 250Gb 7,200rpm 8Mb SATA2
Hard disk(s)WD Caviar SE WD2500KS 250Gb 7,200rpm 16Mb SATA2
Monitor- ViewSonic VX912 19" 8ms @ 1280x1024x32
Speakers- Technics headphones
OS- Windows XP Pro SP2

 

[DDC]

I need an honest answer. Does anybody have a video card
that can run CoD2 maxed out in all settings under dx9
with frame rate above 50 fps and no dropouts or choppy
screens ? CoD2 is a pretty honest benchmark. It should
separate the so-so cards from the "real" game cards.

johns

why do people increase the resolution screen to the max. when paying
at 1024x764x32 is really cool?

a x700pro 256 mb can play that game at a descent rate.
a x800 128mb will have hard time in some place of the game but will
run most of the game very smooth.

 

[DDC]

OK, I tried level 3 (Stalingrad) @
1280*960,Anisotropic,4xAA,DX9,Shadows-On,Number Dynamic Lights-High,Soften
Smoke Edges-Everything,Number of Corpses-Insane.

This is on a AMD XP 2700+, X850XT PE, 2GB RAM, everything stock speeds. (Not
nearly a high end system)

My FPS varied from 17-42, hovering between 20-25 mostly. What was weird was
that it felt playable the whole time. I usually tell people they have to be
over 40, preferably 60, to enjoy a game. That being said, I won't continue
to play it like this to the end. I'll give up the Aniso and AA to smooth
the frames out and enjoy it even more.

Another thing, if this was MP, with me trying to kill other gamers, I would
never live with that framerate.

do people notice that at high resolution you don't really need the AA
and af. because the detail is so small that you can't see the effects
of stairs around forms...

 

[KCB]

do people notice that at high resolution you don't really need the AA
and af. because the detail is so small that you can't see the effects
of stairs around forms...

Right, but he said max setting, so...

 

[abc]

why do people increase the resolution screen to the max. when paying
at 1024x764x32 is really cool?

a x700pro 256 mb can play that game at a descent rate.
a x800 128mb will have hard time in some place of the game but will
run most of the game very smooth.

It's all relative.
Play at a higher resolution for a while and then go back to the lower one.
You will notice the degradation.

Of course it depends on your monitor size. A bigger monitor needs a higher
resolution.

 

[DDC]

My 9800 Pro can beat an X700 Pro in just about everything.
I've seen that. Seems the market is loaded with con artists
selling garbage to kids. I'm serious in this investigation.
I'm going to report the results honestly too. Right now,
nothing has beaten my 9800 Pro in games. Even the
X800s are glitchy and choppy in CoD2 using dx9.

johns

Frankly i'm curious about your method of benchmark, a 9800pro can't be
better than a x700pro. the image quality is better with the x700pro
than a 9800pro. maybe you can put them head to head with both card
having 256mb. even more interrresting the 9800pro score at default
clock around 2500 point in 3dmark05 as the x700pro score at 3000 point
I've been there do that and i'm able to comment.


it's all 3dm05
that's my 9800pro 2455 128mb
http://service.futuremark.com/orb/projectdetails.jsp?projectType=12&projectId=157105

that's my x700pro 3066 256mb
http://service.futuremark.com/orb/projectdetails.jsp?projectType=12&projectId=1316812

that's my x800 3900 128mb
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=1615687

the top card i had for cod2 was the x700pro because of it 256 mb
gddr3. Plus if i had the chance to get a x800 256mb i would go for it
any time. I've found out that the sapphire x800gto2 is quite good and
is near the x800xl 256mb also that it use the x850 pc board and gpu,
so this is my next card because of the extra pipe that are unlocked in
it.

You know battle field 2 is a directx9 too and on my x800 128meg it
doesn't go like a slide show at all. it surpass my x700pro 256megs and
the game is more fluid than ever. So to me using cod2 for critises
other game is not relevant and efficient. why not using need for speed
most wanted when there are a lot of police card purchasing you the
game tend to slow down a lot even with my x800 card

also i would recommend you to get the 3dmark06 and bench your 9800pro.
you wont get 300 point in that...

 

[johns]

My 9800 Pro can beat an X700 Pro in just about everything.
I've seen that. Seems the market is loaded with con artists
selling garbage to kids. I'm serious in this investigation.
I'm going to report the results honestly too. Right now,
nothing has beaten my 9800 Pro in games. Even the
X800s are glitchy and choppy in CoD2 using dx9.

johns

 

[TonyC]

My 9800 Pro can beat an X700 Pro in just about everything.

I've seen that. Seems the market is loaded with con artists
selling garbage to kids. I'm serious in this investigation.
I'm going to report the results honestly too. Right now,
nothing has beaten my 9800 Pro in games. Even the
X800s are glitchy and choppy in CoD2 using dx9.

johns

You seriously expect anyone to take you seriously?? I'd lay off the glue
for a while kid. I've had plenty of experience with 9800 Pro and my own
X800XT, no comparison my friend. X800 wipes the floor with it, your
testing methodology is flawed.

 

[==--==]

Um, no way.

I've got a 9800Pro and an x800xl
the x800 B_L_O_W_S the 9800 away. PERIOD

==--==

 

[johns]

I'm not fooled by that. Most benchmarks do not test in-game
settings, or chipset compatibility very well. The 9800 will "bench"
lower, but I see clearly that it "plays" better, with deeper color,
and no screen glitches. The X800 series has a serious problem
with in-game performance. It was built to bench high, but it does
not play well for reasons unknown. Go to the Far Cry discussion
sight and read the posts for yourself. I'm not going to be rooked
by these so-called benchmarks again.

johns

 

[johns]

I service 1200 users on one subnet. I'll take you on anytime.
Go to the Far Cry discussion group and try a comment like that.
You will tangle with the ones who know the problems.

johns

 

[johns]

How does it perform in CoD2 with top settings ?
I know for a fact that it glitches. All I have to do to
outperform that with my 9800 is drop to dx7 and
take a minor hit in "smoke". This new system
I'm building is going to have to be better than a
glitchy X800xl. I just don't have $528 for an X1800XT.
And, then, on top of that, go to the Far Cry discussion
sight, and tell the guys with the X1800s that are
glitching, how your X800xl is better. Heh! Prepare
for some heat on that one. Personally, I would be
mad as hell, but I'm not going to make a mistake.
I'll know when the right person starts posting to
this query. Somebody out there has got Far Cry
to top settings, and CoD2 to top settings, and
all is well on his system. I want to know about
it. I'm starting with:
mobo GA-K8NF-9 with AMD Athlon 64 3800+
backed by TruePower 480 psupply to handle
the big card, but I can't seem to find honest
poop on the video ???? And I'm not going to
get screwed by kid-hype. C'mon, fire up CoD2
and make it run right. THAT is the benchmark
that will separate you sheep from us goats.
Plays great on my 9800

johns

 

[DDC]

Running CoD2 in DX7 mode is like playing CoD1, hardly a fair comparison.

true cod2 is a 256 memory videocard eater. I've played that game at
1024x764x32 all maxout like people say on a x700pro 256meg and it was
fairly cool to play. IMho i upgrade to a x800 cheap 128 and the game
run mostly at a good fps but in the hard corner it more like a slide
show. but the rest of the game is rally cool a bit more than my
x700pro..

And btw 9800 can't run that game on dx9 maybe a xt 256mb.

 

[DDC]

Why? Can't you handle more than one idea at a time?
It is the combo of all these problems that points the way.
None of these cards is getting the job done, while me
9800 is up and running fine in all of these games.
As for 3DMarkxxx ... horsepoop! Tells me nothing
about performance in modern games, when the
whole package has to work together. Try a 6800 on
an nForce3 chipset. You can't even move the mouse
without the screen jumping in a game like Far Cry.
My 9800 doesn't do that, even at the highest settings.
nVidia fixed that only with the 7800s, and then raised
the AGP price to over $300 to rip off the nForce3
mobos. I can buy the 7800GS for $250, but only if
I go pci-e mobo ... at $480 for the bundle. And then
I have a card that can't top out in CoD2, and is waiting
for patch 1.4 that MIGHT fix HDR and AA . Poop on
all of this.
As for claiming to know it all. I do. And my next game
box is going to work right.

johns

I will grant you the idea by telling you that the only way it could be
true is that the conceptor of that prticular game build the engine
aournd rv350 gpu it might be smooth like ou've said but your missing
all the goodies of more power full card your 9800 mith be the perfect
match for a 20-30 fps frame rate on your whatever ctr/lcd but the
point still stand we say that a 9800 wont get any furter than a 6600
card witch is a fairly low end card.

 

[DDC]

Not so. I can run it on dx9, and see the graphics. Looks great,
but not that great. FPS is too low on 9800, so it is a slide show.
Still when I drop to dx7 on the 9800, it looks very good because
the 9800 is that good. When I switch to the 6800, in dx9 the
graphics don't look a bit better than the graphics using the
9800 in dx7, even if the FPS is higher. So I gain nothing
buying a mid-range pci-e video card. On the Far Cry group,
the guys with the X800s say it glitches in CoD2 at the
high settings. Meaning I would have to drop back to lower
settings. That is nuts. I've already dropped back with the
9800, and it runs fine. So the next grade up are the 7800s,
and their prices are coming down rapidly. And again on
the Far Cry group, the 7800s are failing because of auto
enable of HDR ... while my 9800 looks and plays great.
And also, the X1800s are screwing up in Far Cry ?????
What the heck is this?? Stupid card industry can't find
its ass with both hands or something? The 1.4 patch
is going to settle some issues with ATI development,
I hope .... and possibly cure the 7800s incompatibility
with AA and HDR, but that is still in beta. In the mean
time, I just started Men Of Valor: Vietnam on my 9800,
and life is good. My money is staying in my pocket.

johns

So your mane concern is getting a new card. On the other side your
dealing with a 9800 128megs witch is old timer tech. you have
sdram/ddr even if it get 22gb/s of memory bandwith it doesn't use the
half of it IMO.

And to those who as some issue driver with their x1800 card i can tell
them that they are on the via mobo. the best way to get a good result
for game is to match a nf4u or sli as they are nf4ultra. and set a
good card like a x800xl/xt in the best way getting a x850 series or
switching to a x1800xl that last one is known to get a better score in
all game over a x800xt or better.

x1800xl faster than a 7800 technicly speaking...
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2005/10/17/sapphire_radeon_x1800xl/14.html

 

[TonyC]

I service 1200 users on one subnet. I'll take you on anytime.

Go to the Far Cry discussion group and try a comment like that.
You will tangle with the ones who know the problems.

johns

You are kidding yourself, I don't give a toss how many users you "service".
Make your mind up first of all, are we talking X800's or X1800's? CoD2 or
Farcry?

I run CoD2 on a daily basis, online, with all the trimmings on. Plays
flawlessly, I don't know what else to tell you, zero issues here. I also
used to play Farcry and had no issues there either. And I've seen a direct
comparison between my X800XT and a 9800Pro, the 9800 shows it's age to put
it mildly.

Feel free to "take me on", I'm more than happy to be proved wrong. But my
own experience shows otherwise. I've been building/repairing PC's for
umpteen years, I wouldn't claim to know it all. What do ALL the hardware
review sites tell you? I suspect you already know the answer.