The New Rig - Testing Phase Begin

Post by **wildweasel** » Sat Jun 10, 2006 18:06

As you may have read in my mods journal, I've got this new system.

Pentium D 3.0 GHz
2 GB RAM
2x GeForce 7900 GTS (256 MB each)
Sound Blaster X-Fi
160 GB HD

So far I've only tested five games on here: Half-Life 2, Doom 3, Splinter Cell 3, GZDoom, and Deus Ex 2. Thing is, there's a thing I like to call "Obsession Syndrome" - you obsess over the new machine for weeks before you get it, and when you finally get it, you have no clue what to try and run on it.

So what I ask you all: give me a game that is impossible to achieve a decent framerate at.

PS: I already know about Oblivion. I'm acquiring that as we speak.

TheDarkArchon · Post by **TheDarkArchon** » Sat Jun 10, 2006 18:26

Call of Duty 2 and Far Cry.

Bashe · Post by **Bashe** » Sat Jun 10, 2006 18:41

Aw man, your system kills mine and I thought mine was good.

Phobus · Post by **Phobus** » Sat Jun 10, 2006 18:49

@ww: Quake 4 has a higher set of system requirements than Doom 3, though I could run it on a D3 minimum requirements computer anyway. I'd advise playing the game anyway, as it's very fun, and plays a lot more comfortably than D3 does (better weapons, flashlight attached to two of your guns, faster pace)

Post by **wildweasel** » Sat Jun 10, 2006 23:20

I've got Quake 4 lying around somewhere. I had Call of Duty 2 burned to a DVD, but the stupid burner drive screwed up and now I can't read the disc in anything but the drive that burned it.

Post by **solarsnowfall** » Sun Jun 11, 2006 1:41

I'm trying to imagine Oblivion on that rig of yours.

MasterOFDeath · Post by **MasterOFDeath** » Sun Jun 11, 2006 2:41

I would suggest Battlefield 2, its got rather steep requirements at times, but I've heard it doesn't support certain GeForce cards (a certain series I think, but yours may not be it). It should run, and if it does it should run maxed on that system, give it a shot.

Post by **wildweasel** » Sat Jun 17, 2006 6:35

A bump with more benchmarks...

Works Perfectly At Max Details:
- Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory (full resolution with SM3.0 shaders)
- Doom 3 (no tweaks applied - may go looking for parallax shader mods)
- Half-Life 2 (with FakeFactory Cinematic mod)
- Deus Ex 2 (with Community Hi-Res Textures package)
- TES3: Morrowind (no mods applied - may go get Better Bodies and hi-res texture sets)
- FEAR demo (doesn't support my monitor's native resolution, so I have to put up with slightly fuzzy graphics)
- Condemned demo (very awesome and I want to buy it now =P)
- The Chronicles of Riddick demo

Works Well With Reduced Details:
- TES4: Oblivion (can't run full resolution without stuttering)
- Tomb Raider Legend 1.2 demo (next-gen content causes major lag - this is the first game that my computer actually has trouble with, outside of emulators)
- Myst V demo (can't run full resolution without some major performance issues)

Haven't Tried Yet:
- Battlefield 2 demo
- Quake 4
- GTA: San Andreas

Chronoteeth · Post by **Chronoteeth** » Sun Jun 25, 2006 16:06

Man, thats really great. ;-;

Post by **wildweasel** » Sun Jun 25, 2006 21:56

My system has met its match. 3dMark06 utterly destroys this thing in the CPU tests, achieving less than 1 frame per second. Every other test averaged about 30 FPS at 640x480.

Post by **Enjay** » Sun Jun 25, 2006 22:06

I've never really understood what 3Dmark was really supposed to be about. It seems to deliberately do things that slow the fastest contemporary computers to a crawl and then gives you a crappy rating, despite the fact that the machine it just rated is more than capable of running any real current program with ease. A few years ago, the version of 3Dmark that was current then rated my machine badly (despite the fact I'd bought the best in every category of component I could find at the time), yet over 1 year later, I was able to run Doom3 on the same machine without any difficulties.

I think it's just a ridiculous tool to make people think they need to upgrade hardware (even when faster hardware may not even be available). And let's not forget, it is just a tool. Any program that you really want to run to actually do stuff will work much better than 3DMark does. I think it also inspires geek pissing contests as they brag to each other about the 3DMark rating their machines have. As for actual, practical use: I don't really believe it has any.

Post by **ellmo** » Mon Jun 26, 2006 11:51

Please don't play Call of Duty 2, this is a shoot em up game for 12 year old retards (not to insult anyone here XD), it's exactly the same as the first part was, but less innovative and more repetitive:

1. Run where your compass shows and kill everything in sight.
2. Jump onto the 88 flak and kill a tank
3. Repeat point no 2. five times
4. Use the 88 to kill an uber tank that comes from nowhere!
5. Return to point 1. and repeat it unless you see "mission accomplished"

That game was a straightforward offense towards my intelect.

Post by **Paul** » Mon Jun 26, 2006 13:28

Out of vane curiousity, where do you get money for such a rig? Saving? Work? Rich parents?

Post by **wildweasel** » Mon Jun 26, 2006 16:50

It's actually a lot harder than you make it sound, Ellmo - especially when you're playing it on Veteran difficulty, at which point it's as intense as Doom on Nightmare.

Paul: The first two. Since I got my job, I've been saving up for this rig, and when I got it I've been paying off my parents to the tune of ~$150 a month (which means I'll be paying off this box for a while).

Psycho Siggi · Post by **Psycho Siggi** » Tue Jun 27, 2006 3:22

What's with the trippy E?
And dude, that's probably the biggest rig I've seen to date. I know I'd be proud of buying something like that with my own hard earned cash.

Well... At least my hard drive is bigger