Your Belief on RAM

2

Comments

  • There are some games that do have unplayable graphics that's true (IMO Warcraft I is an example).
    But it just bugs me that people don't actually play the game, they just watch people move on the screen.
  • Wipeout wrote:
    But it just bugs me that people don't actually play the game, they just watch people move on the screen.

    Isn't that a movie?

    -Q
  • ...You don't get my point.

    Some people don't focus on the game, they focuses on how good the game looks, how fast they can run. They can't just shut up and play. I've been coping with lag for years now, can't they just shut up and deal with it?
  • Wipeout wrote:
    ...You don't get my point.

    No I don't, or at least not with that explanation.

    However, in defense of such people (In moderation), that is how you get minor things, easter eggs, hidden clues, etc.

    -Q
  • My first pc I owned had an 8meg intergrated 1 or 2 speed agp Trident CiBlade 7 chipset :P. I could barley watch xvid compressed videos, so gaming other than C&C Tiberian Sun and others was out of the question. I still prefer smooth motion over stuttery motion on my games so most graphics (as my gfx card is shite) are set to lowest or medium. The card in mention is a Geforce 5200FX. My bog satandard Geforce 6600 owned compared to this card.
  • Gawd, everyone seems to hate the FX5200. I will admit it's not the best of cards, but don't beat up on it that much.

    Yeah I guess the easter eggs and stuff sometimes plays a part...
  • Alright, question for the legislature: If not the GeForce FX 5200, what instead (Bearing in mind the rough market and cost of the FX 5200)?

    -Q
  • Exactly, unless you're super super picky. I bought mine for $25 and I don't know anything else on the market that does the same for equal price. If I'm right, FX5200 is around the same as a Radeon 9200 which does cost more as I have seen.
  • I'm seriously interested though, if I was to replace my FX 5200 (EG. It gets shot in an electrical storm) with something of about the same price, what would you all recommend?

    -Q
  • Maybe not the same price range but I'd recomend a Geforce 7800GS either bog standard or one of the overclocked models. It's the last of the agp cards and has the N70 chipset so it is at least worth itfor that even though they only have 16pixel piplines:( why didn't Nvidia go out with a bang and give us 20.

    Or you could just buy another FX5200.
  • The best cards to go for are always the *600 of each generation.
  • i never liked nvidia. is 5200 the same generation as the radeon 9600?
  • Uhh... I'm talking about generations of *nvidia* cards :P
  • i know but im just asking.
  • I was drawing a comparison of 2 companies. And no I think 9600 is never that 5200. Q, how much did you pay for your 5200?
  • Anything above 15 should look like video. Think about it, are you really able to distinguish 15 different pictures in the matter of a second?

    And Q, my GeForce 7300LE was under $60 and gets great performance.

    -512
  • Uhh...video is 25-30.

    And you *can* tell the difference anyway.
  • Most TV video is 30fps, but anything above 15-20 should still be tolerable. Sure you can see a difference but it's NOT like a slideshow.

    -512
  • NTSC is 30

    PAL is 25.

    And it *is* horrible, it looks jerky and slow.
  • I don't recall what it was, I think it was... 40 USD? Or that was the 20GB I got at the time. I don't remember and notoriously lost the receipts.

    Anyway, I'm not partial to one video card company. If people recommend a different companies card, I'm willing to give it a legitimate consideration.

    -Q
  • Well, I haven't had problems with nVIDIA or ATI Cards. I've just heard better things about nVIDIA. And video at 30 fps is fine. That's standard stuff you see on TV.
  • 24 fps is generally considered the minimum for animations to look... well like animations instead of slide shows.
  • Is there any way to test what "FPS" you get, or is it something that varies and depends on too many things to benchmark?

    -Q
  • Um. It depends on what your measuring. Like a vdeo, a video game, your desktop? In some cases its not possible to get a 'true' result because the results would be lower from extra cpu cycles needed to perform the actual calculations.
  • Well, I don't see the point to measuring the FPS of my desktop as it is static (I not wanting to experiment with DreamScene). Maybe "Pirates!", since that's about the most intensive thing I do on here.

    -Q
  • You could try something like fraps. http://www.fraps.com/download.php
  • Excellent, I'll try that now.

    -Q
  • Yeah I've used Fraps. It works fine.
  • OK, it looks like during constant rendering I get ~30

    -Q
  • Well that's at least bettet than me, but I'm running on an 800 with 512 SD RAM.
Sign In or Register to comment.