Hemi-Cuda Posted April 12, 2002 Share Posted April 12, 2002 i run an Athlon 1ghz with 256mb SDRAM and an ATI Radeon 64mb DDR video card. now i can run both quake 3 and return to castle wolfenstein at full detail and not have any slowdown FPS wise. but along comes JK2, and i have to turn down many things just to have a reasonable fps i find this really strange, especially after seeing this: "yes you are well within the sysreqs however you will have to turn off the fancy gfx stuff. download the rtcw demo if you like to see what the gfx and mp is like. note: rtcw sysreqs are HIGHER then jkii's." now either thats not true, or somethings screwy between my comp and JK2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrEEpaGe Posted April 12, 2002 Share Posted April 12, 2002 jk2's levels are much larger than those in games like wolfenstein, and many of those levels are outdoors... more than likely that is what is causing it, but it could be something else.... in no way to i have any proof of this =) edit: actually, i am running on a duron 750 w/ gf2u and i didnt experience any framerate problems...i turned it down so that i could load the levels faster =) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DannyDiplo Posted April 12, 2002 Share Posted April 12, 2002 I played it all the way through at 1024x768x32 with high geometry and very high texture detail etc. on a 1.1Ghz Athlon, 384MB PC-133 RAM and a 32MB GeForce256 card on WinXP and it was fine. Only time frame-rates got really bad was on the swamp levels... *shrug* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valdarious Posted April 12, 2002 Share Posted April 12, 2002 I also played it on high detail at 1024 reso 32bit. I didnt have any problems, I even run winamp in the background alot too. JK2 has a new texture size set than the previous games for the q3engine. They used alot of 512x512 textures I believe, alot of the other games using the engine have never used that large of textures before. I dont know why your video card would have problems with it, it sure couldnt be the processor, what OS are you running? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hemi-Cuda Posted April 12, 2002 Author Share Posted April 12, 2002 i run WinXP, and JK2 would act really strange sometimes when i try to have the detail higher. i played SP at 800x600, medium geo detail and medium texture detail. if i went to high texture detail, it would be a mixed bag. i could stand still and move my mouse around to look at different areas. some places the FPS would be fine. others it would be choppy as hell (all indoors) and if i tried very high detail, forget it. i would get maybe 3-4 fps. also levels would take forever to load Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Creston Posted April 12, 2002 Share Posted April 12, 2002 Jk2 does have some issues with XP. That's what you get for buying into Micro$haft's new OS that lets them treat you as a criminal, take a crap on your rights as a legitimate consumer, and lets THEM decide if you can reinstall it or not Seriously though, check around the tech help boards, there is a lot of stuff on WinXP there. Once again goes to show that whenever MS releases a new OS, you shouldn't buy it until it's second release (if at all). Creston Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DannyDiplo Posted April 12, 2002 Share Posted April 12, 2002 Only problems I've ever had with XP Pro is missing the nostalgia of BSOD's Seriously, I've never had one problem with it. All games run perfectly, infact better than 9x, as XP has much better memory management and the 2K kernel is far more stable and crash resistant. The only people who have problems with XP are the ones who do an upgrade rather than a clean install or don't bother to check that there are XP specific drivers for their hardware before installing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valdarious Posted April 12, 2002 Share Posted April 12, 2002 I agree, I used to dual boot with 98se and XP and keep 98 for games till I got my geforce3 and a nice driver set for it. Since then I nuked 98 and use XP for everything now, it runs perfectly fine on my machine. Abit mobo Geforce3 ti200 512ram Live value card I never have any issues with games, I am a resource junky too so I know how to turn off specific OS services that I never use, so my machine is always in tip top shape. I would look into trying some different drivers for you ATI personally or maybe even checking to see if you need a bios update for your motherboard. Check to see if your Mobo is even useing x2AGP setting in the bios, some mobos you have to manualy select that. It could be running in x1 and wont be using that DDR that you have to its extent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vorax Posted April 12, 2002 Share Posted April 12, 2002 The way Raven designed the some of the maps, it is not very fitting to the Quake 3 engine. They also doubled the average texture sizes used. Together = system hog. - Vorax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrNutz Posted April 12, 2002 Share Posted April 12, 2002 I've heard mixed reviews on XP running games. Some great, and some horrid. I wouldn't use it cuz it lacks in the networking dept and is bloated as all hell (I use it at work for some tasks, but the only thing it does well for me is run winamp Since I am required to run winblows I use 2K and I'm pushing better than 80FPS in MP. My specs are AMD1.1 ghz 256 PC133 GeForce3 64. I have no complaints... JK2 is awesome! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SPY_jmr1 Posted April 12, 2002 Share Posted April 12, 2002 thank you for crediting me on the quote btw. define a reasonable fps 70? 100? 150? you have to understand that this happens whenever ANY new high end game comes out. i think it is a great idea that raven geared jkii more for a high end system. look at the microsoft flightsim series of produts. MS designs them for hardware that wont be out for 6months to a year after the software comes out. and it runs great.(the FS) the only way to make software run better is better hardware. the only way to get better hardware is if the software needs it. remember GILDE and 3dfx? wanted to run that new game? got voodoo? if not you SOL. now all we need is for gf4ti4600's to cost 50 bucks........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike89 Posted April 12, 2002 Share Posted April 12, 2002 Hmm. I think just the opposite. I consider Jedi 2 to be one of the quicker playing games. I play at 10x7x32, 8X aniso, Quincunx FSAA, max settings and still pull averages of close to 100 fps most of the time. Slower in some places. Of course I have the 4600 on an XP 2000+ which does help. Serious Sam and MOHAA are much more demanding system wise than Jedi 2. Get ready guys. No games from here on out will be LESS demanding that's for sure. Count on the future games hitting your system harder and harder as they go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SPY_jmr1 Posted April 12, 2002 Share Posted April 12, 2002 I play at 10x7x32 well if you play at that res ANYTHING'S gonna run like a ****ed ape:D :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jedi_SmackY Posted April 12, 2002 Share Posted April 12, 2002 Running the game on a 1.4ghz AMD, 512meg PC2100 DDR Ram, Hercules 3D Prophet GeForce3.. Max everything, 1024x768.. Run's pretty good. I had been running it at 1280x1024, but would see some slow down in frames when there where a ton of actions going on. The only other game that has ever caused me to turn things down was MoD:AA.. I don't think the Quake3 Engine was made for outdoor type maps... my 2 cents =) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike89 Posted April 12, 2002 Share Posted April 12, 2002 At 8X aniso, Quincunx FSAA, Max Settings? That's still a pretty good hit. No way could I do that on the GeForce 3, not really playable anyway. Quake 3 plays well on anyone's system (almost). It is no test of the system. It's not really that demanding. Playing NOLF, Deus Ex, Serious Sam, MOHAA on the other hand will tell you how good your system really is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jedi_SmackY Posted April 12, 2002 Share Posted April 12, 2002 Originally posted by Mike89 At 8X aniso, Quincunx FSAA, Max Settings? Ahh, nope sorry, not max "everything" =) I will turn all that on tonight and load the game to tell how much of a hit I take... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HITAKH Posted April 12, 2002 Share Posted April 12, 2002 The game works great for me... I have a 1 ghz athlon as well, but I have 384 megs of ram, and instead of the radeon I have a GF4 Ti4600. In the Communications room of the Doomgiver I spawned 10 Lukes and 10 Tavions. There were so many saber sparks and colors... it was pretty insane, but I had a solid fps the entire time, which made it really damn cool looking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HITAKH Posted April 12, 2002 Share Posted April 12, 2002 Oh yeah, I was running the game at 1200x1000, with all 32 bit colors and all settings maxed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[2E]Kure[E2] Posted April 12, 2002 Share Posted April 12, 2002 OK thinking i should be able to help! I have exact same specs, but i duel boot ME/2K However JKII runs the same on both, however in 2K a setting of Very High for texture detail will kill it. However set it to high, and everything else to MAX (turn of Aniso because it overrides Radeon's setting which are better, and shadows which JKII is having probs with.) and run it 1024 and i get 60-80fps. However you need to download latest drivers, actually the 6043 set just became official, you should have good luck w/ these, if not go to http://www.rage3d.com and you can get the latest, alos an awesome site for Radeon support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TCPVIP Posted April 13, 2002 Share Posted April 13, 2002 A one year in develpoement, that's why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dale7007 Posted April 13, 2002 Share Posted April 13, 2002 Radeon 8500, 256mb ram, 900mhz AMD athlon, i get heavy load times if i have it on Very high/high. Im upgrading my comp soon so i could care less though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryudom Posted April 13, 2002 Share Posted April 13, 2002 with my duron 1g/tnt2 i can run it at 800*600, max geometrie, med textures, (volumetric shadows don't work?) and everything else on at 40-50 fps Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.