Hemi-Cuda Posted May 1, 2002 Share Posted May 1, 2002 here are my system specs: ASUS A7V-E AMD Athlon 1ghz ATI Radeon 64mb DDR 256mb SDRAM Windows XP Pro now my system is no slouch, and i can run Quake 3 and Return to Castle Wolfenstein awesome with details maxed, but when it comes to JK2, it bogs down to no end. i run the game with low geometric details, and medium texture details, but if there's more than 5 people on the screen at once or someone uses lightning or drain, my FPS can go to single digits what bothers me is that JK2 isn't all that graphically advanced. hell Wolfenstein looks better, and i can run that with all settings maxed and still pull 100 fps and dont say "just get more ram" cause ram has little to do with FPS compared to the processor and vid card, and 256 is deffinetly enough for JK2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pedantic Posted May 1, 2002 Share Posted May 1, 2002 The same sort of thing happened to me in the swamp areas. However, after playing part of it and coming back, everything was fine again with high settings. I dunno what was up with it; I just attributed it to my computer getting too hot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NerfYoda Posted May 1, 2002 Share Posted May 1, 2002 Get more RAM!!! Seriously though. Does this happen on any and all MP maps? in SP? I assume you have the latest drivers for your vid, sound card, OS patches, etc... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NerfYoda Posted May 1, 2002 Share Posted May 1, 2002 Originally posted by Pedantic The same sort of thing happened to me in the swamp areas. However, after playing part of it and coming back, everything was fine again with high settings. I dunno what was up with it; I just attributed it to my computer getting too hot. The swamp map has a LOT of stuff going on at once & can really degrade your performance. But AFAIK thats only for the 1st swamp map. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
power_ed Posted May 1, 2002 Share Posted May 1, 2002 well.. i use 800mhz Pentium III 348mb SD PC133 Ram Riva TNT2 pro 32mb i have all details maxed up with a 1024x screen resolution and i get about 40-60 FPS in rtCW though i get aprx 80 FPS Try turning off all other applications.. ESP: virus programs as they tend to grab quite allot of your RAM.. also, you might consider using the "high performance" window setting etc it turns off shadows 'n stuff.. ::/Ed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewBJedi Posted May 1, 2002 Share Posted May 1, 2002 http://www.lucasforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=49099 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hemi-Cuda Posted May 2, 2002 Author Share Posted May 2, 2002 should have said that i'm by no means a comp newb when i posted. of course i went through all the basics (latest drivers, BIOS tweaks, tweaking game settings, etc), and i run my system with the most minimal amount of programs running i can what pisses me off the most is that people with lower system specs than me are getting better performance out of this game. its obvious Raven did a poor job of performance management with JK2, as Wolfenstein looks better and also runs MUCH faster. ATI cards take the biggest hit, no matter what set of drivers you use (and trust me, i've tried em all) i really hope this upcoming patch will fix some of these issues, cause this 30 fps and below bull**** is really starting to irritate me. hell even with low geo detail and texture detail, and 16-bit colors, in some places i still drop below 30 fps and for those that asked, i only worry about FPS in multiplayer games. in single player it's not a concern (and yes, this is on every map except the duel arenas) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RiverWalker Posted May 2, 2002 Share Posted May 2, 2002 have you tried higher settings? seriously... I know at least with some GF2's, it preforms BETTER with high settings, rather than lower ones... and a certain degree of that ATI video cards suck. "ATI cards take the biggest hit, no matter what set of drivers you use (and trust me, i've tried em all) " wouldnt' it be pretty obvious that this is a fault of the hardware, not the program? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NerfYoda Posted May 2, 2002 Share Posted May 2, 2002 Yeah it seems like most games made nowadays are "optimized" for the NVidia line of cards. Thats why you get for not following the crowd I guess. But still you cant beat TV output on an ATI card... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zante Posted May 2, 2002 Share Posted May 2, 2002 I used to have the same prob but got some new drivers for my geforce 2 mx and now everything is running at around 40fps Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Mormegil Posted May 2, 2002 Share Posted May 2, 2002 Mate i have the same sort of thing as u, 900 mhz athlon 256mb (cheap) SDRAM Radeon 64mb ddr with latest omega drivers ( but ive tried all drivers that i know are available) SB live 5.1 2 dodgy old hard drives 8 gb & 2 gb (don't know the speeds) Win me (eurgh) All other games rock on my comp and **** anyone that says buy an nvidia + i just saw Halo on my mates Xbox and that I'm sure is alot less powerful than our computers so why does halo really really really really really really look like the mutts nuts and this game jump and slow down and basically **** about. Why oh why? Is UT 2003 our only salvation? Well if it is I'd like to say **** all lame game devs that make a ****e game and basically sell us a pack of lies (reflections removed, u bastards I hate u). And i know its not my comp so forum trolls don't even come here saying get this, get that. If u actually had the comps u say u do then u wouldn't even be in these forums. End of rant ~~~~ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k3po Posted May 2, 2002 Share Posted May 2, 2002 it's your video card ati sucks when it comes to OpenGL, that's why i got a new Nvidia. i do need new ram only got 128. and cd-rom, 6x, my old creative 52x craped out a couple weeks ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reverse Posted May 2, 2002 Share Posted May 2, 2002 I use a hercules prophit 3d 4000xt and JK2 works awesome for me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swifty Posted May 2, 2002 Share Posted May 2, 2002 I have roughly the same system as you Asus A7V AMD XP 1700+ 512 DDR ATI 8500 64meg Windows XP And I get typically 100-150 fps, after I removed the cap. Settings are maxed at 1024x768 except for shadows, which I read was buggy. I upgraded to ATI from a GF2 GTI, and I'll never buy an overpriced Nvidia card again. Sure, 4x AA is great, but so is food on the table. For the record, I'm running the 6043 drivers for XP on my ATI. 3dmark scores are around 8500-9000 is memory serves. Fast writes are enabled, AGP is at 4x in the BIOS, and I'm running VIA 4.38. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nasa Posted May 2, 2002 Share Posted May 2, 2002 Don't get bogged down with this FPS crap. OK, it does help but it wont make you a better player. Concentrate on your game play. Trust me don't worriy about your FPS. With a FPS of 120 what's your problem?(25 or above is, OK) With Q3 the only advantage you have with a high FPS is the "Rocket jump" You could have the best system available with the best "Ping" and "FPS" It wont make you a better player. Game play. Game play.Game play.Game play.Game play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[D12]SirBanshee Posted May 2, 2002 Share Posted May 2, 2002 AMD Althon 2000+ (1.66ghz) Windows XP Geforce 3 Ti-200 64meg AGP 512 DDR Ram Even with all that, I can only hit 45-50ish FPS with a game of 8 people on Normal settigns at 1024x768. Definetly a weak FPS when you consider the system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewBJedi Posted May 2, 2002 Share Posted May 2, 2002 "Performance Issues: 1. Why is the game running slowly for me? How do I make it run faster? The most likely cause of this is the tendency of people to crank things up as high as they will go just because they can. Don't worry, I do this too... My recommendations for improving performance in Jedi Outcast: a) Update all of your video, sound and directX drivers to make sure you have the latest, greatest versions. There's a list of all supported hardware as well as the tested drivers in C:\Program Files\LucasArts\Star Wars JK II Jedi Outcast\Install\trouble.rtf b) Turn off all background applications including e-mail, ICQ, and especially virus scanners. Some virus scanners really do check everything and this can kill load times and performance. c) Don't play in resolutions higher than 800X600 on anything short of "uber hardware." JK2 is a hardware intensive game and if you crank everything as high as it will go, you can overheat our video card and/or your processor. That will cause lock-ups and performance problems. Taking the side of the case off for extra ventilation is another option to avoid this. Be careful with AMD machines, though. Sometimes taking the case off makes matters worse depending on how ventilation is set up. For an in-depth performance tweaking guide, visit http://www.3dspotlight.com/tweaks/jedioutcast/index.shtml " http://www2.ravensoft.com/jedioutcast/faq.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewBJedi Posted May 2, 2002 Share Posted May 2, 2002 Originally posted by Swifty I have roughly the same system as you And I get typically 100-150 fps, after I removed the cap. Settings are maxed at 1024x768 except for shadows, which I read was buggy. I upgraded to ATI from a GF2 GTI, and I'll never buy an overpriced Staring closely at the wall textures doesn't count. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ed1371 Posted May 3, 2002 Share Posted May 3, 2002 Originally posted by NewBJedi [b Taking the side of the case off for extra ventilation is another option to avoid this. Be careful with AMD machines, though. Sometimes taking the case off makes matters worse depending on how ventilation is set up. [/b] Actually, you should NOT take off the side of you case regardless of proc you are running. Cases are designed for air to flow a certain way. If you want to cool it down in there, look at other options (cleaning up ribbon cables, keeping your fans and heat sinks clean, adding additional fans correctly, getting the liquid cooling systems that are out now) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desslock Posted May 3, 2002 Share Posted May 3, 2002 Originally posted by ed1371 Actually, you should NOT take off the side of you case regardless of proc you are running. Cases are designed for air to flow a certain way. If you want to cool it down in there, look at other options (cleaning up ribbon cables, keeping your fans and heat sinks clean, adding additional fans correctly, getting the liquid cooling systems that are out now) It depends on the ambient room temperature. If your like me, and coldnatured, you keep your room at a comfy 50-65. It does help my temp a little to take the case off in a room that cold.. but most people wouldn't like playing that cold, as most people are not cold-natured. And yes, the money needed to run the AC at that level is more than someone else's bill. Most all of the complains I've read.. in this thread at least.. are boxes running an AMD chip.. think this may be a problem? JKII runs fine for me until someone with absorb gets drained... I actually crashed my system when 3 Lights put up absorb and were drained by 2 darks.. ack. All other games rock on my comp and **** anyone that says buy an nvidia + i just saw Halo on my mates Xbox and that I'm sure is alot less powerful than our computers so why does halo really really really really really really look like the mutts nuts and this game jump and slow down and basically **** about. [/Quote] Heh.. lol.. Ok, the Xbox was designed to run games. PCs, well most of them, are designed to run a wide variety of programs. The Xbox has a lot more power than a PC because it isn't running Windows 2K.. Second, in the PC world, the PC is the central hub of all the games, apps, and stuff you do on your PC. Everything else is a user, so to speak.. that means, there has to be a lot of compatibility, and to have that, you need less available system resources. Instead, games are built around the Xbox's specifics. All Xboxs are the same... except for manufacturing flaws... therefore, the compatibility lies at the game developers to make their game tailored for a specific setup, and a lot less resources are used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wardy Posted May 3, 2002 Share Posted May 3, 2002 I play the game with all detail settings maxed out - resolution at 1600x1200 with no problems. Framerate is 70-90 fps. BUT. That's my new laptop, a PIV 1.7 GHz w/ GeForce4 440 GO. I play JKII mostly on my desktop; Athlon 1 GHz, GeForce2 Pro, 256Mb DDR RAM at 1024x768 and still get roughly the same framerate. I know from experience that ATI card have a poor implementation of any games using the Quake engine. Hell, I had some ATI branded card with my first system back in '96/97 and I couldn't get Quake to even run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ed1371 Posted May 3, 2002 Share Posted May 3, 2002 50 deg?? lol that is cold! Every computer/situation is different but... Even at burn-in and test stations that are kept cold, the computers are still kept buttoned up because the case is designed to continually bring fresh air in an push air out (kinda like a pump). When you pop it open, it disrupts the airflow from flowing over the components correctly. This is a very basic topic in computer maintenance and use. (I remember it was even on the lowly A+ exam) anyhoo....digressing a bit AMD's new(er) chips do run warmer, but as long as you have an AMD approved case and heat sink the proc should run cool. I have seen others though that have OC'ed thiers and ran way too hot, solution was a better heatsink+fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hemi-Cuda Posted May 3, 2002 Author Share Posted May 3, 2002 where is everyone getting this notion that ATI is bad? the ATI Radeon 8500 is proven to outperform any geforce 3, and will also outperform the geforce 4 mx. the only advantage nvidia users had over ATI were drivers, but now that is a moot point, since ATI has stepped up their driver performance like i said before, i run Wolfenstein at max details and i pull off 50-100 fps depending on the environment (the game also looks much better than JK2 does). i also run every other game i own at max settings and dont notice a problem. it is only JK2 that i see a very noticable slowdown, no matter what kind of game settings i use. so, in fact, it is JK2's fault, or rather Raven's for poor coding people should learn that there ARE alternatives to nvidia. personally i wont pay $100 more for an equally powerful video card Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waazzuupp Posted May 3, 2002 Share Posted May 3, 2002 ihave a radeon 8500 OEM and a 1.6 ghz processer and my game runs great. i runs 90 fps most of the time and it doesn't go below 30 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jedi-Bert Posted May 3, 2002 Share Posted May 3, 2002 Back on topic with cuda's problem, what settings do you have under more video? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.