HAHA New Video Cards are SUCH A JOKE.

[AaronP]

I was thinking about buying a new video card to go with my Athlon 1600XP DDR setup, and today I installed my friend's copy of Wolfenstein on the computer which has a Radeon LE, and the damn game ran AWESOME at 1024X768 and the game looked GREAT! Uhh, if a 60 dollar Radeon LE can play Wolfenstein awesome, what do I need a 250 dollar card for?

 

[epod]

Hehe I have a Radeon 8500 and with MAX details in Wolfenstein, my computer barely handled 1280x1024... This is with max texture detail, max geometry, max character.. full effects, dynamic lighting.. I doubt that Radeon LE did that =P

 

[rbV5]

Probably don't.

 

[Workin']

You don't. You can get a GF3 Ti200 for $160. If you think RTCW looks great at 1024x768, you should see it with all the goodies turned on at 1600x1200x32.

 

[Killrose]

I'm sure it ran good in single player mode inside, but go outside in multiplayer mode with someone pointing a flamethrower at you.

The modded LE will do it, but that's about the minimum for RTCW.

 

[BFG10K]

I run RTCW on my Ti500 at 1152 x 864 at full detail levels and it rarely dips below 60 FPS in the single player game. Your Radeon LE can't even come close to doing that.

 

[Insidious]

<< game ran AWESOME at 1024X768 and the game looked GREAT! >>



LOL ************ Might wanna raise your expectations *************** LOL

 

[EBM]

Wolfenstein awesome, what do I need a 250 dollar card for?

A playable game with 4x antialaising enabled.

 

[JackBurton]

Hey, my Voodoo3 3000 plays Wolfenstein at 640x480X16 with all setting set to low and it plays GREAT! Who needs one of those fancy GF3 TI500.

 

[The_Lurker]

O give the guy a break, and stop humoring/mocking him. The game does look great on a $60 card, you really can't beat it for the price. If i was paying 4x as much for a R8500, i'd expect it to play the same game twice as fast and twice as good looking. The fact is, the Radeon LE is a great card for the money, so let him be happy with what he has.

 

[FreakyGuy]

Load up the Medal of Honor demo and try again.

http://www.warp2search.net/article.php?sid=1998

 

[Spike]

The radeonLE is a wonderful card for the money, I just retired mine after about a year and have nothing but good things to say about it. I loved how it ran everything I threw at it and did not make me have to drop out of school to afford it..... However, I did just upgrade to the latest generation of graphics cards (bought a Radeon 8500LE) and man, what a difference. I get about the same preformance in all my games... except now I am running them all in 1600x1200 instead of 1024x768 and I have everything turned up to max. In all honesty, I would be fine running games at 1024x768 with details at their medium levels, but now that I have this card up an running... I am having a hard time going back. No, you don't need a $200-300 card to play the new games, just don't play someone elses computer who does have one or you will never be able to look at your own computer with the same respect.

 

[DJBOB]

Ahh so true. I remember when a friend of mine got a Diamon Monster. A outstanding 8MB of video memory on a AGP 1x card. How could you go wrong with 800x600x16 lol. Ahh the good ol days. Now we see people who come on and are like "damn I'm getting 247 FPS in Quake III when someone else is getting 250! This is unacceptible" Lol technology goes too fast. I would hate to see my 8500LE got to waste and not have any games that fully support it. However I don't see that happening any time soon.

Bob

 

[sc0tty8]

HAHAHAHAHA.......

I know the feeling, I can play q3 max every thing on my kyroII at 1280x1027.

Could't do that on my voodoo 3 3k.


I look at it this way. If you are a very light gamer, get a cheap card, if you sit on your duff for hours playin games, might as will treat your eyes right. Get the 250$ 8500 and have the best card out there. Why not? It will last a year or 2, some say no, but it will, ppl still use a voodoo3...

 

[MrCoyote]

Isn't the game using just a modded Quake 3 Arena engine? This engine is basically the same from the original Quake, just adding updates with every quake release. The quake engine doesn't require that much CPU power like Unreal. Everyone always base their graphics card conclusions on the Quake engine. It is so old/outdated it isn't even funny. Try some other games not based on Quake engine, especially older games like Nocturne and watch how slow the card performs.

Better yet, try Ultima Ascension and see how choppy everything is! This game is finally playable on my new system with AMD 1.33 and the Radeon 8500!

 

[Dark4ng3l]

nope Quake3 uses a completely different engine than quake1 and 2

 

[Sunner]

Dark4ng3l is absolutely correct, and I must add, IMO the Quake3 engine is FAR supperior to the UT engine in every immaginable way.

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

carmack is brilliant. while the games may not be perfect (i still lubbed q3a) the engines beat everything else out there. incredibly good looking, and incredibly fast. just giving the guy some credit

 

[yata]

I have a Voodoo 1 pass thru card that takes GeForce and Radeon to school and back.

 

[JOSEPHLB]

Ok guys.. Dont make me throw in my Diamond Stealth S3 Virge, 4mb PCI on you guys now..


this will make your Ti 500's look like dog doo
hahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

 

[RSI]

On my TNT2 regular (Ultra on the way soon) I play older games (Half Life, Unreal Tournament, etc) in 1024x768 or higher - new games like RTCW though I have to play in 640x480 for it to be smooth. I always play with max details, though.

-RSI

 

[AaronP]

well, people jizz all over themselves for X-box games at 640X480! I think 1024X768 is high enough res until they come out with much more advanced graphics. For just textured polygons, you don't need 1600X1200.

 

[Sunner]

A TV is different from a monitor, 640 wont look as awful on a TV as it does on a monitor.
But 640 on a monitor... YUCK!

 

[chizow]

<< A TV is different from a monitor, 640 wont look as awful on a TV as it does on a monitor.
But 640 on a monitor... YUCK! >>



Heheh exactly....yes...1024x768 is about all the average 17'' monitor can handle, but when you have the extra real estate that larger CRT's (19'' and up) and TVs hooked up through TV-out, those higher resolutions make a big difference. Sniping heads as big as your own is pretty easy on a big screen

Chiz