It's funny because you're actually getting offended and upset that I claim I get good FPS in a video game, which is the opposite of what your great computer knowledge is. Something so trivial, to make someone uspet, is hilarious and sad.

Oh yes, so upset that I punched a hole in the wall...

Or I posted on an internet forum that you're wrong. Because that automatically constitutes being upset.

So your saying your getting 40-100FPS in CS:S with max detail settings? Even at the lowest resolution, this is impossible.

The only reason why we are bugging you so much about this, is that your claiming what simply cannot be done.

It physically imposible. You're lying or have missed something.

Here are the graphics settings I use right now


FOR CS Source:
Resolution - 1024x768
Anisotropic Filtering - None
Direct X 9.0
Model Detail - high
Texture Detail - high
Water - Simple reflection
Shadow Detail - High
Shader detail - Medium
Filtering mode - Trilinear


Screenshots.. Not from my view, since it was easier to take screenshots during battles while viewing from other perspectives.

http://www.geocities.com/mfnkilla/Dust.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/mfnkilla/Dust2.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/mfnkilla/Dust3.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/mfnkilla/Prodigy.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/mfnkilla/Prodigy2.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/mfnkilla/Prodigy3.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/mfnkilla/Prodigy4.jpg

That's 800x600, I can tell from the size of the screenshot.

Also, I'm pretty sure that's DX8.0, but I'm unable to tell without seeing water. Seriously, there's no way to set DX9.0 with an FX card--it defaults and sets itself to DX8.0.

So that's one game where you've proven you get MODERATE framerates Shadow detail is also on medium or low, because high detailed shadows look a LOT better than that.

I've never even tried to run the game yet on the highest of all settings. I wonder what it would be like..

Jim--unless he resized the screenshots, those are 800x600.

they don't look resized but you already called him on that

Always no matter what?

Let's run some QIII benchmarks in 640x480 and see which one wins..

Oops, yes, res is 800x600.. Funny, it was 1024x768 the last time I played. Does the new update do that?

then something is up with his computer
i ran it just fine with a celeron 1ghz 256mb ram and a geforce 2 mx 400 pci

now i got a fx 5500 256mb pci and it is rockin

at low settings?

again
1. with the GF2MX it's running in DX7 mode which runs quite fast even on crappy machines

2. again FX5500... DX8.1 if you forced DX9 it would be a noticable drop in framerate

the FX series have weak DX9 support

It would be close, but I think I'd still win.

I get OK framerates with my corrent magic box - 2400+ Thoroughbred, 512MB PC2700 and a 9600 on an A7V8X-X.

It's quite an old set-up, and Doom 3 chugs ubermegabad when you AR spam. HL2 not as much, but it's noticeable. And that's with everything turned low. I need to upgrade.

As it is, I've had next to no experience with nVidia. Anyone know of a reasonable comparison between them and ATI?

Oh, and lastly...

on FX series vs. 9500-9800series ATI wins

X*** vs. GF6 ... it gets a little more tricky as both are about even on speed in most games but the GF6 has support for SM3.0

My dual 6800GTs in SLI will slaughter you all for this meaningless squable.

at medium low settings, and a my geforce was runnin in dx 8.
and my fx 5500 plays well with lego star wars and i know its not running dx8 cause it requires 9 because of the pixel shader support it needs. ill do fraps see what framerate i get, but no matter how much research u do on a card, u can only tell by having it on ur system. so stop ganging up on the poor dude and calling him a liar.

1. GF2MX is NOT CAPABLE AT ALL of running in DX8 mode

2. GFFX series ALL default to DX8.1 in HL2

3. lego star wars is NOT a graphical masterpiece

gf2mx is too capable at dx8, inless ur callin me a liar i got the box right here that it came in..........so ya..........would post a pic of it but i dont got a digital cam or a scanner (that works)

you do realize the boxes don't tell you the whole truth right?

if my GF4MX isn't capable of DX8 then your GF2MX is most definately not

time for a return of the HL2 comparison shots

http://jim7.home.insightbb.com/hl2/dx7.jpg
http://jim7.home.insightbb.com/hl2/dx8.jpg
http://jim7.home.insightbb.com/hl2/dx9.jpg

no comparison shot for dx8.1 due to a lack of noticable differences between 8 and 8.1

all shots 1280x1024 6xAA 16xAF all modes at maximum possible settings allowed by that DX mode

those pictures just show me the difference in a game i dont have, nor i wont get at this time do the the specs of my comp and my $$$.

and how do u know that ur gf4mx isnt dx8? and how gf2mx isnt???

so me creditable proof, because i got a box agaisnt ur text, ill take the box for now.

Show me credible proof that you aren't 12.

DrkJedi, the funny thing is, my HL2 game looks EXACTLY like the DX 9 picture you posted, especially the water.

because i actually know the limitations of my hardware... and so do ALOT of other people

it's missing a major part of what makes a video card "DX8 hardware" specifically the pixel shader support

then you must be using mat_dx90 or whatever that command is AND the hack to make the water work... or you are flat out lying

FX5200 was is and always will be a slow card it's slower than a GF3 ...maybe not but still slower than a GF4 (Ti not MX)

Yep. Temp--you still haven't proven crap besides you get 40-60 in CS:S 800x600 with questionability on the other graphical details (including that it's in dx8.1 unless you specified otherwise)

about to be 15 in 6 days, so ya.
July 3, 1990


and i thought pixel shader was DX9 not 8???????

There are multiple versions of Pixel Shaders. 1.0, 2.0, 2.1, and now 3.0.

I can't believe this argument is still going on. I don't see how you could possibly argue the matter, its a well known fact, a simple google will tell you that the Geforce FX series SUCKS. Hell, there's been at LEAST 5 people here tell you guys that it sucks, even people who happen to own the cards (poor guys, I feel your pain)

There is no contest. The GeforceFX series absolutely sucks in DX9, and its speed leaves something to be desired. (Actually, a whole helluva lot to be desired)

And as a side note:

Just because you can run a card under DX9, does not mean it supports DX9. All the pretty graphics and textures will NOT work, and it will simply default down to the highest supported DX version.

And in Half Life 2, a GeforceFX will NOT RUN in DX9 unless you specifically modify the configuration via a console command or edit the config file. This was intentional by Valve to maintain decent speeds on the graphics cards, because performance was so poor.

Thank you, that makes perfect sence.

I have noidea how to use hacks, Im not as adept in computer **** as you guys are, so stop accusing me of ****.



I proved that I got decent and well-playable fps (i said 40-100 range), when you said that I didn't.

Woo! I'm a month older than you! Na na na na na naaaaa

actually

DX8 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, 1.3
DX8.1 1.4
DX9 2.0, 2.0b, 3.0

i think 2.0b and 3.0 were brought in with DX9.0b or c



and even then i believe the water reflections still fail to work if you only use the console command to force DX9... you need that one thing that allowed it to work... so tempermental has just run himself into a wall with the word "liar" painted on it in bright yellow letters

Here you go:

http://www.humus.ca/3D/Sea.zip

Download this small tech demo, which requires Pixel Shaders 1.4 (which is apart of DX8.1).
Have fun running it on your GF2MX.

EDIT:

Oh drk, there is no 1.0 shader, it starts at 1.1 (why, I don't know).

shiny...

...and actually there is a 1.0 it's just that 1.1 is what actually gets used

Yeah, you also said on high settings. All your craps in DX8.1 with medium settings 800x600. That's hardly high settings.

My settings may not be on all high, but they certainly arent low.

Thanks for taking a huge dump on my topic. I think I'm going with the 6600GT, thanks for those that did help. (ZZT and Yoshi)

i would have tried to help but the thread was already destroyed when i arrived