Hard Light Productions Forums
General FreeSpace => FreeSpace Discussion => Topic started by: JCDNWarrior on March 23, 2011, 01:23:37 pm
-
In developing missions for FS2, I've been having a hard time to optimise for intelgrated graphics, so every FS2 player could run them. However, I came to the question: How many people actually use 'intelgrated' (Intel motherboard/processor Integrated) graphics? And specifically, what type?
Also, if you use Nvidia and ATI graphics, I'm very interested to hear what type you have - Integrated or discrete - As well as what generation (Example: Nvidia Geforce 8800 GT / ATI Radeon HD4850).
This way, I, and probably several other FREDders will know how far we will need to go in optimising missions so a large(r) majority of people can fluidly play such levels.
The poll will be open for 10 days. I hope to receive many comments and votes. Thanks in advance!
- JC
-
Discrete, Nvidia GTX 580
-
Nvidia GTX 260 XXX and 9600GT here, both running MVP Advanced without problems.
-
Geforce 8800GTS. Served me well for several years now, rarely has problems with FS. :D
-
an old ati hd3850. Was a quick fix after my 8800gtx died.
-
I have an nVidia 9400GT. I can run everything maxed-out except the BP-Massive Battle.
-
Radeon Mobile 5470 here.
-
Intel 945GM, with an Intel Atom N270 on my netbook.
I do have an NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 on the desktop comp though.
-
BFG GeForce 8800GT 512 MB OC2
Venerable card, but much like the rest of my system, is starting to show its age. It still manages most FSO scenarios well enough - I believe my system is more limited by processor and memory bandwidth...
-
Discrete Nvidia GTX 260, will probably sell it out and buy an HD 6950... but that after I get a new job.
Edit: forgot performance..
Quite good, plays smooth with all effects, minor drop on FPS while playing delenda est.
-
Geforce 6150SE nforce 430, it lag a lot, I guess 12 to 14 fps , even without the most ''heavy'' features
-
2x NVidia GTX 460 in SLI.
-
ATI Radeon HD 3600, discrete (and with optimized performance).
Runs BP with advanced VPs with only a minor FPS drop on larger battles (using latest nightlies at least, which have performance improvemetns, not to mention my computer is heavly overclocked).
I'm going to move to a newer stuff once my father finds a new card (and thus will give his current one to me). :)
-
ATi HD5670 for me. 125fps, about 100fps average unless the hattie shows or i'm playing WiH, then it drops, but i havent' seen how much.
-
GTX 275 - No complaints so far :)
-
an at time of release nvidia 6600 GT, can run 3.6.10 mvp advanced ok but 3.6.12 mvp advanced kills me
-
nvidia 9800 GTX
-
NVIDIA Ge Force 250 GTS
-
NVIDIA GeForce GT 435M for me.
-
Nvidia Geforce GTS 450
-
GeForce 9800 GTX
-
Radeon 3650 HD mobility. 30% overclock, since the OEM underclocked it by a huge chunk.
Runs the game mostly fine at 1080p maxed out. Things chug when lots of hull is in the scene (due to new fragment shaders) and from head.anis.
-
Wow , I envy your video cards xD
-
NVIDIA 9600 GSO
-
Nvidia 260GTX, bought it as a quick replacement for my dead 8800GTX
Will get something new when I upgrade my pc (soonish)
-
NVIDIA GeForce GT 330M
-
Discrete. nVidia GeForce GTX 295. She purrs like a walrus when running FS Open (especially BP), but the gameplay is butter smooth.
-
the results of the poll are ****ing hilarious.
-
Why, because it says basically we can say "too bad" to all (5 of) the poor sods with intelgrated chips and tell them to get something that isn't crap? :P
-
Nvidia GeForce GTS250-1Gb-Zalman Cooled, Over-Clocked here (GPU:821Mhz; Memory:1102Mhz; Shader:1944Mhz), Running MVP Advanced without problems.
Probably a little to much info but thought it might help especially as people may have modded cards. :beamz:
Edit: I used to have an Nvidia GeForce 7300 GT, which worked ok (did not work with MVP Advanced to slow)
CPU:Intel Core 2 Duo 6400 @ 2.13Ghz; RAM:DDR2@333Mhz 4096Mb
-
Used to have Radeon 4870 1GB, got tired of it's loud fan so swapped it recently to Radeon 6850 1GB, Asus DirectCU. Why is this even a poll? Screw intelgrated users or anyone with pre-DirectX 9/OpenGL 2.1 cards. What is obsolete is obsolete.
Still, don't be too obsessed with video card. As long as it's decent OpenGL 2.1 (DirectX9) compatible card, it shouldn't have performance problems. I'd be more concerned with CPU performance once OGL 2.1 specification is met.
-
Fury, you're just being an elitist asshole here. You know that, right ?
First, we don't necessarily all have the money to buy ourselves high-end computers. Second, think about netbook users, netbooks with real GPUs are prohibitively expensive. Third, if you just think "screw them", then screw you.
-
I'm always an asshole and I don't really care either. FSO doesn't need a high-end computer, a decent discrete graphics cards doesn't cost much. Brand-new low-end discrete graphics card can cost as little as 50€ and probably as much in USD since europeans always get screwed over with product prices. You can get much better discrete card for same price if you buy an used one.
If you cannot afford that, then how can you afford to keep the computer on as it uses electricity? And netbooks? Really? Seriously? Reality check fails you. If a mod runs on intelgrated without problems, then great. If not, so what. They've chosen their fate and I don't see why mod developers need to go out of their way to indulge them.
-
I'm always an asshole and I don't really care either. FSO doesn't need a high-end computer, a decent discrete graphics cards doesn't cost much. Brand-new low-end discrete graphics card can cost as little as 50€ and probably as much in USD since europeans always get screwed over with product prices. You can get much better discrete card for same price if you buy an used one.
you fail there fury, take my rig as an example, the mobo only supports upto AGP x8 so the very best i can put in my rig is a GF 7series, to upgrade beyond that would require new mobo and chip as well as the card also probably need new hard drive and optical drives as they are all IDE, believe me i would love to upgrade but finances with my family don't go to that far.
-
So what's stopping you from getting Radeon 3650, 4650 or GF7 AGP variants? All should be available somewhere close(ish) 50 bucks, used ones below. And all of them smoke any intelgrateds by far. AGP slot isn't an excuse. You were saying?
-
NVIDIA GeForce 9400M on my Mac... (and I have no idea what the difference is between integrated and discreet. :lol:)
For now only certain BP missions give me problems.
-
Basically, an integrated chip is hardwired into your motherboard and uses the system RAM as VRAM. This typically means that a portion of the system RAM is permanently assigned to the GPU. A discrete chip comes with dedicated RAM. For example, my old Laptop had an integrated Radeon X1250, which meant that 256MB of system RAM were unavailable, as it was used by the GPU. My current system, a Radeon Mobile 5470, comes with its own gig of RAM. Due to having to share memory bandwidth with the rest of the system, integrated GPUs are several orders of magnitude slower than their dedicated cousins (And Intel graphics chips suck ass in general anyway).
IMHO, while it's certainly good practice to make sure your mod runs playably on lower-end systems, you should not start to restrict yourself to catering only to the low end. I'm sorry, Intel users, but as Fury said, if you want to do real gaming, get better Hardware. For me, while it's certainly cool to know that FSO runs well n netbooks, that's more of a curiosity than a design goal.
For me, the lowest end one should try to design for are the few remaining cards that can handle OGL 2/DirectX 9c/Shader Model 2, everything below that means sacrificing a lot of potential prettyness on the altar of performance.
-
Radeon HD4890 here. The CPU is usually the bottleneck on my rig (a good old Core2duo E4400 with 2GB of RAM)
-
Radeon X1950 AGP desktop, HD 3200 PCI-E Integrated on laptop
Strange thing is I like nVidia better...
-
GeForce 8800 GT on my desktop. But this baby is slowly getting old :(
And my Notebook (which runs even WiH pretty smoothly) has a Geforce 320M chip integrated.
-
I'm with The E and Fury on this
-
AMD M880G with ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4200
Works for me because so far it plays any game I'm actually interested in playing, including FSO with MVPs and MV_Advanced and decent framerate, although I turn off MV_Advanced because I really don't need it.
Played through all of FS2 Main campaign this way without a single problem with my framerate.
BP runs great too.
Oddly enough, I had problems with Spoon's WoD even though it looks like it should be less graphics intensive.
Of course this is by no means a gaming PC. This laptop's just to get me through college and I don't have the $$$ to go build a decent gaming PC. :P
-
Geforce 6150SE nforce 430
This. It feels a lot like my old Radeon 9200/98SE machine(which had a few OpenGL disable flags obviously), but I finally get to see normal maps and such now(which is definitely still worth it). :lol:
-
Intel GMA X3100 on my MacBook.
Intel 915GL Express on my IBM.
Given that most manufacturers seem to slap on an nVidia or ATI card to newer computers, and a significant portion of HLP's veterans build their own computers from scratch, I'm not too surprised by the polling results.
-
:nervous: Ehm... Mobile Intel 4 Series Chipset. It's been a while since I've played FS though. I think I had decent performance as long as there wasn't a BoE. Of course, that fact that things like normal maps simply don't work probably helps with performance. Would that go under i3/i5 vote?
-
integrated gpus on AMD APUS are quite good, Intel Sandy Bridge igps are also excellent.
AMD Zacate APUS includes an HD6310, a 80 sp gpu, its a HD5450 integrated.
AMD Llano Apus will include a cut down version of the HD5670, its goes from 160 to 400 stream processors.
(http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/03/11x0318bsccx7.jpg)
-
No Intel GPU will ever be able to compete against an ATI or NV chip. Also, Intel chips still suck in terms of OpenGL support.
-
And in some Directx features too, but still, core i3, i5 gpus are already as fast as a HD3200. Sandy Bridge HD2000 and HD3000 gpus are faster than that, nearly as a HD5450.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Intel/Core_i5_2500K_GPU/1.html
and Quick Sync is able to encode videos much faster than CUDA and Stream combined lol
-
Which would be totally cool and relevant, except FSO doesn't care about that.
-
But, i remember having playing FSO on the IGP of my core I3 before i brought a HD6870... i dont remember well, i need to try again.
Anyway, dont forget that Sandy Bridge IGP are quite powerfull gpus(nearly like a HD5450)... especially the HD3000. Intel next gen cpus, Ivy Bridge, will feature more powerfull gpus, incluiding dedicated gpu memory integrated on cpu. Yet again, i have no idea about how good is the OpenGL support.
AMD Llanos APUs are excellent, i bet any of those will be able to play FSO on 1920x1080 whiout a issue.
BTW, FSO can be ported to ARM platform? Tegra 2 is a dual core ARM processor made by nvidia with a Nvidia gpu... and next gen includes a more powerfull nvidia gpu on a quad core ARM.
-
If those ARM CPUs are x86 compatible, yes. If they're not, probably yes.
Also, the Internet says that Sandy Bridge cores can do OpenGL 3. Will be interesting to see how that turns out.
-
No Intel GPU will ever be able to compete against an ATI or NV chip. Also, Intel chips still suck in terms of OpenGL support.
It gets even worse on a Mac, where there are no OpenGL driver updates that I know of. Jeff once troubleshoot a problem I had and mentioned how horrendously outdated the OGL on my MacBook was.
-
I have some low end nVidia 128MB card, don't know the number. Should be fine for me, as I used to run FSO on less...
-
I have a Mobile Intel 4 Series Express Chipset (it's a work notebook). I'm replaying the FS2 campaign and the Hatshepsut is the only thing that makes my FPS drop noticeably. I'm playing with all the settings at max so I guess that I could lower them in case of distress...
-
I have some low end nVidia 128MB card, don't know the number. Should be fine for me, as I used to run FSO on less...
I could run FSO on a Geforce 4 MX 440.
That's from the 367 days though. Dunno what has changed.
-
Radeon HD4870 w/ Athlon II X4 620 and 4 GB of Ram on the desktop (runs beautifully, i think i got down to at worst maybe 17 fps lowest in WiH), and shortly enough at least attempting to get playable on AMD C50 w/2 GB Ram and the integrated Radeon HD 6250. Desktop used to be a Nvidia 9800GT, worked well on that too.
I admit, I used to play on a 2 GHz Core Duo laptop with GMA 950 and 1 GB of ram. Frustrating, but playable with the right settings. Albeit in the 3.6.9/early 3.6.10 days. It was still better than my desktop at the time. Pentium 4 1.8 Northwood, 1 GB ram (originally 512 Mb), Radeon 2400 Pro AGP (open box 20 bucks) (originally a PCI GeforceFX 5500). Good god that thing chugged with FSO. Especially with the 5500.
edit: Can't tell i'm an AMD fanboy, can you..... :nervous:
-
I find it interesting that no one has marked even one vote in : No (Different option)
-
I don't find it particularly interesting..... I've not seen too many cards from other companies in a few years. Perhaps the odd integrated S3 or Via chip, but even then, they were all on P4 era boards and quite frankly were fairly poor performing, 16-32 MB DX8/9 chips that managed to be worse than Intelgrated chips.
-
Via Nano 2 dual core is a quite fast processor, indeed faster than a E350. And the integrated Chrome GPU is quite fast too.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/chrome-520-nano-dc-vn1000,2779.html
And, that poll needs the AMD APu option too.
-
Running NV 7600GS here. Got an 9600GT somewhere, but can't be bothered due to extra heat it generates (I don't play any new games anyway, mostly got the 9600 to experiment with VDPAU).
-
ATI X1300 on the desktop (still trying to fix that ATI bug, it's ornery!) and intel 965GMA on my tablet. I have to cut off a lot of the bells and whistles if I remember correctly (like specular and environmental lighting), but it technically runs.
-
ATI onboard hd4290 and ATI Radeon HD5570 running in unison (not crossfire), works pretty well for an onboard/dedicated combo
-
NVidia 9800 GTX running solo (no sli)
It's at least got a gig of its own ram.
-
Don't ignore us integrated graphics folks!
Running an i7-620M HP Elite Book 2740p with Integrated Intel HD Accelerator Graphics. I do not have a scuzzy little cheapo machine, but its a tablet and was built primarily for school/work. It's capable with the right options! (My main desktop sploded :C )
-
Freespace in a tablet , woud like to play it that way
-
Don't ignore us integrated graphics folks!
Running an i7-620M HP Elite Book 2740p with Integrated Intel HD Accelerator Graphics. I do not have a scuzzy little cheapo machine, but its a tablet and was built primarily for school/work. It's capable with the right options! (My main desktop sploded :C )
One advantage is that the i3-i5-i7 generations (and newer) use a much better generation of intelgrated graphics, though still limiting. Those generations are comparable to the cheapest current generations of laptop/desktop graphics cards, so they're not as far behind as the earlier generation ones.
-
@ Swamper - I'm using it in normal mode. Just happens to be a tablet. I don't think that the touch screen would be very good for navigation. :p
-
For now this is for me:
Notebook: Intel 965 (X3100) integrated graphics
Desktop 1: GeForce GT 240 which replaced my dead 9600 GT
Desktop 2: Riva TNT 2
-
TNT 2, awesome card in the day
-
My desktop has an ATI 4870 (512MB version).
My laptop has 2 videocards, one Intel processor integrated (core i5, I think its an intel HD 3000) and one ATI Mobility 5650 1GB.
The integrated chip is actually surprisingly strong, it plays Team Fortress 2 at native resolution (1366x768), everything high and at 30 fps. Doesn't look too good, but it's way more than I expected.