[DaBrain]

Well, the question is above.

I don't know when I'm going to upgrade my system, but if I do I'd like to know, what to update.

[GT-Keravnos]

I think a GPU with 256 MB. Had it not been for lightspeed's LT 27 aug. package I would be chugging along with my 64 MB Ti4200 card.

[GoulMeister]

both are important, perhaps you could specify what system u have?

[Taristin]

I have a weak CPU, and a powerful GPU. My GPU stuggles at times, but it holds up while running FSO. Good stuff.

[DaBrain]

Athlon XP 2,2 Ghz 256KB L2 Cache
512MB DDR Ram
NF7-S
Geforce 4 Ti 4200 8x 128 MB

It runs ok, but I think I've reached the limit with shadows enables.
Any new feature will be too much.

So what exactly is important a fast GFX Card or a GFX card with much ram?

[AqueousShadow]

I believe your computer system (you should specify what CPU and GPU you are talking about; cuz I think you've already confused Raa) is holding up much of your performance in FSO. Your GeForce 4 Ti is ... not enough to stomach what FSO can throw at it, so I suggest finding a better video card overall is a better idea, rather than trying to balance CPU and GPU speeds. Both are equally important as if you don't have a fast CPU, there's no point in having a lot of space in which to transfer data (GPU). And if you have a fast CPU, it's made pointless because your GPU will be clogged with more data than it can hold because it's too small.

Personally, I use a GeForce FX 5600 AGP 8x 256 Mb. Most cards won't run without that AGP, and it's either 4x or 8x. Then you've got to choose between 128 or 256 Mb, usually. So, if you're lookin' for value, just get my card with your new system, unless you want that extra punch...get a newer one.

[ChronoReverse]

A ti4200 is enough to stomach what FSO throws at it.  Unless you have the 64mb version.

FSO has caught up to modern games in terms of texture memory usage and thus requires the 128mb to function well.  Of course I knew it'd be like this when I got my ti4200 so I'm having no problems XD

That said, a fast CPU would be second in terms of general FS2 performance while more ram (minimum 256 recommended 512, excellent is >768) reduces the ingame stutters.


The shadows are really cpu intensive AFAIK and only a faster cpu can really help with that.  Sure a nicer video card would be nice but the calculations in the cpu is what's slowing it down.  Shadows, pretty, but require a lot to show it =/

[Unknown Target]

my GF4Ti4600 runs FSO just fine with the shadows (I have a 2.4 Ghz P4)

[ChronoReverse]

Well, I can run with the shadows until I hit a certain number of objects onscreen =/

[JR2000Z]

Well, that's RAM.

[Taristin]

Originally posted by AqueousShadow
I believe your computer system (you should specify what CPU and GPU you are talking about; cuz I think you've already confused Raa) is holding up much of your performance in FSO.

Eh? I was just saying that my 9600xt 256 is doing the brunt of the work for FSO on my Box. Because it certainly isn't my single channel mode 128Mb 266MHz ram, or the 600MHz 266FSB Duron plugged into the mobo, that's doing much of anything for it.

In fact, I've read my manual for the Mobo, and it says not to run a CPU with a clock speed of less than 1000MHZ. I think 600MHz qualifies as that... Wonder when it'll burst into flames...

[DaBrain]

There is no Duron with 600 Mhz and FSB 266 (133) AFAIK.





If the textures are loaded into the video Ram, why do I need this much ram for my system?

[Overlord]

I think only the dds textures are loaded into vram, the pcx, jpg and tga textures are loaded into ram. But i could be wrong.

[Taristin]

Originally posted by DaBrain
There is no Duron with 600 Mhz and FSB 266 (133) AFAIK.





If the textures are loaded into the video Ram, why do I need this much ram for my system?

Eh? Then what do I have?

Anyway... the system ram isn't for the textures, it's for everything else...

[Lightspeed]

Yet it will be filled by textures as well since you won't be able to store them exclusively on your vid card.

[DaBrain]

Originally posted by AqueousShadow
I believe your computer system (you should specify what CPU and GPU you are talking about; cuz I think you've already confused Raa) is holding up much of your performance in FSO. Your GeForce 4 Ti is ... not enough to stomach what FSO can throw at it, so I suggest finding a better video card overall is a better idea, rather than trying to balance CPU and GPU speeds. Both are equally important as if you don't have a fast CPU, there's no point in having a lot of space in which to transfer data (GPU). And if you have a fast CPU, it's made pointless because your GPU will be clogged with more data than it can hold because it's too small.

Personally, I use a GeForce FX 5600 AGP 8x 256 Mb. Most cards won't run without that AGP, and it's either 4x or 8x. Then you've got to choose between 128 or 256 Mb, usually. So, if you're lookin' for value, just get my card with your new system, unless you want that extra punch...get a newer one.

The 5600 is slower than the 4200...

[QuantumDelta]

Originally posted by DaBrain



The 5600 is slower than the 4200...

Speed isn't everything.
Memory, functionality and pipes (I'm not actually sure of the pipe difference) will have a large effect on things too.

but to be honest, my specs are about 1.5x yours all around the board, except 1GB DDR RAM and I still struggle at times

[Col. Fishguts]

edit: ignore this post, i should have looked at the new sticky

[Nuke]

i remember running freespace 2 on a 120 mhz cpu and a 16mb 3dfx banshee card (one of the first 2d/3d combo cards), it ran but stuttered . now i have a 2.4 ghz computer and a crappy geforce 4 mx420. it still stutters, i went through doom3 with an average frame rate of 15 fps. as far as fso is concerned, it runs great.

the number one factor in fast gaming is memory speed and quantity in both the video card and the system. it your swapfile is being used during a game its gonna have a suckey performance. if all the graphics being used in a game fit into video memory then your performance will be awesome. textures can be moved from system ram to video ram fairly quickly but to a limit. past that limit its gonna degrade performance. faster memory will extend that performance abit, but quantity is more important.

a good video card typically wil go into 2 or 3 computers before i toss it. my voodoo3 (top of the line model when i got it) lasted me a good 4 years as the typical cpu lasts me 1.5 years. so a good $300 video card is always a good buy.