Battlefield 2 - Nvidia vs ati? yet again?

Buhammot · Jun 17, 2005

Ok, well My rig is as shown on my sig. I recently helped build a nice gaming machine for a friend of mine. MSI NF4 board, eVGA 6800GT PCI-E 256mb, 2gb Geil Value 2x1gb PC3200, and a 3500+ A64 Venice core.

Well, first off, I have had the demo for a few days, and just became used to how it played on my comp. Then after building his computer, we installed the game, max settings... max AA in game, and the textures came out so much better than what I was seeing. Not to mention the gameplay was still smoother. Can anyone else confirm this texture degredation for ATI cards? I will post a screenshot shortly.

xTrEmEoVrClOcKr · Jun 17, 2005

I have the complete opposite opinion ... my game runs like ***. I have to set mine to 800x600 2x 4x High / Med. Details. This is on my system in sig. Ive tried 5 different drivers. I get a normal 50fps during game-play and then it goes down to 3 w/e I view something "Action Packed". I think its time for a refromat?

bradleyland · Jun 17, 2005

I've seen results all over the place as well. IMO, it's going to take the full game and at least one patch before things settle in. My system runs the game great, but someone with almost the exact same setup as me with the exception of the motherboard can't even run the game. Go figure.

Gabkicks · Jun 17, 2005

there are plenty of 6800 owners struggling to get the demo to run smoothly so its more that the game is a bit buggy than anything.

Buhammot · Jun 17, 2005

I do think that the 2gb of RAM helps alot in his system tho. No slowdowns during the game, the included drivers with the demo, and all settings maxxed in game. When it loads.. its all there. Then again, it was the first game installed on his comp. He had an older VIA based board, and we had to reinstall win2k.

eli · Jun 17, 2005

I would have to second the 2gigs of ram. I have 2 gigs of ram, 630 Intel, 6600GT and the games is running awesome with all details on high at 1280X1024. I haven't even tried it on another system however.

tjr1973 · Jun 17, 2005

Maybe it is the RAM. I have 2 Gigs also and it run awesome with all settings maxed in video settings and in game settings. I'm running at 1280x1024 and it looks great and I have no stuttering at all. I'm running the Cat 5.6 Drivers from ATI's site and didn't have to do a thing to get the demo to run smoothly. I agree with everyone else that there are probably some bugs for them to work out with certain setups.

tjr1973 · Jun 17, 2005

xTrEmEoVrClOcKr said:
I have the complete opposite opinion ... my game runs like ***. I have to set mine to 800x600 2x 4x High / Med. Details. This is on my system in sig. Ive tried 5 different drivers. I get a normal 50fps during game-play and then it goes down to 3 w/e I view something "Action Packed". I think its time for a refromat?

Have you tried running your system at stock speeds? I remember when Doom 3 came out, they said that running it on an overclocked system would cause problems. Just curious if you had tried that yet.

Gabbiani · Jun 17, 2005

128x960, everything high except shadows / lighting (medium) and 4x. I see 90fps when in the air, and avg 70 when on the ground. It does drop into the 40's often though. I am sure they will fix everyones problems. When the first bf came out it was incredibly buggy. By the time Desert Combat hit its final release most people had long forgot about it. But it is still an amazing game by most standards.

Goateh · Jun 17, 2005

Heh, I just run it 800x600 with everything on medium and it runs perfectly fine

theELVISCERATOR · Jun 17, 2005

Xtreme has had lots of issues with that system, so it most likely just him..

Phoenix87 · Jun 17, 2005

I run 1024x768 with everything on high cept shadows(i still havent noticed a difference between high and medium) with 8xAF fine.

If you have problems clear your shader cache.

Biofear · Jun 17, 2005

http://hardware.gamespot.com/Story-ST-x-2147-x-x-x&body_pagenum=2

Check It!

Vance S · Jun 17, 2005

Biofear said:
http://hardware.gamespot.com/Story-ST-x-2147-x-x-x&body_pagenum=2

Check It!

That article is weird because they talk about the effects of going from an AMD 4000 to a 3000 but then they show graphs with Pentiums in them. I wouldn't put too much stock in that article.

WuChild · Jun 17, 2005

That article is mistaken, my 9800 pro runs the game a hell of a lot better than theirs does

Chixofnix · Jun 17, 2005

eli said:
I would have to second the 2gigs of ram. I have 2 gigs of ram, 630 Intel, 6600GT and the games is running awesome with all details on high at 1280X1024. I haven't even tried it on another system however.

that's comforting at least... i'm running w/ a 6600gt and this game is tough to run smoothly! all i need is another 1gb stick... and the money for it ^^;

xTrEmEoVrClOcKr · Jun 17, 2005

theELVISCERATOR said:
Xtreme has had lots of issues with that system, so it most likely just him..

Wow Elvis, that was the definition of a USELESS post. Has nothing to do with the topic. So keep your mouth shut.

Why would you point fingers at my system first off? Its a demo, maybe everything isn't full proofed yet, maybe your just trying to start some beef with me to look cool, damn your an e-thug.[Sarcasim/]

Fighter2a · Jun 17, 2005

I'm running at 1024x768 on high settings with my 9800 pro just fine.

flixotide · Jun 17, 2005

With my Prescott 2.8 in HT, 1 gig of kingston valueram and my trusty old 5900XT I run at 1024x768, everything at medium, no AA... runs like a charm even on 64/64 servers.

Cheers, Flix

jcw122 · Jun 17, 2005

Original poster, dont forget about picture quality due to the quality/age/type of the monitor

Battlefield 2 - Nvidia vs ati? yet again?

Member

member

Registered

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

member

Member

Member

Member

Similar threads