Dolphin, the GameCube and Wii emulator - Forums

(08-04-2009, 01:42 AM)Daco Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-04-2009, 01:35 AM)cmccmc Wrote: [ -> ]Im even on your side daco

you'd better
or ill send my old skool (fast but crappy deu to flags missing like SSE2/SSE3) AMD XP 2300

lolufhsf

ufhsf?

(08-04-2009, 03:18 AM)tufask Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-04-2009, 01:14 AM)Daco Wrote: [ -> ]@ tufask : my GF FX could run UT2k4 just fine. hell it can do Win7 full speed while Win7 is very hard on GPU's. what the fuck is your problem? no it can't do modern shit but for games which dont need shaders 2.0 it works perfect on XP

For UT2K4 the most important thing is a fast cpu, not a fast graphicscard I even could run it with an old GeForce 2 MX.
Win7 needs a fast gpu? Come on... as long as it's a DX9-card, it's ok to run Aero (even on Vista, which needs more ressources then Win7).
Sure you can play games that don't need SM 2.0... no wonder, most of them are 5 years old... Maybe 20 fps is fluid for you, but i prefer 30 fps at least
Anyways, this is getting offtopic. Just enjoy your Fx 5200 (which is still crap in my opinion )

1) on my old GF2 MX it didn't run fine at all at higest settings. on the contrary.
2) wrong about vista<-> win7. Win7 needs less ram/cpu but ALOT more gpu then vista. and "just any DX9 card" isn't right. go use GF2 MX then if you will.
3) 30fps sure isn't fluid. im talking 60 fps here
4) who said im still using a GF5? GF6 & GF8 here
5) crap compared to what? a GF9? >_>

(08-04-2009, 03:25 AM)dyoo Wrote: [ -> ]ufhsf?

u fucking homo sexual freak

..............

(08-04-2009, 03:49 AM)tufask Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-04-2009, 03:31 AM)Daco Wrote: [ -> ]1) on my old GF2 MX it didn't run fine at all at highest settings. on the contrary.
2) wrong about vista<-> win7. Win7 needs less ram/cpu but ALOT more gpu then vista. and "just any DX9 card" isn't right. go use GF2 MX then if you will.
3) 30fps sure isn't fluid. im talking 60 fps here
4) who said im still using a GF5? GF6 & GF8 here
5) crap compared to what? a GF9? >_>

1) well, i could run it at medium settings with a playable framerate. With an old GF4 TI 4200 it ran at max. settings.

2) GF2 MX is a DX7-card, not DX9^^

3) Oh, you're a human wonder which can tell the difference between 30 fps and 60 fps... interesting... Well, in my opinion 30 fps IS fluid! In Crysis i get around 30 fps with high settings, any other game above 60 of course

4) Well, the way you hyped the FX 5200 gave me the thought you're still using it lol.

5) Crap compared to any other card from the same year the FX 5200 got released

1) GF4 > GF2 lol.
2) its DX9 compatible (note, compatible; not made for it aka supports). IF it can do DX9 games it'll be mighty slow lol. i ran Guild wars on a GF2 so lol (with a 800Mhz AMD athlon )
3)i know not much ppl can but i can >_> specially in fast paced games like UT (which brings me to the point that im sure some Xbox games CANT do 60 perfectly . GTA4 included. saw it once and that sure was skipping frames once in a while)
4) not using it but sure have one in my old system hell it can do dual monitors in dualview (not horizontal span. know the difference) fine (note that nvidia/microsoft hasn't worked on dual view in ages and therefor its a bit slow at certain things)
5) obviously, the 5200 was the low end card of the GF5 series. just like the GF8400 is (unless there is a 8200...) for the GF8 series.

Ahem...

We are all able to distinguish up to 85 fps, or at least i can.
But it's a lot more comfortable for me to FIX it to 43.
We all have our ways.

Other than concentrating on a Super CPU or a Super GPU, you should start thinking about the perfect balance of both (in performance and price) and you'll get the most out of a computer.

..............

(08-04-2009, 04:09 AM)CacoFFF Wrote: [ -> ]Ahem...

We are all able to distinguish up to 85 fps, or at least i can.
But it's a lot more comfortable for me to FIX it to 43.
We all have our ways.

Other than concentrating on a Super CPU or a Super GPU, you should start thinking about the perfect balance of both (in performance and price) and you'll get the most out of a computer.

which is exactly why i said this on page 2

"i can make a i7 boot an windows os in 10min if i wanted to
how? give it an old slow ass hard drive and/or ram"

(08-04-2009, 04:36 AM)Daco Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-04-2009, 04:09 AM)CacoFFF Wrote: [ -> ]Ahem...

We are all able to distinguish up to 85 fps, or at least i can.
But it's a lot more comfortable for me to FIX it to 43.
We all have our ways.

Other than concentrating on a Super CPU or a Super GPU, you should start thinking about the perfect balance of both (in performance and price) and you'll get the most out of a computer.

which is exactly why i said this on page 2

"i can make a i7 boot an windows os in 10min if i wanted to
how? give it an old slow ass hard drive and/or ram"

Lol, my pages are up to 50 posts, you should try it .
And, you're right there.

Adding something about the FPS: any CRT screen user, should set its update frequency from 60hz to 85hz, it's less harmful for your eyes.
If you don't like how the picture flows (maybe too many frames for you) fixing 43fps on a 85hz config gives a realistic feel, not to mention you won't need such a powerful video card to reach 43 instead of 60 or 85.