Will this video card run half life 2?

yes but poorly....i have it....hl2 looks okay, but you better have a beast of a system to back that card up....plus you wont be able to play hl2 in dx9 mode either. I'd reccomend at least an ATI 9600 XT or something of that sort.
 
keep in mind though that the 9600XT is much more expensive
 
Yeah I only have 100 dollars to spend so i am looking for a good
cheap card that will run half life 2.
If i get more money I will look into that ATI 9600 XT.
 
not trying to thread jack here but has anyone heard of an fx 5600 cos my mate gave me his old geforce fx card cos hje bought a new one and i have it lying around for a second system im gunna put together for testing and jsut wondering if it indeed does exist as i cant find it on nvidias website, :0 im gunan overclcok the nuts of it :p and jsut want to know what te top most 5600 does cos i thinks it is an SE
 
Thanks for the info.
I think i will get it because it's kinda my only choice.
 
Joims said:
not trying to thread jack here but has anyone heard of an fx 5600 cos my mate gave me his old geforce fx card cos hje bought a new one and i have it lying around for a second system im gunna put together for testing and jsut wondering if it indeed does exist as i cant find it on nvidias website, :0 im gunan overclcok the nuts of it :p and jsut want to know what te top most 5600 does cos i thinks it is an SE

http://www.nvidia.com/page/fx_5600.html
 
if you have enough money to buy a 9600 xt i would get a 9800pro you can get them for pretty cheap an di would say its a better card as for the fx5200, its runs fine for me but i hve a p4 3.4GHz and 1024 mb ddr400mhz ram, so that obviously helps alot.
eg
ive got these settings On CS:S
Resolution - 1024*768
Model Detail - High
Texture Detail - High
Water Detail - Simple Reflection
Shadow Detail - High
Wait For V-Sync - Diasbled
Shader Detail - low
Filtering Mode - Trilenear
Antialiasing mode - None :( oh well
Hardware DX level - 8
Software Dx level - 9

Video Stress Test Avg. FPS - 53.17

just to give you some idea
it plays the game fine if thats what you wanna do :)
 
ch0ke said:
Wait For V-Sync - Diasbled
I don't want to threadjack, but he seems to have gotten his answer.

Could someone please explain to me what 'Waitfor V-Sync' is? I know what all the other settings are, but this one has always baffled me.
Thanks in advance. :)
 
Xtended_Play said:

I used to have the 128 MB version of the FX 5200. I also had 512 RAM and P4 2.8Ghz. HL2 was OK but performance was poor with FarCry and Doom 3

On the CSS video stress test the FX 5200 got about 75 FPS average on these settings:

Model detail: Medium
Texture detail: Medium
Resolution: 800x600
Water detail: Simple reflection
Shadow Detail: High
Wait For V-Sync - Disabled
Shader Detail - low
Filtering Mode - Trilenear
Anti aliasing - None
 
I believe if you enable 'wait for v-sync', then your FPS can't go any higher than your monitor's refresh rate. If you disable it, the FPS can go higher, but you might notice some graphical problems (screen "tearing")..
 
Get a geforce 5700 they pretty cheap i got mine 175 dollars in australian dollars. i can run hl2 on high except for the water reflections etc.
 
Yeah, I have a GeForce 5700LE which I have overclocked-Get 50 fps on the Video stress test with my current settings, (all default settings within the hl2 video config area, and letting the card driver handle AA and AF) you will need to play with your settings and see what works best for your PC, but go to guru3d.com and DL Coolbits and overclock that puppy. Best card for under 100 bucks, IMHO.
 
I've heard bad things about Tiger Direct.
 
I'm guessing that card is about equal to a Radeon 9600SE, which is what I have. I run on Omega's drivers, and I have an AMD Athlon 2500+ and 1GB of PC2700 RAM. All of my settings are maxxed out, except for AA, which is set to none. I run at 800x600. My FPS rarely drops below 45... :rolleyes:

The key is to keep a clean system, keep your RAM clean, and disable any services you don't need. According to most standards, I shouldn't be running at any more than 20 FPS.
 
Well looks like the question has been answered..so....
 
diluted said:
I believe if you enable 'wait for v-sync', then your FPS can't go any higher than your monitor's refresh rate. If you disable it, the FPS can go higher, but you might notice some graphical problems (screen "tearing")..
Ah, I see. Makes sense.
Thanks for answering. :)
 
There is a hardware and software thread for this, please, use that thread.
 
stay away from that 5200 crap. get a 9600xt from newegg for $25 more.
 
I had a FX5200 and now have a 9600XT (think I coulda fit into this thread any better?) and I saw a 30+ FPS jump in all games. With the XT, I get a solid 40 FPS at most times, sometimes going down into the mid/low twenties for as long as what's happening on screen takes place...

Solid choice.
 
Just another note on the V-sync....you should always have it on. Because even if you manage to get 500 kazillion fps you are only gonna get whatever you monitor refresh rate is. (eg) Say you get 300 fps but your monitor only has a 60hz refresh rate, this means that no matter what the game says your running at you will only ever be able to get 60 fps nothing more. :upstare:
 
That would be the stupidest purchase ever. No seriously.

Ti-4200 on Ebay. That's like a bare minimum.

I swear to f*cking god no one ever googles up reviews.
 
beam said:
Just another note on the V-sync....you should always have it on. Because even if you manage to get 500 kazillion fps you are only gonna get whatever you monitor refresh rate is. (eg) Say you get 300 fps but your monitor only has a 60hz refresh rate, this means that no matter what the game says your running at you will only ever be able to get 60 fps nothing more. :upstare:

not nessarily true, when i turn wwait for v-sync my css chugs like a mad man. instead of that i run my monitro refresh rate really high for the resolution i play the game at 1024*768, my monitor supports 105hz, i do this in "refresh rate overide", i dont turn v-sync on but i put in my config fps_max 105 or something dont remeber and its fine :cheers:
 
It will run on Half-life 2 when you move this to the Hardware forum.
 
The FX5200 Ultra is a much better card than the FX5200 regular, for about the same price... I have one of my 5 computers running it, and it performs well... So, if you're gonna go that route get the Ultra edition of the FX5200, or, if you're smart and you wanna save up another 30 or $40 bucks, go get the ATI 9600 pro, you don't have to have the XT, the XT is hardly better if you ask me, I can compare with two of my other computers, and even though the graphics test come out a bit better with the XT, performance looks to be better with the 9600 pro, In fact, I'd have to say skip on the 5200 Ultra and do yourself a favor and get the 9600 Pro, you will thank me later..

edit... Yes a TI4200 would be the worst purchase you could make... Hell, it wont even run BF1942 with a good framrate, I gave that card up a couple years ago....

edit.. DANIMAL quit acting like an admin and let the REAL admins do their job OK, make sense? since you have no authority here? Thank you.. Sorry but its more irritating having a heckler in a post than it is to see a post in the wrong place...
 
i have that exact card with a amd athlon xp 2600 + and 512 ddr ram and it runs game with full detail and everything turned on with great fps.
 
yes. on medium if the rest of your pc is good (2.4 intel, 512 ram) i would go with an ati radeon 9550. my friend has the 9550, 768 ram, and an amd athlon 2300+, and he runs halflife 2 on high.
 
STEELH3D said:
DANIMAL quit acting like an admin and let the REAL admins do their job OK, make sense? since you have no authority here? Thank you.. Sorry but its more irritating having a heckler in a post than it is to see a post in the wrong place...

Take it easy. It's not the end of the world.
 
Back
Top