[pc] Bioshock

oo ooo oooo ive got bioshock :D

Tis a damn good game!

Bought an 8600GTS (512mb gddr3 one) for it (that and crysis etc). The visuals are stunning! Still havent finished it but i know im damn near the end.

Top quality stuff!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daevius

I run it at 1280x1024, and in the graphics menu I have everything at max. My NVidia control panel says that AA and AF are application controlled, so I guess everything is at max. Anyways 4x AA is really nice, 8x has only a tiny bit of change and 16x is just a waste of time for the GPU.

---

4x AA still leaves jaggies on lines. Then when you go into 8x most of it is gone. Then with 16x you have virtually none.

So there is a difference between them. And a major one from 4x to 8x with any resolution below 19x12.

Further more games do no use AA by default and have very low AF. You'll need to force that stuff in your drivers to use them.

Once you enable AA with your weak card, you'll get to unplayable states at that resolution.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GohanSSJ

Shadermodel 2, you need Shadermodel 3 which you get from the Geforce 6600's (i believe it starts there anyway, could be a little lower aswell) and up, and the ATI X1600 (or was it 1300?) and higher.

There is a mod that allows you to run it on Shadermodel 2 cards, but even then your card will be to poor to run it, the mod is only useful for those with ATI X800 cards or near that.

---

nVidia started SM3 with the 6800 and ATI started it with the x1300s.

And yes the SM2 mod is geared for the x800 series cards as anything lower is just to weak.

NoPeace - out

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NoPeace

nVidia started SM3 with the 6800 and ATI started it with the x1300s.

---

The 6600 does support SM3.
Performance

8600GTS, just new, you call that weak? :P I just dont want to pay like 600€ for the newest 8800GTX which will be half price in half a year :/

I've got the game. But I'm afraid to install it since I'm sitting on a 9800 PRO lol.

I played the demo on my 360 i thought it was sexy i like the whole idea so ill prolly pick it up

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GohanSSJ

The 6600 does support SM3.
Performance

---

I didn't know that. I've only heard of the 6800 having it.

Though I would hate to see SM3 on a 6600. 6800s struggle with it and they completely over power the 6600.

It'll be like the x1300 with it. Supports it but not powerful enough to actually use it.

And like the x1600 with AA+HDR. It supports it but it'll never be able to do it. :icon6:

[QUOTE=Daevius;2639621]8600GTS, just new, you call that weak? :P I just dont want to pay like 600

Yup, I saw that the 7900 serie is pretty good. But they didn't sold any at the local shop, so I did the 8600GTS...

VGA Charts 2007 | Tom's Hardware

Perhaps I can put 2 video cards in my pc? that would be fast wouldnt it?

Video Adapter
Name RADEON Radeon X300/X550/X1050 Series
Video Processor ATI Radeon Graphics Processor (0x5B60)
Manufactory ATI Technologies Inc.
Video Architecture VGA
DAC Type Internal DAC(400MHz)
Memory Size 256MB
Memory Type Unknown
Video Mode 1024 x 768 x 4294967296 kleuren
Current Refresh Rate 60Hz
Driver Version 6.14.10.6715
Driver Date 28-7-2007 3:30:27

CPU Name AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 3400+

Ain't good for Bio, no?

That ain't good indeed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NoPeace

I didn't know that. I've only heard of the 6800 having it.

Though I would hate to see SM3 on a 6600. 6800s struggle with it and they completely over power the 6600.

It'll be like the x1300 with it. Supports it but not powerful enough to actually use it.

And like the x1600 with AA+HDR. It supports it but it'll never be able to do it. :icon6:



8600 series cards are a joke.

8600GT =~ 7600GT
8600GTS =~ 7900GS

Normally the next gen mid range cards are as powerful as the low end of the last gen high end cards.

Which in this case they are only as fast as the last gen and in some case slower.

That is why I say it's weak. Because the card that it competes against in DX9 is weak.

Not to mention you could have gotten a faster DX9 card for less money. As the 8600 series along with the AMD 2600 series are just to weak to even run DX10 games.

That money could have gotten a 7900GTO or a x1900XT. Which are far superior cards in terms of DX9 performance. Though they can't support DX10 but that doesn't matter when the mid range DX10 cards can't even run DX10 with good settings (which causes loss of IQ).

NoPeace - out

---

The 6800 can run properly with SM3, i got a eVGA 6800GT with 256mb DDR3 (there is also a DDR2 version) and it's pretty damn fast (considering the age of it), you can compare it to a 7600GT, this card can run Bioshock on a little over the medium settings, so not that bad.
But yeah the 6600's probably can't pull most of it, and same goes for the low ATI's like you said, it's just a selling point, but it's worth absolutely nothing. 8600's are indeed a joke, i checked the specs, and it's even worse at points then mine, which is a absolute joke, i mean how can a supposed mid range card have parts that are worse then a card from like 5 years ago, that's just sick.
And i completely agree with the rest aswell, those mid range cards will never be able to use DX10, they can't even max the DX9 features, so the DX10 features simply won't be used, which makes the whole DX10 point useless, and then it's smarter to buy a high end DX9 card as they're much cheaper in comparison.

By all means, the 8600 ain't a bad card, but compared to other choices within that range it's pretty damn bad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daevius

Yup, I saw that the 7900 serie is pretty good. But they didn't sold any at the local shop, so I did the 8600GTS...

VGA Charts 2007 | Tom's Hardware

Perhaps I can put 2 video cards in my pc? that would be fast wouldnt it?

---

It would make it faster though you must have an SLI ready motherboard. Even then it would be a waist of money. Would have been better to have bought an 8800.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Genryu

Video Adapter
Name RADEON Radeon X300/X550/X1050 Series
Video Processor ATI Radeon Graphics Processor (0x5B60)
Manufactory ATI Technologies Inc.
Video Architecture VGA
DAC Type Internal DAC(400MHz)
Memory Size 256MB
Memory Type Unknown
Video Mode 1024 x 768 x 4294967296 kleuren
Current Refresh Rate 60Hz
Driver Version 6.14.10.6715
Driver Date 28-7-2007 3:30:27

CPU Name AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 3400+

Ain't good for Bio, no?

---

You got that right. That isn't good enough for that game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GohanSSJ

That ain't good indeed.

The 6800 can run properly with SM3, i got a eVGA 6800GT with 256mb DDR3 (there is also a DDR2 version) and it's pretty damn fast (considering the age of it), you can compare it to a 7600GT, this card can run Bioshock on a little over the medium settings, so not that bad.

---

Yeah they are fast. But the problem with them is when you turn on HDR the card is just dead. Like wise with some other high end shader features.

Still given the fact that the card is from 4 years ago it's still pretty damn powerful. The 6800s where monsters back then just as the 8800s are now.

What ever happened with the damn 7800/7900s.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GohanSSJ

But yeah the 6600's probably can't pull most of it, and same goes for the low ATI's like you said, it's just a selling point, but it's worth absolutely nothing. 8600's are indeed a joke, i checked the specs, and it's even worse at points then mine, which is a absolute joke, i mean how can a supposed mid range card have parts that are worse then a card from like 5 years ago, that's just sick.
And i completely agree with the rest aswell, those mid range cards will never be able to use DX10, they can't even max the DX9 features, so the DX10 features simply won't be used, which makes the whole DX10 point useless, and then it's smarter to buy a high end DX9 card as they're much cheaper in comparison.

By all means, the 8600 ain't a bad card, but compared to other choices within that range it's pretty damn bad.

---

Yeah it just makes no since why AMD and nVidia made them so damn weak and so damn overpriced. They support features that it will never be able to run.

The only possible reason why I could ever see getting a mid-range DX10 card over a high end DX9 card is the fact they can be used as a GPGPU (general purpose GPU). Then and only then will they be of any real use as a 8600 has more FP power then a QX6800. So you'll get some nice folding@home scores from a cheap card.

NoPeace - out