Minimum card to run Doom3

jmecor

Distinguished
Jul 7, 2003
2,332
0
19,780
I'm planning on upgrading my crappy TnT2 to GF4Ti4400.
I know this card can run doom3, but what is the minimum video card requirements for doom3 to run.

Ex-ample:
. GF2MX200
. GF4MX440
. RADEON 7500 and older dx7 cards.


<font color=blue>
My computer is <b>sooo fast</b>,
It finished <b>SETI</b> in <b>10 seconds.</b>
<font color=blue>
 

ufo_warviper

Distinguished
Dec 30, 2001
3,033
0
20,780
The minimum to run DOom3 is said to be a Geforce 256 with 32 megs of RAM for the minimum or Radeon 7xxx.

My OS features preemptive multitasking, a fully interactive command line, & support for 640K of RAM!
 

Ganache

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
225
0
18,680
You should try to save a bit more, to get a RADEON 9600 pro or a FX 5600 ultra REV 2. You'll get all the eye candy DOOM can offer. Better yet, WAIT till HL2 or DOOM3 comes out. Better card will come out and you can buy a new card then. Youll be able to pickup the NEW value card then. AKA next 9600 pro and the like.

No point upgrading now for a game that isn't out before 2004
 

jmecor

Distinguished
Jul 7, 2003
2,332
0
19,780
ya, i know that newer cards will arive later especially in the holidays. But they are going to be priced very high, maybe above $400 dollars. Maybe i could save up to $200 in that month so i could end getting up a 5600 ultra or radeon 9600 pro. I can't stand anymore my TnT2 card today it don't even have T&L.

<font color=blue>
My computer is <b>sooo fast</b>,
It finished <b>SETI</b> in <b>10 seconds.</b>
<font color=blue>
 

Ganache

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
225
0
18,680
Maybe you can find a cheap TI4200 and upgrade later again. 4200 are very cheap these days, and pretty much on par with 4400
 

jmecor

Distinguished
Jul 7, 2003
2,332
0
19,780
$100 is the lowest but the manufacturer is quite sucky (Inno3d). I'm opting for gainward ti4400 which cost only $15 more.

<font color=blue>
My computer is <b>sooo fast</b>,
It finished <b>SETI</b> in <b>10 seconds.</b>
<font color=blue>
 

Caimbeul

Distinguished
Jul 4, 2003
378
0
18,790
I'd be wary of Gainward naming policy. Check it is definitely a Ti4400. Although I'd really say get a 5600U Rev.2 or better.

Pick up the pennies and the pounds will take care of themselves...

<i>Mmm Dawn AND Eve at the same time...Drroooooll
-------------------------------------------------
<b>XP2100+, 1Gb RAM, ASUS A7N8X, PNY 64Mb Ti4200. :cool:
 

dhlucke

Polypheme
The game isn't out. I don't know of any official stats on the games system requirements. It's all gonna be speculation at this point.

________________________________
<font color=red><b>your an idiot of biblical proportions
 

Shielder

Distinguished
Jul 18, 2003
44
0
18,530
I'd also say get either an FX5200 (if your budget is really tight), an FX5600U (or better preferably) or an ATI 9600 (or better). These are all DX9 cards, which is what Doom3 is written for. Otherwise, you won't get all the graphics options. I've also heard that the next version of Winbloze will only work with DX9 compatible cards with 128Mb or higher, is this true?

Andy

There are lies, damn lies and statistics - Mark Twain.
 

jmecor

Distinguished
Jul 7, 2003
2,332
0
19,780
is having a DirectX 9.0 hardware will also shows better graphics detail. That's what i'm really looking in dx9.
And for future games. I want to learn more in DirectX 9, is their a site that explains more of it.

<font color=blue>
My computer is <b>sooo fast</b>,
It finished <b>SETI</b> in <b>10 seconds.</b>
<font color=blue><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by jmecor on 08/18/03 04:30 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
 

jmecor

Distinguished
Jul 7, 2003
2,332
0
19,780
is doom 3 delayed next year? if that's true then i'll buy one now and upgrade later.

<font color=blue>
My computer is <b>sooo fast</b>,
It finished <b>SETI</b> in <b>10 seconds.</b>
<font color=blue>
 

Caimbeul

Distinguished
Jul 4, 2003
378
0
18,790
Yes DX9 give better lighting, particle effects and so on and yep Doom 3 is now not expectied till mid 2004 at least. see quackecon article on toms front page. but it has been known its delayed for some time.


<i>Mmm Dawn AND Eve at the same time...Drroooooll
-------------------------------------------------
<b>XP2100+, 1Gb RAM, ASUS A7N8X, PNY 64Mb Ti4200. :cool:
 

Shielder

Distinguished
Jul 18, 2003
44
0
18,530
DX9 hardware may show more graphics features, but the frame rate may not be as good as previous generation cards. I think the FX5200 is roughly the same as the MX series of cards (I think that this is when DX9 options are switched on you'll get a frame rate something similar to the MX series??)
The FX5600 are about the same as the Ti4200 and 4400.
And the FX5800/5900 will be roughly equivalent (with all the bells and whistles turned on) to the Ti4800.

I do stand to be corrected on this...

Andy

There are lies, damn lies and statistics - Mark Twain.
 

jmecor

Distinguished
Jul 7, 2003
2,332
0
19,780
Microsoft could have paid id to wait till the xbox version is out and at the same time release the pc version.

<font color=blue>
My computer is <b>sooo fast</b>,
It finished <b>SETI</b> in <b>10 seconds.</b>
<font color=blue>
 

dhlucke

Polypheme
The 5200 is a dx9 card that will be unable to play dx9 games at reasonable framerates.

________________________________
<font color=red><b>your an idiot of biblical proportions
 

jmecor

Distinguished
Jul 7, 2003
2,332
0
19,780
do agp 2x/4x/8x have the same voltage of 1.5.
My plans is exactly to transfer my old tnt2 m64 card to my old k6-2 system (w/ agp2x) after buying a new card.


<font color=blue>
My computer is <b>sooo fast</b>,
It finished <b>SETI</b> in <b>10 seconds.</b>
<font color=blue>
 

jmecor

Distinguished
Jul 7, 2003
2,332
0
19,780
but 4200 runs faster than 5200, right? and the only advantage of 5200 is that it has dx9 support & 4200 only has dx8.

<font color=blue>
My computer is <b>sooo fast</b>,
It finished <b>SETI</b> in <b>10 seconds.</b>
<font color=blue>
 

Shielder

Distinguished
Jul 18, 2003
44
0
18,530
Yes. That's why I said it is like the old MX cards. I had an MX420, it was adequate for most games, but it started to slow down when IL2 hit it. I've just got an FX5600 so things should improve a bit. (I hope)

There are lies, damn lies and statistics - Mark Twain.
 

jmecor

Distinguished
Jul 7, 2003
2,332
0
19,780
THe point is:

1.) Avoid any GF mx card if used in future gaming

2.) A directx 9.0 card is good also for upcoming games

3.) If I aim for FX5200, make sure it's the ultra version

and

4.) sorry. if there's no ati product listed, they're quitehard to find here.

<font color=blue>
My computer is <b>sooo fast</b>,
It finished <b>SETI</b> in <b>10 seconds.</b>
<font color=blue>
 

Shielder

Distinguished
Jul 18, 2003
44
0
18,530
AGP 2x/4x/8x have different voltages (I think) If the graphics card you are using has two notches in the connector, then it is multi voltage (3.3 and 5v).

I wouldn't go for the FX5200 Ultra. I'd got for the FX5600 or 5600Ultra. (I couldn't afford the ultra version of my card...)

There are lies, damn lies and statistics - Mark Twain.
 

Caimbeul

Distinguished
Jul 4, 2003
378
0
18,790
1)Yes! avoid at all costs.
2)DX9 is good.
3)dont touch the 5200, from everything i have heard AND SEEN, it both sucks and blows.
4)it may be worth looking at some of ATI's products as they tend to be cheaper and are just as good if not better in some cases. + you will get better DX9 performance cheaper. if your not too fussed about effects etc and just want polygons shoved around, then opt for a GF4Ti series.



<i>Mmm Dawn AND Eve at the same time...Drroooooll
-------------------------------------------------
<b>XP2100+, 1Gb RAM, ASUS A7N8X, PNY 64Mb Ti4200. :cool:
 

jmecor

Distinguished
Jul 7, 2003
2,332
0
19,780
so that
means many 8x video cards will work on 4x cards mobo,
but not 4x video cards on 2x mobos.

<font color=blue>
My computer is <b>sooo fast</b>,
It finished <b>SETI</b> in <b>10 seconds.</b>
<font color=blue>
 

jmecor

Distinguished
Jul 7, 2003
2,332
0
19,780
Nvidia cards favor OpenGL that's why in counterstrike i get high frame rates even at high resolutions but if Direct3d is used my card starts acting weird and the frame rate refresh is somewhat late.

Which could be better :
Ati Radeon 9200 Pro 128mb or
Nvidia geforce4 ti4200 128mb (they're almost priced the same)


<font color=blue>
My computer is <b>sooo fast</b>,
It finished <b>SETI</b> in <b>10 seconds.</b>
<font color=blue>
 

Caimbeul

Distinguished
Jul 4, 2003
378
0
18,790
try looking at some benchmarks...for pure pushing power i think the ti4200 comes out on top but the 9200 supports dx9. in fact the 9000pro is faster than the 9200!!

According to THG's own benchmarks the Ti4200 128Mb is more at the 9500 level. look at these benchmarks:
http://www.tomshardware.com/graphic/20030311/geforcefx-5600-5200-03.html#unreal_tournament_2003

<i>Mmm Dawn AND Eve at the same time...Drroooooll
-------------------------------------------------
<b>XP2100+, 1Gb RAM, ASUS A7N8X, PNY 64Mb Ti4200. :cool:
 

xeenrecoil

Distinguished
Jan 7, 2003
842
0
18,990
heya Jmecor;

Each generation of AGP is a new voltage standard, i will explain.

Agp 1.0 runs on a signaling voltage of 3.3v
Agp 2.0 runs on a signaling voltage of 1.5v
Agp 3.0 runs on a signaling voltage of 0.89v

Most Video cards are backwards compatable with the previous generation of AGP standard, some are even backwards compatable to the first generation AGP standard.

Here is a chart to help you understand and refrence the various generations of AGP standards.

AGP 1.0 - 3.3v
AGP 2.0 - 1.5v & *3.3v
AGP 3.0 - 0.89v & *1.5v

* The asteric represents Graphics card compatability with the previous AGP standard generation.

You will need to read the Graphics Card specs to garuntee backwards compatability to the AGP 1.0 - 3.3v standard.

XeeN