1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Graphics What res settings for F.E.A.R. in Core Duo-2.0GHz/ATI x1300w256MB-shared/1Gb RAM?

Discussion in 'Hardware' started by Yubalostia, 15 Feb 2007.

  1. Yubalostia

    Yubalostia What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    15 Feb 2007
    Posts:
    11
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sorry for the obviously noob question, but I want play F.E.A.R. @ 1280*768(like my screen) on my tabletPC with the specs mentioned above in the title.

    I don't know what could be better:
    1. Play @ 1280*768 with everthing (fx, shaders, etc.) in "minimum"
    2. Or lower resolution and add more fx and shaders and higher res textures

    I can settle with 70% frames above 25fps. Maybe resolution is not such an important thing? I'm new to this gaming on a PC and I'm hooked. I already installed Omega drivers with no noticeable effect... I think.

    The most important thing for me is the window-shattering explosions :eeek: , along with playable fps... maybe I could let the game decide? Thanx! :rock:
     
  2. airchie

    airchie What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    22 Mar 2005
    Posts:
    2,136
    Likes Received:
    2
    If its an LCD screen I wouldn't ever personally play at anything but the native res.
    If that means setting everything to minimum then so be it.
    Or you could look to upgrade the gfx card to something a little more capable... :)
     
  3. Yubalostia

    Yubalostia What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    15 Feb 2007
    Posts:
    11
    Likes Received:
    0
    thanx

    well yeah, it's an LCD screen, so ok, native it is then. Now, I am interested in upgrading the gfx card of my laptop, but I believe it's impossible, is it not? hmmm, how could I do such a thing? thanx for the answer. :)
     
  4. Mathmarauder

    Mathmarauder What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    14 Jan 2007
    Posts:
    369
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have similar specs and it runs fine on med/high at 1280 by 1024, thats with shadows disabled because I think they look wonky. Hope that helps.
     
  5. DarkLord7854

    DarkLord7854 What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    22 Jun 2005
    Posts:
    4,643
    Likes Received:
    121
    I always play at 1024 by 768 on my 19" LCD even if it's widescreen (native: 1440 x 900). There usually isn't that great of a difference between the resolutions if you can't even have decent smooth textures
     
  6. Austin

    Austin Minimodder

    Joined:
    16 Jul 2004
    Posts:
    2,037
    Likes Received:
    15
    :confused: Native is best for general Windows duties but when gaming it's not a prerequisite by any means. Generally running a game with low details will make it look abysmal, at least aim for medium settings at whatever res gives you an average of 40-60 fps. 1024x768 should look pretty close to your native res and is widely supported yet has 20% fewer pixels which should lessen the GPU demand. Who knows, you may even prefer 640x480 with high details, maybe some AA+AF (although panel scaling may provide alittle free AA). You should generally disable shadows, AA and AF as these tend to place heavy demands on your GPU. Best thing to do is to suck it and see, everybody has their own preferences.

    :worried: Unfortunately X1300 is very underpowered, generally you can expect to run at half the speed of a 6600GT (for some frame of reference). Under-powered GPUs are very common in laptops and the X1300 is actually more capable than most.
     
  7. Yubalostia

    Yubalostia What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    15 Feb 2007
    Posts:
    11
    Likes Received:
    0
    hey that's some nice advice, I thank you all, really.

    I just don't know... I think playing at a lower resolution will decrease the things I see in the "viewing frustum", if such a thing applies to games... kinda like widescreen Vs. square screen, you know, the difference blockbuster tries to make you think when you rent DVDs... I don't mind having less res if I can play well and I don't miss certain things I should see with a widescreen... guess I should be more interested in FPS? ( I think I can barely play at it is... but I love the game, I may be biased lol)

    hmmm, yeah, I think I just should suck it up and check every possible combination of settings... but I strongly believe I am underpowered and there's nothing I can do... I will try some lower res... but thanx!! :) really helpful!
     
  8. Mathmarauder

    Mathmarauder What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    14 Jan 2007
    Posts:
    369
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well your video card is sharing part of your main ram, with windows in the back round thats really going to be eating into that 1gb of ram, you could try upgrading the ram to 2gb, this would be cheap and fairly easy to install and would help loading times and fps, you might be able to bump the resolution up a bit more then.
     
  9. DarkLord7854

    DarkLord7854 What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    22 Jun 2005
    Posts:
    4,643
    Likes Received:
    121
    The res difference really won't matter that much. I've played HL2 in 1024 x 768 and in 1440x900 and though there is a bigger field of view, it didn't impact how I played the game at all, just made it prettier and made my vid card start screaming trying to keep it's temperature down :p
     
  10. cjmUK

    cjmUK Old git.

    Joined:
    9 Feb 2004
    Posts:
    2,553
    Likes Received:
    88
    Keen gamers often prefer fps to detail. It's better see your enemy quickly so you can kill him, rather than marvel at his HQ textures as he stutters into view and crushes you...
     
  11. Yubalostia

    Yubalostia What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    15 Feb 2007
    Posts:
    11
    Likes Received:
    0
    lol, you're right. that's a nice way to put it. I've been having trouble with stuttering. :wallbash:

    I will set everything up accordingly, thanx. I will also try to upgrade RAM, it seems reasonable and possible. :thumb:
     
Tags:

Share This Page