|
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
#1 (permalink) |
|
is on the 2nd circle: Lust
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 89
Hellbux: 1,995
|
I did use the search tool but did not find my anwser. Still..... why cant i run HL2 in directx 9.0? I did read something about a while back but i just canf find out why.... I did update video drivers and directX but still no go
PLs Advise Cheers
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 (permalink) | |
|
Quote:
EDIT: o wait.. no i didn't? I thought they removed it from Fx cards.. they lose 70% of their performance in the move to DX9 9600 only loses 8% :-/ it should be in options, it should say DirectX X.X and u should be able to choose from a drop down menu . I can't Personally, 9800 is locked at only DX9 Ugh. you should stay with DX8 on all GF FXs http://anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2281&p=4 |
||
|
|
|
|
|
#6 (permalink) |
|
is on the 1st circle: Limbo
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1
Hellbux: 315
|
Mate if u have graphic card like gf fx or lower u have to download patch that is emulating some kind of effects (eg water) here is link http://forums.nvidia.com/lofiversion/index...x.php?t456.html have fun
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 (permalink) |
|
is on the 2nd circle: Lust
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 50
Hellbux: 1,094
|
by the way :S
i got a fx5900 (asus v9950) i run 83 FPS in the video stress test @ 1154x864 and 4x AA :S (direct x 8.1 mode though) i also tested the game with FRAPS; i got: min FPS: 42 avg FPS: 93 max FPS: 185 anyone please explain :S, because the game runnes better with AA on than off :S
__________________
Meet The Incredible nOObMan |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 (permalink) |
|
ooh but ravenholm is a pretty low-demanding scenario tbh. the level-to-level load times in ravenholm costs ten times less waiting then for example the Coast or Canals. i think the levels in ravenholm aren't that big like the others, plus the fact that its close-quartered mostly, which gives high-fpses mostly. i know cuz i happen to had NET_GRAPH 3 command line on in that pirticualr level. (shows fps and packet send, which was higher to allmost 30 fps avarage than other levels)
hl 2 isn't demanding at all when it comes to good graphics but still smooth gameplay. take for example doom3. for a good/great visual experience on MY rig, i need to cut into gameplay smoothness dramatically, leaving me no option but to turn down the graphics for a better play experience. this also gives the awkward feeling of non-scaryness, because it looks so bad. HL2 doesn't have this at all. settings on hi, fps around 70, no problem at all. tho the AF and AA thing (you say it doesn't effect gameplay smoothness?) sure deserves a try, because i know out of shear experience AA and AF on is a real fps-sucker, thats why i never had it on. OR its just plain simple, because i have a RADEON graphics card, and you Nvidia. doom 3 plays best on nvidia, then again HL2 plays best on Radeon.
__________________
![]() 'Because the finding of this, finds you incapacitorially finding and/or locating in your discovering the detecting of a way to save your dolly belle ol' what's her face.' - Captain Jack Sparrow |
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|