Performance

A forum for computer hardware and software issues
Post Reply
Chan
Villun
Villun
User avatar
Posts: 46
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 2:11 am
Blizzard tag: Caelnyn#1343

Games Played

Ville Awards

Caelnyn’s avatar
Loading…

Performance

Post by Chan » Tue Oct 30, 2007 3:35 am

Odd thing happens to me. No matter what screen resolution I set my video settings to in HL1 or Source, I get the same framerate, sometimes even when I set all details to max. Sorce however is always running at about 10 -15 fps which is far from playable. I'm just trying to figure out what might cause this weird situation.

Specs:
2.4 Celeron
768 Megs of Ram
7200 Speed HD
ATI Radeon 9600 SE
Vista (debating on downgrading to 2k maybe, runs about the same on XP as well)
Wifi Connection
<TVB>Chan

Hamese
Retired Admin
Retired Admin
Posts: 2648
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2006 5:06 pm
Location: Houston, TX
Contact:

Games Played

Ville Awards

=USV= Hamese’s avatar
Loading…

Post by Hamese » Tue Oct 30, 2007 7:42 am

Can you test with a static connection as opposed to the Wifi? I have played on my wireless and get playable rates, but when I use a LAN line it is better and a little more stable. I only get about 30 fps anyway, so my wifi connection was probably around 20.

Tickles
Villun
Villun
User avatar
Posts: 1257
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2006 6:42 pm

Games Played

Ville Awards

Re: Performance

Post by Tickles » Tue Oct 30, 2007 7:57 am

Think it's more along of the lines of his 2.4 Celeron and the ram.. I was on a 2.8 & 768 ram and I was getting no more then 20 fps on cable connection in Source, that was with config tweaks to lower graphics etc... Now I'm on a Dual core processor over 1gig ram and never drop below 40 fps.

1+gig of ram may help you some, but I'm thinking it's also your 2.4 celeron thats bottlenecking you.

DeafOfficeWorker
Retired Admin
Retired Admin
User avatar
Posts: 7903
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 3:39 pm

Ville Awards

Pootleshooter’s avatar
Loading…

Re: Performance

Post by DeafOfficeWorker » Tue Oct 30, 2007 8:22 am

More RAM and a better video card.
[img]http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s68/pootleshooter/kpsdow.gif[/img]

Hamese
Retired Admin
Retired Admin
Posts: 2648
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2006 5:06 pm
Location: Houston, TX
Contact:

Games Played

Ville Awards

=USV= Hamese’s avatar
Loading…

Re: Performance

Post by Hamese » Tue Oct 30, 2007 9:14 am

[quote="Tickles";p="48278"]Think it's more along of the lines of his 2.4 Celeron and the ram.. I was on a 2.8 & 768 ram and I was getting no more then 20 fps on cable connection in Source, that was with config tweaks to lower graphics etc... Now I'm on a Dual core processor over 1gig ram and never drop below 40 fps.

1+gig of ram may help you some, but I'm thinking it's also your 2.4 celeron thats bottlenecking you.[/quote]

I'd agree with the Processor too. As far as RAM, if your machine isn't using it then more RAM will not give you anything noticeable. However, since you have Vista your machine might be maxing out 768Mb. My work machine has XP and without Steam loaded and being in a game I use a little over 600, so make sure your machine isn't having to use the pagefile as that = slooowwwww

l3eeron
Retired Admin
Retired Admin
Posts: 9999
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:51 am
Location: The surface of last scattering

Games Played

Ville Awards

Post by l3eeron » Tue Oct 30, 2007 10:05 am

You can never have enough horsepower...

All the ram in the world wont help unless you have a good processor tho. CPU is more important, but harder to upgrade.

A more stout video card would get you going...

The ATI 9600 se is a little sub-par for source, something like this will suit your needs ALOT better

Radeon X1650 AGP 8X 512mb GDDR3 (pretty good for $85.00!)
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications ... CatId=2234

Chan
Villun
Villun
User avatar
Posts: 46
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 2:11 am
Blizzard tag: Caelnyn#1343

Games Played

Ville Awards

Caelnyn’s avatar
Loading…

Post by Chan » Tue Oct 30, 2007 2:27 pm

Hmm Thanks for your guys help, Imma try to borrow someones pentium 4 that is 2.4 ghz, I know that would run more better for games, since celeron is the budget model. I never run anything other then steam if I am running steam as well, so the memory issue isn't as big, but yes, a 1 gig would be nice. Right now my Vista Computer score is 3.1 with my processor being the 3.1 and the 'Gaming Graphics' being a 3.2 So thanks for your sugestions and all.

BTW I had a simular problem to this before, but it turned out that all the cooling gel from my procesor to heat sink flaked off or with repeated rebuilding it more or less was non exsistant. My computer still ran, but very slow. When I bought a tube of the gel, my performance went up like crazy and could play my games again.


Holiday season is around the corner, so maybe I can do something with that. Thanks and here's hoping to seeing you all in TV's TF2 server's soon!
<TVB>Chan

sgt stutter
Server Ops
Server Ops
User avatar
Posts: 7243
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 3:47 pm
Location: May as well be Canada

Games Played

Ville Awards

Post by sgt stutter » Tue Oct 30, 2007 6:24 pm

As Hamese stated, using Vista will suck up all your memory, you should have a min. of 1gig when using Vista.
Image
RIP-Trigger
RIP-Blue
RIP-Stevo

Clay Pigeon
Retired Admin
Retired Admin
User avatar
Posts: 4811
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 12:45 pm
Location: Michigan

Games Played

Ville Awards

Clay’s avatar
Loading…

Re: Performance

Post by Clay Pigeon » Tue Oct 30, 2007 6:50 pm

If I were you I would wipe your OS partition and install xp...
"No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever. There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom. Against that power tyrants and dictators cannot stand." - The prophet G'Kar

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests