Pages: 1 2
Before you speak, you may want to actually know what you're talking about.jihadarmadillo wrote:
How do you consider a gaming rig with an Opteron as high end? An opteron is a server CPU and was never intended for the gaming community.
Whoever advised you to waste your money on one needs his head examined.
Just my 3 cents
Last edited by jnick (2006-10-21 00:17:50)
This is why I hate all idiots.jnick wrote:
Before you speak, you may want to actually know what you're talking about.jihadarmadillo wrote:
How do you consider a gaming rig with an Opteron as high end? An opteron is a server CPU and was never intended for the gaming community.
Whoever advised you to waste your money on one needs his head examined.
Just my 3 cents
I think that it has something to do with your GPU drivers regognizing the game and making some weird optimizations. Worked in BF2 also!RGP_Rommel wrote:
Try this worked for me.
Specs are as follows
AMD Athlon 64 FX-60 Dual core @2.86ghz
DFI Lanparty nF4 SLI-DR
2 x EVGA 7900GTXs 512mb in SLI @650/1600
2GB OCZ gold DDR 500
2 x WD Raptors 74gig (Raid 0)
1 x Maxtor 300gig 7200rpm (Storage)
Thermaltake big Typhoon
Enermax 600W NoisetakerII PSU
Thermaltake W0099RU PurePower Power Express 250W Power Supply (for video cards only)
HP L2335 23" widescreen
1920x1200 (Tried running at 1600x1200, no change) 4x AA 16X AF all high settings, was only getting about 25-40 FPS a second.
Found out that I had to remane the bf2142.exe file to bf2.exe in the game folder. Don't ask me why it works but it did. Now I get about 70-100 FPS!
Not sure if it will only help if your running SLI. Give it a shot! It won't hurt anything!
Maybe you want to actually read what you reference before you reference it.joemah wrote:
*cough*cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:
OMFG, I cannot believe how ignorant people are, there is no difference in performance between opteron's and general AMD 64 cpu's... DO some research before you post.joemah wrote:
You have an opteron, designed for workstations/servers, not gaming.
Making Choices
As you can see, the Opteron processor is really designed for use in servers. What about workstations? If you're buying a single-processor workstation, should you buy one based on and Athlon 64 or the single-processor Opteron chip? My answer is that the amount of memory you need should determine your choice. The Athlon 64 can handle at most four 1GB SIMMs, while the Opteron can go to eight.
So if you need only a single processor and will not need to go beyond 4GB, the Athlon 64 will work well for you. For all other needs, especially if you anticipate needing more than one processor, the Opteron is your chip of choice.
The Source engine and the BF2/2142 engine are very very different beasts designed for very very different games.ShadowFoX wrote:
The BF2 engine is horribly unoptimized. It runs badly for its appearences. Source engine has better graphics and yet it runs a whole lot better. Dice and EA really didnt bother doing any optimizations therefore both engines run relatively badly.
Yes they did... they just added a lot more. All the models are higher poly, weather effects are in place, and most maps are loaded with static objects. Your computer would prob blow up if you did that on the BF2 engine.ShadowFoX wrote:
The BF2 engine is horribly unoptimized. It runs badly for its appearences. Source engine has better graphics and yet it runs a whole lot better. Dice and EA really didnt bother doing any optimizations therefore both engines run relatively badly.
Pages: 1 2