[QUOTE=ZekeTwo;26081281]If you're not an idiot and record the video to a hard drive that the game isn't running off of the frame rate hit is minimal.[/QUOTE]
This isn't always true, just saying.
I ran this game maxed out with my 5750 on DX 11. I got about 5 FPS but it looked so fucking sexy. So I played the game with 5 FPS. I honestly didn't care I took the over all looks before playability.
I love how it crawled down to 17 fps at one point
[QUOTE=Binladen34;26081491]I ran this game maxed out with my 5750 on DX 11. I got about 5 FPS but it looked so fucking sexy. So I played the game with 5 FPS. I honestly didn't care I took the over all looks before playability.[/QUOTE]
Damn, you must be the king of graphic whoring.
I run it on Very High with a firm 50+ FPS with my GTX 470...
[QUOTE=BlackDeath292;26081732]I run it on Very High with a firm 50+ FPS with my GTX 470...[/QUOTE]
Is it DX11 though?
It's a video camera so his FPS isn't affected. It's not that hard to realize.
[QUOTE=Mr.Cookie;26081530]Damn, you must be the king of graphic whoring.[/QUOTE]
Yep.
I don't think it looks good. But it's better than mine, so I can't complain. I get 15 fps with my ATI Radeon 4650, lol.
[QUOTE=starpluck;26082460]It's a video camera so his FPS isn't affected. It's not that hard to realize.[/QUOTE]
This.
[QUOTE=Doom14;26079629]Crysis didn't bring anything to it's knees. [b]My crappy computer could run it on beyond high at a stable framerate.[/b]
S.T.A.L.K.E.R. was and still is the ultimate computer killer.
I'm getting a lot of disagrees, but I'm just talking about my perspective. I could run Crysis on very-high, easy. It was an optimized game, just like the Unreal 3 engine.
S.T.A.L.K.E.R. was not. My computer chugged with the most basic of lighting settings. I was refering to computer killer by how much power it takes to run, not how pretty it looks. A little misconception on my behalf goes a long way in the negatives I see. And yes, I should've rephrased, it only was the computer killer at the time. Metro 2033 doesn't even work on mine because ATI pulled a dick move and moved over the X1900 series to legacy.[/QUOTE]
At 1280x1024.
on the topic, for me the game both runs and looks better under DX10 than it does under DX11.
runs better for obvious reasons
looks better because for some reason it looks like it renders at 1920x1080 and then stretches to 1920x1200, the geometry is fine though, but that's annoying.
[editline]15th November 2010[/editline]
[QUOTE=ghostofme;26087047]At 1280x1024.[/QUOTE]
Metro 2033 with DX9 is very doable, maybe he's playing at DX9 High
"Hey, what's everybody?"
Well, today I am a human.
[QUOTE=M_B;26087108]
Metro 2033 with DX9 is very doable, maybe he's playing at DX9 High[/QUOTE]
The post I was replying too was talking about Crysis.
But I agree with you, Metro 2033 can be ran well on mid-range rigs if you use DX9.
[QUOTE=BlackDeath292;26081732]I run it on Very High with a firm 50+ FPS with my GTX 470...[/QUOTE]
Not in DX11 you don't.
Also, I've been looking at new gfx card. My beloved 8800 GTX has "finally" given up after 3.5 years of heavy duty gaming. Surprised it lasted this long considering the 8800GTX was know to overheat and get fucked up. Luckily Norwegian law is so awesome, so I can send it back to the store and either they fix it, get me a new one or give me my money back. I doubt they'll fix it and they can't give me a new one seeing they don't have the 8800 series for sale any longer. So I'm hoping for money. I'll spend it on a GTX 580. I'll need a new PSU as well though, which is kinda sad seeing my current PSU is only about 6 months old. But I think it will be worth it. I've read a lot of tests about this card and benchmarks on different games and GTX 580 is always on the top of the lists over benchmarks, along with SLI and Crossfire with different other cards. So yeah... You won't get any better card than this atm. Not even ASUS ARES which was supposed to be so super awesome and costs twice as much as any other graphics card out on the market.
Metro ran quite well on my 4870 512mb, looked very impressive and was a fun game.
You know, he could use Fraps if he had a phenom 2 x6 in there and assigned Fraps 3 cores clocked at 3.2ghz
Metro 2033 ran great with my GTX 460 in DirectX 11 and High settings.
[QUOTE=starpluck;26082460]It's a video camera so his FPS isn't affected. It's not that hard to realize.[/QUOTE]
If his PC can run Metro 2033, maxed out with no issues, then he can run Fraps without a framerate hit what so ever alongside it
Hell Metro 2033 ran pretty damn good on my HD5750 with the settings jacked up
He is using fraps, why?
[QUOTE=Jiggmin;26096270]He is using fraps, why?[/QUOTE]
Because its the best program to keep track of your FPS.
[QUOTE=ghostofme;26087047]At 1280x1024.[/QUOTE]
More like 800x600.
Regardless it won't really show the true quality.
[QUOTE=MachiniOs;26099792]Regardless it won't really show the true quality.[/QUOTE]
Needs more gi tbh.
[QUOTE=Kab2tract;26079919]Sure, maybe because of how terribly optimized it is.[/QUOTE]
so you're confirming it is like the other guy said "ultimate computer killer"
[QUOTE=ZekeTwo;26081281]If you're not an idiot and record the video to a hard drive that the game isn't running off of the frame rate hit is minimal.[/QUOTE]
I had my fraps installed on my 1.5tb external drive and had the videos save there as well, and the game was installed on my internal drive. I still got my framerate destroyed, your statement is wrong.
[editline]17th November 2010[/editline]
[QUOTE=starpluck;26082460]It's a video camera so his FPS isn't affected. It's not that hard to realize.[/QUOTE]
still a dumb idea if people want to actually SEE what the game looks like.
That's not as good as I would expect for a single component that costs $500+
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
