Comments on: Half Life 2 review in PC Gamer (and Vampire: Bloodlines)

By: Shr3dd3r

Shr3dd3r — Tue, 11 Jan 2005 17:31:22 +0000

Hi i have got geforce 5700ultra with ddr2 a gig of ram and a 3.2 athlon xp my card does bottle neck but i get 85fps on 1024×768

By: kok

kok — Sat, 25 Dec 2004 22:53:23 +0000

hi i got a g4orce mx with 64 mb. i got the demo for hl2. And it works fine but some pauses. I an wondering if i should get anew card for the full game.

By: Datademon

Datademon — Mon, 22 Nov 2004 02:20:01 +0000

I have Geforce 6800GT
Athlon 64 4000+ @ 2800Mhz
1GB Crucial Ballistix
2 X Hitachi 7200 160gb in raid 0 (applications)
1 X Hitachi 80GB for OS (XP/Gentoo)

Video stress test 119fps
Does this well? not really. Ive played the game 1/2 the way though and i get annoying pauses, when the game loads things AFTER the loading is done, these pasues last about a second or two. This also happens with 4 different versions of the graphics driver.

Also during intensive scenes the fps goes from
130ish to 20. So sometimes this game does not run smooth.

I use 1280X1024, max settings, 4X AS, AA off.

I also get wierd memory exception messages from time to time. (My memory tests fine and the pc does 3dmark 2003 loops for several hours).

Im also not overclocking the graphics card it gives very little fps gain.

CS source runs smooth as silk though.

I have also tested a 9800 pro card with only 128 mem,
and it runs out of graphics memory at those settings, at least the HL2 console says so.

However running it a medium textues and reflections set the simple it runs very smooth, better than my 6800GT in fact!, the low end fps is better and that is noticable.

This game is biased heavily towards ATI cards, so keep that in mind if you are upgrading .

I reccomend, 1GB mem, 9800 Pro, 2400Mhz+ p4 / althon.

So yes the specifcation is heavy, and i was disappointed not being able to do 1600X1200 at 2 X AA on my system.

Most likely a ATI X800 PE could do that with ease.

By: Cyril

Cyril — Tue, 16 Nov 2004 15:42:43 +0000

I went to purchase HL2 this morning and got a swift kick in the FJ. I have a high speed internet connection at work but nothing at home. Saleman said I cant play W/O a connection (!@#$%^&*)

Did not someone think of people like me when they designed the game? I understand you have to combat gaming piracy but what about people who dont have the Net? What do we do???

By: Finky

Finky — Fri, 12 Nov 2004 10:21:28 +0000

I am looking forward to playing it on the move in my Dell 9100 laptop. 3.2Gig Prescott, 1Gig DDR 3200, 256Mb Mobility Radeon 9800 (X800 core!). Great for lanpartys!

By: scurvy

scurvy — Thu, 11 Nov 2004 10:06:25 +0000

Hey i got 3 gig prescott, 1 gig ram, 9800 pro, audigy 2.
think i’ll have a prob with hl2?
;)

By: Tim

Tim — Wed, 10 Nov 2004 06:15:25 +0000

HL 2 better work fine as i just spent a HUGE amount on my new baby, got a FX53 /2 gig of high end ddr ram /radeon 9800 xt 256mb ddr- i am running everything i play on 1600 x 1200 with everything full blast and it runs fantastic! (even doom)- am looking at the new cards already though as they just kick butt over the best of the “old” cards- which are about 3 months old mind!

By: Little-Burrito

Little-Burrito — Tue, 02 Nov 2004 11:53:22 +0000

Video stresstest was running at about 87 FPS for me at 1024×768 resolution with all settings to maximum.
This was with Intel Pentium 4 Processor with 2600 Mhz, 2x256mb ddr sdram, GeForce 6800 GT 256 GDDR3.
The physics in the wood and in explosions though… man… it actually freezes for a little while there.
I mean if I’m in a room with like 25 things including wood and I throw an HE-Grenade.

By: Bertis

Bertis — Tue, 02 Nov 2004 07:46:07 +0000

CS:Source was made to run better than Half-Life 2. If you get 45fps in CS, dont expect to get 45 in HL2. The textures are not as detailed and there are much fewer interactive objects in CS:Source.

By: Jeebs

Jeebs — Mon, 01 Nov 2004 16:36:56 +0000

athlon 2 ghz radeon 9600 non pro on 1024 x 768 medium to high settings and I ran the stress test at 55fps. cs:source runs at 60fps lowest it will get in a big fire fight is 30.

By: Mick

Mick — Sat, 30 Oct 2004 23:38:02 +0000

Oh yeah, and I’m running it at 1024×768. Looks and plays great on my 19″

By: Mick

Mick — Sat, 30 Oct 2004 23:36:04 +0000

My PC is a mid-range system: 2.53 Ghz P4, 512MB of RDRAM, 9600 non-pro vid card.

Still, when I play CS Source, my FPS are in the mid 30s, which is perfectly playable for me. Often it’ll jump up into the 40s and 50s. This is with the vid settings on medium, and with the AA maxed out (at 6x)!

Thus, Source really seems to run well on older machines. When even a 9600 non-pro can run it with ease, you know you’ve got a versatile engine. Good job, Valve! :)

By: Alex

Alex — Thu, 28 Oct 2004 23:03:03 +0000

I have an 1.2ghz duron with 768ram and a radeon
9600 256mb and CS : source runs perfectly at about 40fps, maybe im just lucky :)

By: nick

nick — Mon, 18 Oct 2004 22:21:09 +0000

I run a 9600 Pro with 128mb memory and a 2.6 GHz HT Intel and 512 MB RAM. I run the game at 800*600 at default settings. (Whichever Valve thinks is right for your card) I belive everything is pretty much set to “medium” quality. CS:S runs from 45+ FPS on average, but in a heavy firefight things get sticky at 10-15 FPS.

So honestly, you could probably play the game. But certain key events may be a bit unjoyable due to the choppyness of the game.

(Anyways, besides you can find a 9800 XT card for aroudn $200)

I paid $130 for my 9600 Pro about 6 months ago or so and now I see it for anywhere from 70-100.

By: danbee

danbee — Mon, 18 Oct 2004 09:21:51 +0000

I’m running CS:Source on my Athlon XP 2600+ and Radeon 9600 quite happily with all the detail turned up (at 800×600 mind). I get about 45fps in the video stress test.

Another chap in my house is running it on a GeForce 2 MX (!) and although it doesn’t look nearly as pretty it still runs well enough to be playable.