BF 2 sucks with the 9800 pro.
Can anyone help?
I have 640 MB SDRAM and a 1.99 GHz P4 processor.
Can anyone help?
I have 640 MB SDRAM and a 1.99 GHz P4 processor.
640 MB RAM ?
Increase your memory RAM to 1.5Gb.
You will notice the difference immediately.
Increase your memory RAM to 1.5Gb.
You will notice the difference immediately.
theres ur problem, only 640 mb of ram .
No, the P4 CPU will be holding you back. RAM is low, but that's not going to cause consistently low frame rates.
I'm running a 9800XT at 1600x1200, mostly medium settings. Minimum FPS is about 30, maximum around 85.
I'm running a 9800XT at 1600x1200, mostly medium settings. Minimum FPS is about 30, maximum around 85.
if its on high then it will be slow
what settings are you trying to run at?
Run low....get more ram.
Hey I know what this guy's problems are like... maybe not as bad since I have 1.5gigs of RAM goin' but I kind of have some issues with the ATI Rad 9800 PRO. I already know it's gonna be archaic soon but still, it should still hold some power up considering:
Following issues I have with it is that the graphics don't look as great as they should hold up, my computer'll often reset itself and start back up with an error message saying my video drive device isn't working or functioning properly when I've updated the thing to the most recent drivers it can house... I've had to tune down quite a bit of the settings in the game just to make it work and my viewing distance doesn't work at the 100% I've set it to, I get like... an 80-85% viewing distance and it sucks when I'm a gunner because I'm blamed not for shooting in time when in fact I can't SEE that far!
The damn game and EA itself, god bless them for making a wonderful game, but they cater to nVidia and those who can house some godawfully expensive rig that'll outdate itself in less than 2 year's time.
Following issues I have with it is that the graphics don't look as great as they should hold up, my computer'll often reset itself and start back up with an error message saying my video drive device isn't working or functioning properly when I've updated the thing to the most recent drivers it can house... I've had to tune down quite a bit of the settings in the game just to make it work and my viewing distance doesn't work at the 100% I've set it to, I get like... an 80-85% viewing distance and it sucks when I'm a gunner because I'm blamed not for shooting in time when in fact I can't SEE that far!
The damn game and EA itself, god bless them for making a wonderful game, but they cater to nVidia and those who can house some godawfully expensive rig that'll outdate itself in less than 2 year's time.
Last edited by Aardcore (2006-05-16 20:34:10)
640 mb ram? Thats an odd number to have. Boost that baby up to a gig + and it should run better. Try lowering video settings etc. I have a Radeon X700 Pro that works great, so i couldnt tell ya what is up.
Although it's still going to suck even if you upgrade the proc and not RAM.
So fars I can tell, it's both. RAM and CPU are choking your system, and the lack of data to the videocard is causing that bad framerate.
Upgrade CPU, RAM and possibly motherboard.
So fars I can tell, it's both. RAM and CPU are choking your system, and the lack of data to the videocard is causing that bad framerate.
Upgrade CPU, RAM and possibly motherboard.
I cannot really support the claim that the R9800 Pro is incapable of handling BF2. I've put that R9800 Pro through both BF2 demo and retail. The demo run was done on my older gaming rig revision with an AthlonXP 2100+ and 1GB of RAM. The loadup time was lengthy but it still ran nonetheless. In fact, at medium settings and 1024x768 resolution throughout, it was able to handle the graphics fairly well.
Your likely problem stems from either RAM, the processor, or both. Which one is the real culprit, you'll have to find out. In the end, you're likely going to end up spending some extra cash just to get a better playing experience out of it. Otherwise, your only other option, without spending that is, is to lower everything down to the lowest details at the lowest supported resolution but retain the maximum viewing distance possible. From there, you may eventually get something close to decent framerate. If you got the time, tweak the settings bit by bit and determine what setting is the best balance between detail and framerate.
Your likely problem stems from either RAM, the processor, or both. Which one is the real culprit, you'll have to find out. In the end, you're likely going to end up spending some extra cash just to get a better playing experience out of it. Otherwise, your only other option, without spending that is, is to lower everything down to the lowest details at the lowest supported resolution but retain the maximum viewing distance possible. From there, you may eventually get something close to decent framerate. If you got the time, tweak the settings bit by bit and determine what setting is the best balance between detail and framerate.
So is it 256+256+128, or 512+128? =640
Anyway, a BIG problem is SDRAM, because it clocks at 133Mhz. DDR does 333/400/500 etc. Combine this with Dual channel technology, and you'll be up to 800/1000, even 1600/2000, with a HyperTransport capable processor (AMD ftw)
Adding SDRAM (which is ridiculously expensive) may help a bit, but won't solve your problem far. The fact that your RAM is only capable of taking in and pushing out data at 133 is THE problem.
I'm afraid.. that you will have to consider a MB change..
Anyway, a BIG problem is SDRAM, because it clocks at 133Mhz. DDR does 333/400/500 etc. Combine this with Dual channel technology, and you'll be up to 800/1000, even 1600/2000, with a HyperTransport capable processor (AMD ftw)
Adding SDRAM (which is ridiculously expensive) may help a bit, but won't solve your problem far. The fact that your RAM is only capable of taking in and pushing out data at 133 is THE problem.
I'm afraid.. that you will have to consider a MB change..
Last edited by DonFck (2006-05-16 23:44:35)
I need around tree fiddy.
Follow the leaderDonFck wrote:
So is it 256+256+128, or 512+128? =640
Anyway, a BIG problem is SDRAM, because it clocks at 133Mhz. DDR does 333/400/500 etc. Combine this with Dual channel technology, and you'll be up to 800/1000, even 1600/2000, with a HyperTransport capable processor (AMD ftw)
Adding SDRAM (which is ridiculously expensive) may help a bit, but won't solve your problem far. The fact that your RAM is only capable of taking in and pushing out data at 133 is THE problem.
I'm afraid.. that you will have to consider a MB change..
I've got a ATI Radeon 9800XT with 512 mb ram, running everything on Medium and some things off, view 100%
I've got a Radeon 9800 pro 128 with a 3.0 P4 HT and 1gig RAM. I run on medium (The Default) pretty well. Although isn't the minimum (or maybe its the recommended) requirements for BF2 a 1.8 ghz processor? Yours would be just above that, just above the 512 min. RAM req and just above the 128meg Graphics card req. (Radeon 9200 and above I believe). So its not just your card, across the board you're right at the boarderline of minimum req's.
That being said I bought my 9800 brand new when it was the best you could get in a new Dell (summer 2003) and maybe it is starting to show its age...a little. Maybe.
If you're going to go for an all out motherboard transplant don't forget to include a PCI express slot! You don't want this problem twice!
That being said I bought my 9800 brand new when it was the best you could get in a new Dell (summer 2003) and maybe it is starting to show its age...a little. Maybe.
If you're going to go for an all out motherboard transplant don't forget to include a PCI express slot! You don't want this problem twice!
It's not the AGP, it's the SDRAM. (Or at least I'm strongly of that opinion)Presul wrote:
I've got a Radeon 9800 pro 128 with a 3.0 P4 HT and 1gig RAM. I run on medium (The Default) pretty well. Although isn't the minimum (or maybe its the recommended) requirements for BF2 a 1.8 ghz processor? Yours would be just above that, just above the 512 min. RAM req and just above the 128meg Graphics card req. (Radeon 9200 and above I believe). So its not just your card, across the board you're right at the boarderline of minimum req's.
That being said I bought my 9800 brand new when it was the best you could get in a new Dell (summer 2003) and maybe it is starting to show its age...a little. Maybe.
If you're going to go for an all out motherboard transplant don't forget to include a PCI express slot! You don't want this problem twice!
A 9800 pro, eventhough it's an AGP card, kicks the s**t out of my X550GE 256, which is Pci-E, And I'm running the game fine on all medium (except for effects on low, I think), 1280x768, draw distance 100%.
Last edited by DonFck (2006-05-17 14:18:08)
I need around tree fiddy.
Ahh, well np battlefield runs fine... i have a ATI Radeon 9800 Pro and 512MB ram...
my stats i got with this: http://www.bf2s.com/player/57744760/
*i have everything just on low*
my stats i got with this: http://www.bf2s.com/player/57744760/
*i have everything just on low*
Last edited by ][v][artini (2006-05-17 14:18:09)
Radeon pro owns. I would definitely say to upgrade your RAM though. I have about the same system as you. 1.8 Ghz processor, 9800 Pro 128 MB, but I have 1.5 GB DDR RAM.
I have 4 settings on high, 4 on medium, draw distance at 100%, and resolution at 1152 x 868. Not too shabby.
My frames are always reasonably on high, SOMETIMES on Kubra dam I drop below 30 FPS but it's rare, and its not too big a deal.
I have 4 settings on high, 4 on medium, draw distance at 100%, and resolution at 1152 x 868. Not too shabby.
My frames are always reasonably on high, SOMETIMES on Kubra dam I drop below 30 FPS but it's rare, and its not too big a deal.
yay theres still hope.
well, i run it on 800x600 60Ghz
Anyhting higher, it lags alot.
All settings low as well.
well, i run it on 800x600 60Ghz
Anyhting higher, it lags alot.
All settings low as well.
This absolutely sucks!!! I have an ATI Radeon 9800 SE AGP with 256 MB and I have a GIG of RAM and 2 GHz Processor but the stupid thing still crashes even if I have the video settings all on low. I've tried all the different drivers, does anyone know any way that I can stop this stupid computer crashin once I have played like 10 mins of BF2???
Does the pc crash or just the game??t-rex wrote:
This absolutely sucks!!! I have an ATI Radeon 9800 SE AGP with 256 MB and I have a GIG of RAM and 2 GHz Processor but the stupid thing still crashes even if I have the video settings all on low. I've tried all the different drivers, does anyone know any way that I can stop this stupid computer crashin once I have played like 10 mins of BF2???
My bf2 used to constantly crash after a few minutes, but I read somewhere about starforce (a copy protection program - not used by EA btw) and since I removed the shitty software I have had no crashes.
Oh and get a 7900gt gfx all high 4xAA min fps 60 but only when there is all hell breakin lose on the screen
Try this link - http://www.glop.org/starforce/detect.php
Last edited by Eggbert70 (2006-05-22 04:50:53)
get a new pc. i wouldnt spend my money on an old system
Its the actual PC that crashes and I only bought this PC like last year, it was suppose to be really good but on BF2 the damn thing jus crashes, I've never even heard of starforce so I duno wher i would find that on my computer coz it aint on there.
could be windows, but if its hardware based, more ram would defitnantly help. if ur ram is SD ram, dont bother upgrade. ddr ram, dont bother as well, get a new system w/ ddr2, save up. ddr ram is ok lah... but 2X512mb helps
Your problem is the processor, which looks to be either a Northwood A or a sneakily advertised celeron. No matter how much you up your RAM, BF2 is still going to run horribly on your machine. Best advice would be to just shell out for an entry-level Socket 939 AGP board and an A64 +3200, and just getting a gig of cheap value DDR RAM if your budget is limited.
make that 2 gigs of value ddr ram