Author Topic: DX9 and AH2 (Read 554 times)

AKIron · « **on:** October 14, 2003, 03:57:18 PM »

We were discussing this the other night. It's my understanding that the NVidia 4000 series cards do not support DirectX9 (at least not dx9 specific features). It was pointed out to me however that in a recent interview hitech said it would require at least a GeForce 4000 series card to see many of the new graphic effects. My question, are these new effects dx8.1 or dx9?

Replicant · « **Reply #1 on:** October 14, 2003, 04:03:18 PM »

It will be dx8.1

Not many cards support dx9 at all, I think only the Radeon 9700, 9800, and the latest GeForce FX cards (5600, 5900) support it.

Roscoroo · « **Reply #2 on:** October 14, 2003, 04:31:43 PM »

Hitech said that most players will need a GF4 mx 64mb card to play ah2

not the ti4000 series ,,, its the 4000 series cards will support the higher graphics of the game.

Im shure my gf2 mx 400 64 mb video card will still be able to play ah2 . It still plays FA3, IL2, FB , generals, doa3, along with many other games .

bloom25 · « **Reply #3 on:** October 14, 2003, 04:44:54 PM »

Just for reference:

Cards that can accelerate Direct X 9 special features -
Radeon 9800, 9700, 9600, 9500 series.
GeForce FX 5950, 5900, 5800, 5600, 5200 series.

Direct X 8.1 -
GeForce 4 Titanium series
Radeon 8500, 9000, 9200 series

Direct X 8 -
GeForce 3 Titanium series (8.1? not entirely certain on this one)
Earlier Radeon cards

Direct X 7 -
GeForce 2 MX, GeForce 4 MX series.
(Note that the GeForce 4 MX series can NOT take advantage of Direct X 8 features.)

Skuzzy · « **Reply #4 on:** October 14, 2003, 08:20:39 PM »

bloom, nice list, but I would caution anyone about the 5200 series of FX cards. If any DX9 features are used, at all, it will bring that card to a crawl.
The card is not much faster than a GF2 Ultra.

Ike 2K# · « **Reply #5 on:** October 14, 2003, 08:34:41 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Roscoroo
Hitech said that most players will need a GF4 mx 64mb card to play ah2

Can it be also in PCI bus version? I only have PCI bus

Skuzzy · « **Reply #6 on:** October 14, 2003, 08:40:12 PM »

Best advice I can give is just to try AH2 and decide if your video card/CPU is enough.

AKIron · « **Reply #7 on:** October 14, 2003, 11:00:33 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Skuzzy
Best advice I can give is just to try AH2 and decide if your video card/CPU is enough.

Right Skuzzy but what card to buy if their's is not enough? Maybe we oughta have a beta thread specifically for everyone to give and get feedback on how their video card performs in AH2?

spud2u · « **Reply #8 on:** October 14, 2003, 11:41:34 PM »

skuzzy i beg to differ with you on the fx5200 and dx9.Ihave been using mine now for 3months with great results of 70 to 95 fps.

system:
amd 200xp
nvidiafx5200 (128mb)
256 ram

AKIron · « **Reply #9 on:** October 14, 2003, 11:48:10 PM »

Spud, there are no DX9 features in AH. Guess there will be in AH2. They will be selectable. Skuzzy was talking about the performance hit when you turn those on.

ALF · « **Reply #10 on:** October 14, 2003, 11:48:50 PM »

With the beta just starting tomarrow (wink)....It would be premature for anyone with a subpar videocard to runout an buy one now anyway. A few month from now the uber Radeon 9800 will be sub uber and $200 cheaper.

If you gota have one right now however, you can get a nice Nvidia ti4200/4600 for a song....and while it may not be th eultimate DX9 card....it will do for 90% of the gamers out there...and for very little scratch ($90-$160)....I dont know crap about the new high end FX line from nvida....I already own a leaf blower, so saw little need to add one to my computers.

Skuzzy · « **Reply #11 on:** October 15, 2003, 07:37:52 AM »

If you want a general recommendation for AH2, then for NVidia, I would say a GFTi4600 (I would avoid the FX line for right now), and for ATI, I would say the 9600Pro simply due to the bang for the buck factor.
However, the 9600Pro will soon be replaced with the 9600XT for the same price and it will run cooler, clock in at 500Mhz core, and simply be faster than the 9600Pro. They are scheduled to be in stores sometime in November.

Recommending a video card is pretty tricky. It all goes to the buyers habits and games they play. If you buy a video card every 6 months, then you can buy the middle of the road video card and be quite content.
If you buy once every couple of years, then you are into making a long term investment. This is more difficult. Now you have to look at the games you will play as they are getting more and more complex, and at a very rapid rate.

Oh, that 5200FX performance you are talking about is outclassed by a 3 year old ATI8500 card, in both speed and image quality. The 5200 is just not a product I could feel good about recommending to anyone. A GF4Ti4200 is much faster than the 5200 as well.

AKIron · « **Reply #12 on:** October 15, 2003, 08:14:07 AM »

Thanks Skuzzy. Can we assume then that the Ti4600 supports all of the directx calls in AH2?

MwXX · « **Reply #13 on:** October 15, 2003, 10:55:19 AM »

Running windows Xp now and a radeon ati 8500LE 128Mb...all up to date drivers ect

this lag is killing me...get close or into a furball and frames drop to 12 and so on...

anti virus, internet security all disabled, sound accel to 3/4

WTH?

Skuzzy · « **Reply #14 on:** October 15, 2003, 11:13:20 AM »

The 4600 is fine. We are using DX8.1 for AH2 right now.

Mw,..the 8500LE is a slower version of the 8500 and the 128MB version uses slower rams than the 64MB version. That particular model is not that great.

If you want to use AA (anti-aliasing) the 4600 is not a good deal. It really slows down to unplayable levels for most games when you try to use AA. If you are into AA, then ATI's 9500Pro or better is about the best there is right now.
The AA algorythm is superb and much better than the NVidia FX line right now. The FX line still uses the same AA solution as the Ti4x000 series does.