[adamvjackson]

P4 2.26GHz (533MHz bus)
768MB DDR 2100 RAM
Geforce4 ti4400 128MB

Doom 3 runs OK at 800x600 with medium details, unsure of the FPS, but doubt it goes over 40.

What a truely amazing game. What I **REALLY** look forward to is how this game will run in 1-2 years. Think about how Quake 3 ran at launch vs on today's systems to get an idea of what I mean.

<3 (that's a heart) for id software!

[jmmijo]

Since payday is tomorrow for me I will not know until then. I'm hoping my P4-3.0c with Radeon X800 Pro and 1GB of ram will work with Ultra-High mode

I'm thinking however that I may want to do a nice comparison between my current CRT and when I pick up my 19 flat panel

[Brian Frank]

Athlon XP 2400+, 512MB PC2700, Radeon 9600XT. I'm doing 1024x768 with low detail settings, and it runs pretty good. If I get alot of action going on at the same time, things start to get a little choppy, but otherwise it's great.

I have to quit every so often, because it's just that creepy. It's like the Alien vids, but you're in ripley's shoes and your fighting demons not extraterrestrials. Zombies are a welcome sight actually, since they're easy to deal with.

[thatsteveguy]

well mine is running between 40 and 60. and no one will get higher then 60 because the game is capped at 60FPS. I'm running it on a P43.0E with one gig of 2700DDR (have to upgrade that to 3200 SOON) and an ATI x800 Pro.


S

[thatsteveguy]

I have seen it shoot past 60 but only before the game acutally starts. I have my FPS displayed using the Con_showfps 1 command from the console. but when I am in the game even if I stand in a corner like you say 60 is the max. Even the multiplayer is locked. They did this on purpose to avoid texture tearing etc and to ensure an even gameplay etc across various video cards.
I have to admit I kind of like the idea.Helps to concentrate on content and gameplay instead of FPS battles...

S

[pmistry]

I will be picking up the game today, wasn't available in Canada until Augst 5 or 6 in stores anyways. I have a:

P4-2.4c / 1 GB DDR400 / Radeon 9800 PRO / SB Audigy 2

I am looking forward to see how this things run on it.

[clutch]

While an old article, this is what has been going around the 'net:

http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2003Oct/bga20031024022368.htm

[pmistry]

Installed the game and it runs fine, not sure about FPS but it seems smooth enough at 1024 at High and is fine at 800, apparently ATI has beta 4.9 Catalyst drivers out to help improve performance on Doom 3, http://www.ati.com/support/infobase/4547.html

Give it a whirl.

[pmistry]

It does seem odd since ID has always favored V-Syncing off as opposed to Epic which Tim Sweeney said himself, why bother disabling the V-Sync, it just causes tearing. But I don't know why Doom 3 is capped at 60?????????

[meth_style]

i just brought doom and to my dismay it does not want to work on my computer, i keeps taking back to windows after i select game difficulty and it starts to load into the game then sends me to window, what do i do.

my system is a pentium 2.8 ghz multi threading, 1 gig of ram, 120 gig hard drive, gigabyte radeon 9600 pro video card with 128mb ddr and a audrigy 2 soundcard

sorry for the spelling , any help would be great, my running system is xp pro

meth_style@hotmail.com

[DosFreak]

What ver are you drivers? Try at least the v4.7 drivers and if you can the v4.9 for best performance.

[Phalanx-Imawano]

I haven't done any actual benchmarking yet, but it's quite slow even at the lowest settings on my PC (in fact it's unplayable at 800x600). PC Specs:

Intel Pentium4 Northwood 2.0GHz (400MHz bus)
ASUS P4PE-X/TE motherboard w/ i845 chipset
512MB DDR RAM
GeForce FX 5600 w/ 256MB VRAM

Which component is the weakest link here? (i.e. must be upgraded first for noticable improvement)

[Jinnxx3]

Plus for those of you who are interested in knowing how many FPS you are getting in DOOM and your other games, you can download FRAPS from www.fraps.com. It is a really tiny app that displays your FPS while you play your games as a tiny number at the top right hand corner of your screen.

You can configure it to display the realtime fps or an average of your frames per second, where you want it to display, the colour, the opacity, and so forth. You start FRAPS before you start the game you are going to run.

[thatsteveguy]

Originally posted by jinnxx3:

Quote:

Plus for those of you who are interested in knowing how many FPS you are getting in DOOM and your other games, you can download FRAPS from www.fraps.com. It is a really tiny app that displays your FPS while you play your games as a tiny number at the top right hand corner of your screen.

You can configure it to display the realtime fps or an average of your frames per second, where you want it to display, the colour, the opacity, and so forth. You start FRAPS before you start the game you are going to run.

Instead of installing a another program to get your FPS just open the console and type con_showfps 1 and change the 1 to a 0 if you want to take it off.
to open the console just press ctr shift ~

that to me is much better then installing a program when the one you are running is quite capable of displaying that info.

S

[pmistry]

Originally posted by Phalanx-Imawano:

Quote:

I haven't done any actual benchmarking yet, but it's quite slow even at the lowest settings on my PC (in fact it's unplayable at 800x600). PC Specs:

Intel Pentium4 Northwood 2.0GHz (400MHz bus)
ASUS P4PE-X/TE motherboard w/ i845 chipset
512MB DDR RAM
GeForce FX 5600 w/ 256MB VRAM

Which component is the weakest link here? (i.e. must be upgraded first for noticable improvement)

I think its a combination of things thats slowing you down, the 400 MHz bus is a bottleneck compared to 533 or the 800 ones. The i845 chipset is not optimized for high speed memory modules, I thought DDR333 was tops for that, and I am not sure about Dual Channel support. The graphics card is low end, the 5700 was what the 5600 should have been.

If you wanted 1 upgrade part, then get a new CPU, P4-3GHz+ with Hyperthreading with an 800 bus, I am sure your board supports it. Check ASUS's website.

If you can swing it, a modest CPU upgrade like a P4-2.8/800 with a Geforce FX 5900 or Radeon 9800 Pro could also work, prices for these cards is falling fast. But you would wind up upgrading other stuff later on like a new memory to take advantage of the increased processor speed. Also try defragging your hard disk, and I am not sure what kind of HDD you are running but 7200 RPM helps, compared to 5400 RPM drives.

Good luck.

[Phalanx-Imawano]

Originally posted by pmistry:

Quote:

Originally posted by Phalanx-Imawano:

Quote:

I haven't done any actual benchmarking yet, but it's quite slow even at the lowest settings on my PC (in fact it's unplayable at 800x600). PC Specs:

Intel Pentium4 Northwood 2.0GHz (400MHz bus)
ASUS P4PE-X/TE motherboard w/ i845 chipset
512MB DDR RAM
GeForce FX 5600 w/ 256MB VRAM

Which component is the weakest link here? (i.e. must be upgraded first for noticable improvement)

I think its a combination of things thats slowing you down, the 400 MHz bus is a bottleneck compared to 533 or the 800 ones. The i845 chipset is not optimized for high speed memory modules, I thought DDR333 was tops for that, and I am not sure about Dual Channel support. The graphics card is low end, the 5700 was what the 5600 should have been.

If you wanted 1 upgrade part, then get a new CPU, P4-3GHz+ with Hyperthreading with an 800 bus, I am sure your board supports it. Check ASUS's website.

If you can swing it, a modest CPU upgrade like a P4-2.8/800 with a Geforce FX 5900 or Radeon 9800 Pro could also work, prices for these cards is falling fast. But you would wind up upgrading other stuff later on like a new memory to take advantage of the increased processor speed. Also try defragging your hard disk, and I am not sure what kind of HDD you are running but 7200 RPM helps, compared to 5400 RPM drives.

Good luck.

Well I'll have to go with the CPU first since I'm tight on budget - a GeForce card above FX 5600 costs well over $200 around my locality (and that's also the minimum price of a Pentium4C CPU). I'd have to wait until Christmas when I receive my bonus before making a big splurge for a full upgrade (i.e. Mobo+Vidcard). By the way my hard disk (where the game is installed) is a Seagate Barracuda 7200RPM 120GB.

[DosFreak]

I don't believe a processor upgrade will do much for him.

I have been using an XP 2800+ 2.2ghz since September 2002 with 1gb of DDR333. This has been more than enough processor. Even enough for Doom 3.

As you can seem from the benchmarks below an upgrade from a 9700 to an X800 pro will provide a significant increase in FPS. You can also see that I am topped out on my processor. Since PCI express is still too new (and therefore buggy). I would like to upgrade to Athlon 64 but the minimal increase in speed vs the $$$$ investment, it would just be a waste. So I'll likely upgrade the other components in my system such as my WD 120GB PATA HD's to Raptor SATA HD's and such until a suitable enthusiast PCI express mobo comes out or until Athlon 64 chips decrease a bit more in price.


Doom 3 demo1
9700 x8Pro X8Pro/16pipes
320X240 =41.9 52.9 52.9
400x300 =41.8 52.9 52.9
512x384 =41.8 52.9 52.9
640x480 =41.8 52.9 52.9
800x600 =39.5 52.9 52.9
1024x768 =32.9 52.2 52.9
1152x864 =28.9 50.0 51.2
1280x1024=23.7 45.1 48.9
1600x1200=14.4 36.8 41.7

I'm currently in the process of overclocking the x800 to find the sweet spot. Currently my core I can barely overclock due to voltages, but the memory can be overclocked significantly. Currently have the Core @ 475 and Memory @ 560. Which only gives me a boost of 4+ fps in Doom 3 @ 1600X1200 but over 10+ fps in 2048X1536 in Quake 3 for a grand total of 202fps! :drool:


Also if you've been reading the many reviews on Doom 3 on the net stating that if you don't have an x800 or 6800 that the Doom 3 experience will be good then well....they obviously don't know what "good" means. I will admit that Doom 3 ran great @ 1024X768 on High Quality with my 9700.....but it runs as it SHOULD BE RUN @ 1600X1200 on my X800 Pro. If you run this game any lower than 1024X768 High Quality then you should quit the game and upgrade your hardware NOW. This is not the game where you want to lower the settings, it will ruin the experience. Right now I am cursing myself for having played 3/4 of the game with my 9700 and loving that I have 1/4 left of the game with my X800.

[Phalanx-Imawano]

Originally posted by dosfreak:

Quote:

I don't believe a processor upgrade will do much for him.

I have been using an XP 2800+ 2.2ghz since September 2002 with 1gb of DDR333. This has been more than enough processor. Even enough for Doom 3.

As you can seem from the benchmarks below an upgrade from a 9700 to an X800 pro will provide a significant increase in FPS. You can also see that I am topped out on my processor. Since PCI express is still too new (and therefore buggy). I would like to upgrade to Athlon 64 but the minimal increase in speed vs the $$$$ investment, it would just be a waste. So I'll likely upgrade the other components in my system such as my WD 120GB PATA HD's to Raptor SATA HD's and such until a suitable enthusiast PCI express mobo comes out or until Athlon 64 chips decrease a bit more in price.


Doom 3 demo1
9700 x8Pro X8Pro/16pipes
320X240 =41.9 52.9 52.9
400x300 =41.8 52.9 52.9
512x384 =41.8 52.9 52.9
640x480 =41.8 52.9 52.9
800x600 =39.5 52.9 52.9
1024x768 =32.9 52.2 52.9
1152x864 =28.9 50.0 51.2
1280x1024=23.7 45.1 48.9
1600x1200=14.4 36.8 41.7

I'm currently in the process of overclocking the x800 to find the sweet spot. Currently my core I can barely overclock due to voltages, but the memory can be overclocked significantly. Currently have the Core @ 475 and Memory @ 560. Which only gives me a boost of 4+ fps in Doom 3 @ 1600X1200 but over 10+ fps in 2048X1536 in Quake 3 for a grand total of 202fps! :drool:


Also if you've been reading the many reviews on Doom 3 on the net stating that if you don't have an x800 or 6800 that the Doom 3 experience will be good then well....they obviously don't know what "good" means. I will admit that Doom 3 ran great @ 1024X768 on High Quality with my 9700.....but it runs as it SHOULD BE RUN @ 1600X1200 on my X800 Pro. If you run this game any lower than 1024X768 High Quality then you should quit the game and upgrade your hardware NOW. This is not the game where you want to lower the settings, it will ruin the experience. Right now I am cursing myself for having played 3/4 of the game with my 9700 and loving that I have 1/4 left of the game with my X800.

In other words, I shouldn't even consider playing Doom3 until I practically get a new PC? That also means I'll have to wait till Christmas (I as stated earlier - I'll have to wait for my Christmas Bonus before getting the money to buy all that hardware).

Or perhaps I should consider an even more economical alternative by waiting for the XBox version of Doom3? (I have an XBox, and what surprises me is that the XBox versions of some games like Need for Speed Underground actually run at good framerates while looking like their PC versions at max detail, but such PC versions would run very slowly on my PC unless I tone it down).

[DosFreak]

That's a choice that you'll have to make for yourself. (of course!) But I think any Doom fan would consider running Doom on an XBox sacrilege. I am unsure of what the quality settings on the XBOX would be. Anyone remember how much memory the XBOX has?

Doom 3

ULTRA Quality=512mb video card
HIGH= 256mb
Medium= 128
LOW=64mb


Also consider that Deus Ex, Thief 3 on XBOX ran very slowly (no doubt due to the ports being optimized more for the PC). Also I'm wondering if Doom 3 on XBOX will have AA turned on? If so then the image quality would have to be reduced even more so to provide acceptable framerates.

Of course the only way to know for sure is to wait for it to come out and see for yourself.

Consider: The three biggest engines for the next 3-4 years will be the Unreal engine (Which won't have another major revision for another 2+ years, The Doom 3 engine (which probably won't have another revision for 5+ years) and the Half-Life 2 engine for probably won't have another revision for 5+ years).

These engines should run just fine on 2+ Ghz processors and X800, 6800 video cards for the next couple of years.


The only problem with buying an X800, 6800 nowadays is AGP vs PCI. There is no difference in speed but the newer mobos will not have AGP support. (VIA may have an AGP/PCI-E mobo). I believe this won't be a problem since as I stated above 2+ ghz processors and X800/6800 video cards should be good.

[Phalanx-Imawano]

Originally posted by dosfreak:

Quote:

That's a choice that you'll have to make for yourself. (of course!) But I think any Doom fan would consider running Doom on an XBox sacrilege. I am unsure of what the quality settings on the XBOX would be. Anyone remember how much memory the XBOX has?

Doom 3

ULTRA Quality=512mb video card
HIGH= 256mb
Medium= 128
LOW=64mb


Also consider that Deus Ex, Thief 3 on XBOX ran very slowly (no doubt due to the ports being optimized more for the PC). Also I'm wondering if Doom 3 on XBOX will have AA turned on? If so then the image quality would have to be reduced even more so to provide acceptable framerates.

Of course the only way to know for sure is to wait for it to come out and see for yourself.

Consider: The three biggest engines for the next 3-4 years will be the Unreal engine (Which won't have another major revision for another 2+ years, The Doom 3 engine (which probably won't have another revision for 5+ years) and the Half-Life 2 engine for probably won't have another revision for 5+ years).

These engines should run just fine on 2+ Ghz processors and X800, 6800 video cards for the next couple of years.


The only problem with buying an X800, 6800 nowadays is AGP vs PCI. There is no difference in speed but the newer mobos will not have AGP support. (VIA may have an AGP/PCI-E mobo). I believe this won't be a problem since as I stated above 2+ ghz processors and X800/6800 video cards should be good.

Keep note that things run differently on the XBox than on a full Windows PC. Take for instance how big the OS is on each platform. On my PC Windows XP gobbles up over half of the 512MB RAM just for itself, whereas it's reported that the XBox "OS" (which is based on the Windows 2000 Kernel) takes a mere 23k of system resources, including the DirectX8.1 code and the hardware drivers. Anyway John Carmack himself said that the XBox version of Doom3 will have "the same graphic fidelity" as the PC version, and that the XBox version is being rebuilt from the ground up, rather than ported (eg the XBox doesn't support OpenGL - the native 3D Graphic API of Doom3, only Direct3D).