Curse

Serafita Kayin · May 12, 2005, 06:05 PM // 18:05

*I stuck this because of the new influx of card questions. Read and enlighten yourselves.*

Ok, I and others have answered twenty-eleven billion threads on cards. Most are asking about cards I threw away years ago. Since I have so many of these cards, and know all about pixel and shader engines and such, let me break this down for anyone asking in the future.

Feel free to add your own experiences.

If you want to run GW at the bare minimum-GeForce 3 Ti, Radeon 8500, Elsa Gladiac, or Voodoo 3 3000.

If you have a card below those, please, do your computer a favor and upgrade. Not only can you not run it, you're probably using a card with inferior 2D image quality, and it may be on its last legs. Please do not ask if your Diamond Monster 2 will run GW. It isn't even a dedicated 3D card.

If you want kinda playable to decent performance, GeForce MX 4 400 (or MX 4000), GeForce 4 Ti 4200 series, Radeon 9000/9200SE/9250, GeForce FX 5200 (includes PCI versionsof the former two) and Voodoo 5/6 series. The GeForce MX series is on the crap end of playable, due to the fact that it's a buisness card, but the others should do pretty well, rest of system notwithstanding.

If you notice, I included other card manufacturers than the big two. I personally have a Voodoo 3 3000 in my emulator machine because it's got the best picture I've ever seen. Many people are still addicted to their Voodoos, and I still have my 3DFX shirt. Rawk.

At this point, there's something to be said for nVidia versus ATi. At these price levels, hardware was rather much different, and the ATi really did display a better picture and run better than the FX series until you ponied up for a 5900 Ultra or 5950 Ultra. With the x/6 series battle, it reversed. And I still don't think the X800XT is better than the 6800, mostly for scalability, and the fact that ATi simply doesn't support all the nes standards that the nVidia cards do. At this point, even if GW is a "Get in the Game" title, it will run better on nVidia. I've tested it. /end fanboyism.

For the highest level of performance, FX 5700 and up, ATi Radeon 9500 and up, and that's about it. The S3 Gammachrome cards can't do it very well, and neither can XGI. In fact, they're not even also-rans.

If you have issues-disable postprocessing first. Most systems don't like the taxation. THen AA/AF. THEN start turning down features. In this way, you'll get the best playable experience no matter what your level.

If you must run PCI, the fastest PCI card you can get is a 256MB FX5500 OC from BFG technologies. Very nice card for the interface and will play GW very well. You won't be saddened.

128 vs 256? Moot unless you're running AA/AF and postprocessing. I am, and even so, I have a 128 MB card. Below it performance will suffer as the card will have to go to system memory to execute standard operations.

If you run integrated graphics-there are onboards that will run GW. nForce 2 IGP, Intel Extreme Graphics 2/3, and Radeon IGP will all run it, at varying levels of OK. Intel Extreme Graphics 1, depending on the board, may cn be updated with the 2 driver for improved workability. But, if you have onboard graphics, seriously consider a separate card. The onboard eats whatever its shared memory size is before the system even gets to windows. Then your system is running a lot less ram than what you put in. Onboard video makes gamer Jesus cry.

At this point, the 6600 GT is the best bang for the buck for any person it's available to. It's available in AGP and PCI-E flavors, runs quiet, runs cool, and supports all the latest features including HD output. (Betcha didn't know that...) I've stated my picks for the low and midlle ends, for high end this is my pick, and I can prove it all day long. I'm running a Chaintech 6600GT PCI-E and I have never had a better card. That's even standing against my old 5900 Ultra flashed to 5950.

Hopefully this will cut down on the number of posts where we all say the same exact thing, and help unclutter this forum so that other important posts don't get buried. If you find it useful, pass it along. Maybe they'll sticky it so us tech type people can play instead of help everyone else play. (just kidding!)

Principa Discordia · May 12, 2005, 06:12 PM // 18:12

Excellent post! Very well thought out, all points are facts instead of blurted opinion, all the choices are great, and there's many alternative brands mentioned for people who prefer one over the other.

Someone sticky this man!

As for my experiences, I've tried to run this game on the following graphics cards: -

1.) Jetway Nvidia Geforce4 MX440 AGP 64mB
2.) Sapphire ATI Radeon 9600 XT AGP 256mB - Ideal for budget users.
3.) Sapphire ATI Radeon 9800 Pro AGP 128mB
4.) Sapphire ATI Radeon X700 Pro AGP 128mB
5.) XFX Nvidia Geforce 6600GT AGP 128mB - Ideal for any users.
6.) Chaintech Nvidia Geforce 6600GT AGP 128mB - Ideal for any users.
7.) XFX Nvidia Geforce 6800 Ultra AGP 256mB
8.) Sapphire ATI Radeon X800 XT PE AGP 256mB

Note: Yes, I have a thing for Sapphire ATI cards, m'kay?

From what I've seen, the MX440 just doesn't cut it. I had to turn all the graphics down quite a lot just for it to run at any reasonable speed.

The 9600 XT runs the game fine but I wasn't very pleased with the level of detail (I'm an admitted eye-candy junkie), however this card does deliver massive performance for its age and pricetag. I would reccommend this for anybody who is held back by a budget.

The 9800 Pro (flashed to XT speeds) is where I became comfortable with both performance and visual detail. In my opinion this would be lowest card anyone should play the game with if they want it to look very pretty. This card, however, still does not cost much less than the X700/6600 series of graphics cards. This card used to be king, but today it's rather overpriced compared to its alternatives.

To me, the X700/6600 range of cards (particularly the X700 Pro and 6600GT) are absolutely perfect for this game. They can run it in the same level of detail as any X800/6800, but for a fraction of the cost. Due to its low clock speeds and less prettiness-enhancing features, however, I'm affraid I'd never reccommend the X700 Pro over the 6600GT. For anyone who can afford it, it's perfect. Fact.

Serafita Kayin · May 12, 2005, 06:21 PM // 18:21

Bugger, forgot to add that the Matrox Parhelia can and will play Guild Wars, but not well. That's another business card that just happens to be able to do it.

And Kyro 2 owners, sorry, you're out of luck. Forgot them too. No Xabres either.

Beradok · May 12, 2005, 06:44 PM // 18:44

Serafita, I agree with your posting, but wouldn't want to count out all video cards from those lists....

Surprisingly, and I know it's only one case, but I have had amazing results using an "unsupported" vid card with GW. I also think that GW is a technical marvel when it comes to games (in terms of Alt+Tab, Bootup, and Shutdown ability), and other games under development now have something to aspire to. Either way, here's my example as to why those who are running "unsupported cards" still may have luck playing GW with decent framerates.

I currently run GW on two pcs... One a desktop, the other a laptop:

Desktop (Custom)
ASUS A7V8X motherboard
1gig pc2100 ram
AMD Athlon XP2400+ (OC'd to 2.2ghz)
BFG GeForce 6800 Ultra OC - 256mb

Laptop (Alienware Area-51m Series 1)
2.4ghz Pentium 4
512mb DDR 2100
Radeon 7500mobility - 64mb

On the desktop I'm running GW with full hi graphics, 32 bit textures, 4x aa, 1280x1024, and getting fps between 75 and 40 (large particle pvp matches).

On the LT I'm running GW with Med grphx, 32 bit textures, no aa, 1280x1024, and getting fps between 40 and 18 (large particle pvp).

While I will say I'd rather play GW or any game on my desktop with that vid card anyday, I can't say that it isn't convenient being able to play GW while comfortably sitting in bed. Right after the install on the low end (below min specs machine) I received a message stating that my vid card was unsupported. You click ok... and it takes you right into the game. Since, I have had no issues with playing on the low-end below specs machine, and it actually runs every instance of the game fairly well. And even with the lower "graphics quality", the game is still pretty as hell, and holds the full feel of GW.

I understand that there are other system specs which could skew my fps, and quality on each machine, but extraneous hardware or not, the unsupported Radeon 7500 mobility still pumps out the game without a problem.

My advice to those wondering about their own systems... If you're lucky enough to have a friend with a copy of the game that you can run a test install with.... Go for it, as you may be plesantly surprised.

And for any of you thinking about a high end upgrade... I solidly stand by the BFG version of the GeForce 6800 Ultra OC. An amazing card for the price, and as far as I can tell, seems to out perform ATI's newest member... (I've tried them both, and was an avid ATI user for a while). Also, the BFG, or 6800ultra in general, is fully ready for the new pixleshading technology hitting stores over the next 5 years. (Some games like Far-Cry, are already taking advantage of it)

Either way, good luck to you all, and thanks for the great posting Serafita.

Serafita Kayin · May 12, 2005, 06:55 PM // 18:55

Thanks for the posting, and here's more update. For me, i just have to have my memory jogged for most of this.

Mobile chipsets-GeForce 4 Go 420 and up, ATi Mobility 7500 and up (thanks bro for the info). Intel Extreme Graphics 2 and 3 once again, though many Centrino notebooks are shipping with a graphics set that is not really much nore than a monkey with a dry-erase board, so be sure to check beforehand.

Tips for laptops-Disable postprocessing. It eats power. Power makes batteries die quicker. Battery go bye-bye in quest=t3h bad.

Also, if you have external power accessible, use it, as well as hardwired ethernet, as both disable the software used to run such as battery management and wireless connections.

For mobile gaming, try to play with a laptop cooler, so you don't run risk of making t3h fryz0rz of your computer. Also keeps you from burning important parts of your lap.

Remember too that most mobile graphics chipsets are shared, so keep that in mind before installing willy-nilly. The available system memory will b lower, so make sure you have enough.

I'll post more as I remember it...

EnDinG · May 12, 2005, 07:25 PM // 19:25

Added the thread to the list.

Kitar · May 12, 2005, 07:32 PM // 19:32

I'm not so sure a voodoo 3 3000 could run guild wars, since it lacks T and L.

Forgot to mention, this goes for the 4/5/6 series as well. Since they also lacked t and l. I'm 99% positive GW (or any modern game) won't run without transform and lighting.

I say 99%, because some games will still run without t&l (although GW isnt one of them)

Principa Discordia · May 12, 2005, 07:39 PM // 19:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnDinG

Added the thread to the list.

W00T I got a thank.

*So happy.*

Edge Martinez · May 22, 2005, 11:52 PM // 23:52

I hope someone reads this because I don't want to start a whole new separate thread, but I am having problems with my Intel Onboard graphics. My computer is a bit older though and only has 3 PCI expansion slots. It is a Celeron 2.0 and it has 1 GB of RAM on an ASUS board. Hey... I'm not rich

I also run Windows XP, except all the XP bells and whistles are turned off (It looks like earlier Windows).

Anyhow, the game locks up every couple hours and on quests or when henchmen or animals are present, it gets real choppy.

With my PCI limit, my choice is fairly simple... ATI 9250 for the money. 128 or 256Mb doesn't really matter. For the price the 256Mb is probably the better buy. I read what was said about the card being the intermediate choice earlier, but I'm curious if anyone out there uses this card for GW and how it holds up. Please, if you are a lurker and have some info somebody should know about this card, share it.

Thank you,
Edge

DrSLUGFly · May 23, 2005, 03:16 AM // 03:16

an aching stirs from deep within my wallet... I'm currently surfing the internet and I've come to the conclusion that this is the most expensive game I've bought (of course, I'd have to upgrade eventually anyway)....

DrSLUGFly · May 23, 2005, 04:08 AM // 04:08

okay... sorry to double post, but this isn't a comment this time, rather a question. All of your advice is very cool, thank you all very much. You seem quite tech savy, but for those of us who aren't quite so tech savy it's difficult still. I've decided on the ATI Radeon X800 (I think, if someone wishes, please advise otherwise). But here's the question:

ATI All-in-Wonder Radeon X800 XT Video Card
ATI Radeon X800XL Video Card
Sapphire RADEON X800 XL Video Card
MSI Radeon X800 XL RX800XL-VT2D256E Video Card
Connect3D Radeon X800XL Video Card
ATI Radeon X800 XL Video Card
ATI Radeon X800XT Video Card
ATI Radeon X800Pro Video Card
ATI Radeon X800 XL DVD Edition Video Card
GigaByte Radeon X800 XL Video Card
Sapphire Radeon X800 Video Card
Rosewill ATI Radeon X800XL Video Card
Sapphire Radeon X800 Pro Video Card
Sapphire Radeon X800 XT Platinum Edition Video Card
Asus Radeon X800XL Video Card
GigaByte Radeon X800 Video Card
Sapphire Radeon X800SE Video Card
Sapphire Radeon X800 XL Video Card
Sapphire Radeon X800 Pro Video Card
ATI All In Wonder Radeon X800 XL Video Card
Sapphire ATI Radeon X800 XL Video Card
Sapphire Radeon X800 Pro Video Card
SAPPHIRE ATI RADEON X800 Video Card
Powercolor ATI Radeon X800 XL Video Card
Asus Extreme Radeon X800XL Video Card

I don't get it... which one should I choose? The details listed below each of them meant little to nothing to me. Here are the details listed under each:

256 mb (all of them)
2d/3d (all of them)
TV-out or HDTV-out (most of them)
DVI (most of them, a couple with Dual DVI)
AGP 8X (most of them)
PCI-Express x16 (a few of them)

what does all this mean? Can I choose simply based on price? I want a card that will run this smoothly and beautifully as well as one that will run Black and White 2, The Movies and Fable for PC smoothly, all of which I'll be picking up when they're released in the fall.

jeffy · May 23, 2005, 04:17 AM // 04:17

I had mx440 and it was friggin horrible. i have a fx 5500 now. its still better. i can see stuff i've never seen before but i have terrible lag due to 256 RAM. Also, i've heard of the PCI-EXpress thing.. its suppose to be good. All i need now is more memory.

Rogie · May 23, 2005, 04:54 AM // 04:54

Those X800s will run just fine. DVI is for flatpanel LCD monitors with DVI connectors. Just make sure you choose correctly between AGP and PCI-Express, because only one of these two types will match your motherboard.

Spookadelic · May 24, 2005, 01:30 AM // 01:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Serafita Kayin

. Onboard video makes gamer Jesus cry.

Oh that's just made my day.

Axle_the_Red · May 24, 2005, 01:42 AM // 01:42

am I allowed to ask if my card will work? I just bought the game and I wasnt quite sure (school will be out soon so I can test...but still...) if it will run. I dont expect perfect, because my comp isnt anywhere near that fancy, and I dont have much money...but if I can I probably will buy the cheapest card that will cut it...

anyways the card is this:

S3 Graphics Pro DDR with 32 MB VRAM

it came standard with teh comp and I seriously doubt it will work at all...but I can hope, right?

Loviatar · May 24, 2005, 01:46 AM // 01:46

you can try it and see what happens

i had an s3 from creative back about 1998 i think

you can try and good luck

EnDinG · May 24, 2005, 02:21 PM // 14:21

Thats the pure bottom of the barrel if you are going to use that card.

It will give you an error of no support but ignore it. You will have to run all settings on the lowest there is due to the extream lack of memory and how out of date the card is.

The game should run. Well? No idea.

Pharoke · May 24, 2005, 04:09 PM // 16:09

The nice thing aobut the 6600GT is it comes in both the AGP and PCIx flavors and with my Chaintech 6600GT AGP also supports DVI. Also, was able to get GW to work on a 5700Ultra and 6800Go Mobile.

Axle_the_Red · May 24, 2005, 08:03 PM // 20:03

hahahahahah!!!! wow. Not even close. DONT USE AN S3!!!!

so...what kind of card would you recomend? I dont have much money...(about 50ish...) and I dont want the highest there is...so...any help?

gentoo · May 24, 2005, 09:27 PM // 21:27

Does anyone have any experience with the Radeon Mobility X300 PCI-E 64mb? These are my complete stats:

1.86ghz Pentium M
512mb DDR2 4200 - 533mhz
ATI Mobility Radeon X300 PCI-E 64mb

I don't want to buy the game if it won't run, and I know that this card isn't at the top of the charts, but is it enough to make Guild Wars nicely playable? I downloaded the client off of the Guild Wars website and the main screen (the camp with the bushes and tents, etc) seems to render okay, but I don't know how relevant that will be to actual gameplay.