• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/
  • Weve updated the Tripwire Privacy Notice under our Policies to be clearer about our use of customer information to come in line with the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) rules that come into force today (25th May 2018). The following are highlights of our changes:


    We've incorporated the relevant concepts from the GDPR including joining the EU and Swiss Privacy Shield framework. We've added explanations for why and how Tripwire processes customer data and the types of data that we process, as well as information about your data protection rights.



    For more information about our privacy practices, please review the new Privacy Policy found here: https://tripwireinteractive.com/#/privacy-notice

Graphic card

Snipingflapjack

FNG / Fresh Meat
Oct 28, 2009
26
0
0
Hey Killingfloor players, I need some help with my graphics on my computer, it is the NIVIDIA Geforce 7050/ NIVIDIA nForce 610i is this a good enough graphic card for this type of game to work sucessfully?
 

ZeRo_InSaNiTy

FNG / Fresh Meat
Oct 3, 2009
266
1
0
Hey Killingfloor players, I need some help with my graphics on my computer, it is the NIVIDIA Geforce 7050/ NIVIDIA nForce 610i is this a good enough graphic card for this type of game to work sucessfully?
Of course. My brother runs the game on a 10 year old PC with an integrated intel chipset and it runs fine(lowest). That card will run the game low-medium settings. Just remember turn off reduce mouse lag,turn off things like dynamic lights,shadows,AA,AF,trillinear filtering and detail textures. Also turn off motion blur.
 

Snipingflapjack

FNG / Fresh Meat
Oct 28, 2009
26
0
0
I mean the game runs but I have to put it on lowest quailty and even then the game still runs slow. I timed it and takes me 2 minutes to get the game started and 4 minutes and 53 seconds inorder to get into a game lobby. When I do eventually get into a game, everytime I stop it like teleports me a 1inch away from where i stop. I'm pretty sure it's not lag because it happens when i play solo.

But do the graphics cards effect the game performance? Not just the quality but also like how much time it takes me to get into a lobby?
 

Nekomancer

FNG / Fresh Meat
Oct 23, 2009
459
22
0
It will run, but it won't be pretty as it could be with a dedicated videocard and may need some tweaks to run without lag. How about the rest of the PC?

I always deactivate Motion Blur. Not to save performance, but normally it's ugly and makes no sense.
 

Snipingflapjack

FNG / Fresh Meat
Oct 28, 2009
26
0
0
It will run, but it won't be pretty as it could be with a dedicated videocard and may need some tweaks to run without lag. How about the rest of the PC?

I always deactivate Motion Blur. Not to save performance, but normally it's ugly and makes no sense.
Yeah it does take me forever to get a the game STARTED and then like 5 mins to get into a lobby. I put it on the lowest quality and it does that. I don't complain to much about the graphics on the game but on lowest it is just rediculous. You can just barely see the words in the game (like when infornt of a door it says E) and the HUD look like hieroglyphics.
 

Jon

FNG / Fresh Meat
May 14, 2009
202
6
0
29
Hilliard, Ohio
My advice is to buy a cheap dedicated video card, as your motherboard does support PCI-E video cards. I'm not even talking that expensive, but something like this would run KF at max settings very well. I'm talking from experience, I used to own that card and it was quite good. You could even go cheaper if you wanted, and it would still be better than the integrated solution you have now.

EDIT: Though it does require a 6 pin power adapter, which you may not have.
 
Last edited:

ZeRo_InSaNiTy

FNG / Fresh Meat
Oct 3, 2009
266
1
0
I mean the game runs but I have to put it on lowest quailty and even then the game still runs slow. I timed it and takes me 2 minutes to get the game started and 4 minutes and 53 seconds inorder to get into a game lobby. When I do eventually get into a game, everytime I stop it like teleports me a 1inch away from where i stop. I'm pretty sure it's not lag because it happens when i play solo.

But do the graphics cards effect the game performance? Not just the quality but also like how much time it takes me to get into a lobby?
No that would be your CPU. Can you post your full computer specs like CPU,RAM, Power supply ect? You are probably lacking ram and other things. Here is where you PC should be at at this century and if it isnt you should upgrade.

1GB Ram
2.0GHZ processor
Nvidia Geforce 6150 or an equivelant intel chipset or ati GPU

those are basically the minimum specs to do anything on a pc NOT GAME. To play games I recommend at least: 2.5GHZ processor
2GB ram
Nvidia geforce 8600 or higher

Luckily KF runs on much lower requirements. Change your render device to Direct3D not direct3D 9.0. Put your settings to lowest(The preset not custom) and put it to the lowest Resolution possible. Then tell me if your preformance has changed. Even a 50 dollar graphics card will make a huge different. No offense but the 7050 isnt in stores anymore even though ones like 6600 are because the 7050 isnt worth any money nowdays. Take a look at newegg.comhttp://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103680
 
Last edited:

Jon

FNG / Fresh Meat
May 14, 2009
202
6
0
29
Hilliard, Ohio
those are basically the minimum specs to do anything on a pc NOT GAME. To play games I recommend at least: 2.5GHZ processor
Nah, that's a bit too high. A lot of the lower clocked Core 2 Duos (mostly 1.86 Ghz) are pretty decent for gaming. I used to get by on my 6320, which was 1.86 Ghz. Ran fine, though I have OCed it quite a deal (2.8 Ghz).

Even runs Crysis pretty well, even on stock settings. 2.5 is a little high IMO.
 

ZeRo_InSaNiTy

FNG / Fresh Meat
Oct 3, 2009
266
1
0
Nah, that's a bit too high. A lot of the lower clocked Core 2 Duos (mostly 1.86 Ghz) are pretty decent for gaming. I used to get by on my 6320, which was 1.86 Ghz. Ran fine, though I have OCed it quite a deal (2.8 Ghz).

Even runs Crysis pretty well, even on stock settings. 2.5 is a little high IMO.
For recent games its quite low. Have you seen the modern warfare 2 specs? it REQUIRES 3.2 GHZ processor no question asked and thats the minimum. Well according to steam. Also what do you mean by "pretty well" pretty well is over 30fps.
 

Jon

FNG / Fresh Meat
May 14, 2009
202
6
0
29
Hilliard, Ohio
For recent games its quite low. Have you seen the modern warfare 2 specs? it REQUIRES 3.2 GHZ processor no question asked and thats the minimum. Well according to steam. Also what do you mean by "pretty well" pretty well is over 30fps.
Modern Warfare 2 requires a 2.5 Ghz Pentium 4 (taken from STEAM requirements). A 2.5 Ghz Pentium 4 gets crushed by Core 2 Duos running at 1.86 Ghz. Ghz does not directly = performance. MW2 won't be that much more demanding than the first one, and my Core 2 Duo running at 1.86 Ghz + 9800 GT ran the first Modern Warfare in the 70 fps range at 1440x900 all high settings. Sure if you game higher than 1440x900 that's when a faster CPU is appreciated, but most gamers don't play higher than 1440x900. Even bumping it up to 1680x1050 would still be alright as long as you overclocked them, but even then, games are a lot more GPU dependent these days than they are CPU
 

ZeRo_InSaNiTy

FNG / Fresh Meat
Oct 3, 2009
266
1
0
Modern Warfare 2 requires a 2.5 Ghz Pentium 4 (taken from STEAM requirements). A 2.5 Ghz Pentium 4 gets crushed by Core 2 Duos running at 1.86 Ghz. Ghz does not directly = performance. MW2 won't be that much more demanding than the first one, and my Core 2 Duo running at 1.86 Ghz + 9800 GT ran the first Modern Warfare in the 70 fps range at 1440x900 all high settings. Sure if you game higher than 1440x900 that's when a faster CPU is appreciated, but most gamers don't play higher than 1440x900. Even bumping it up to 1680x1050 would still be alright as long as you overclocked them, but even then, games are a lot more GPU dependent these days than they are CPU
Oh lol i was checking out the recommended. Anyways I hate intel all out AMD is much better for a PRICE-preformance ratio and the AMD phenom processors overclock like a beast. Also AMD owns ATI so they make those as well. Also ATI is totally beating Nvidia on the next generation cards as the HD 5850 is beating the GTX 285 and is cheaper. My favourite is

http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103692

mostly because I use it and it overclocks to 4.3GHZ with water cooling and IMHO beats the intel i7s in price-preformance every day.
 
Last edited:

Nekomancer

FNG / Fresh Meat
Oct 23, 2009
459
22
0
The times were AMD had the better price/performance ratio are as good as gone. Intel made a huge leap in that area. It doesn't really matter anymore which CPU you use.
 

ZeRo_InSaNiTy

FNG / Fresh Meat
Oct 3, 2009
266
1
0
Should of got the 955, it's basically the same thing just under clocked a little. Could have saved yourself $60:p
Thats what people were saying but W/E $60 isn't anything anymore. I'm gunna be building another PC for gaming and I was wondering if you guys had any suggestions on a good graphics card and processor. Im looking at the ATI HD5850 but they are out of stock ****ing everywhere! And It's looking better than the GTX 200 cards because Nvidia is really really behind on the next gen cards.
 

Jon

FNG / Fresh Meat
May 14, 2009
202
6
0
29
Hilliard, Ohio
Thats what people were saying but W/E $60 isn't anything anymore.
Well damn, hand me over $60 then:p Could really use it, especially with the prices of RAM lately...

I try to save money anywhere possible. Especially when you build a rig, if you can save $20 here and there on certain parts and especially $60 on a processor that's the same as the 965 just under clocked a little, it adds up man.
I'm gunna be building another PC for gaming and I was wondering if you guys had any suggestions on a good graphics card and processor. Im looking at the ATI HD5850 but they are out of stock ****ing everywhere! And It's looking better than the GTX 200 cards because Nvidia is really really behind on the next gen cards.
I was going to suggest the 5850 as well...but yeah they're hard to find. What's your current video card and what resolution do you play at?
 

ZeRo_InSaNiTy

FNG / Fresh Meat
Oct 3, 2009
266
1
0
Well damn, hand me over $60 then:p Could really use it, especially with the prices of RAM lately...

I try to save money anywhere possible. Especially when you build a rig, if you can save $20 here and there on certain parts and especially $60 on a processor that's the same as the 965 just under clocked a little, it adds up man.
I was going to suggest the 5850 as well...but yeah they're hard to find. What's your current video card and what resolution do you play at?

Oh god you don't wanna know. I game on a compaq presario with a geforce 8200m thats overclocked abit. A 1.9ghz amd athlon dual core processor,2gb of ram. That processor was for my all around PC but it has a geforce 6600 card :(. Anyway I play at 1024x768 resolution but my native res is 1200x800 but it lowers my frames alot. Any suggestions on a card and processor? I'm on a budget of 1000-1200 dollars and I live in canada so I pays in CAD. I'm looking at

http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103680
http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150438

I know the HD 4890 is sort of outdated compared to cards like the HD 5870 and the GTX 285 but I just want to play games like modern warfare 2, and Team Fortress 2. Alot of other games too but not like crysis on highest on a gaming res. Im fine with 1200x800 or even 1024x768. I know theres jaggies but I don't mind.
 

Jon

FNG / Fresh Meat
May 14, 2009
202
6
0
29
Hilliard, Ohio
4890 is NOT outdated...it'll max any game you throw at it, especially at those resolutions. It doesn't have DX11 support, but who knows if that'll take off since DX 10 never did either.

If you want 4890 performance w/ DX11 for around the same price, try looking for the 5770. It's about as powerful and cheap on the wallet.
 

ZeRo_InSaNiTy

FNG / Fresh Meat
Oct 3, 2009
266
1
0
4890 is NOT outdated...it'll max any game you throw at it, especially at those resolutions. It doesn't have DX11 support, but who knows if that'll take off since DX 10 never did either.

If you want 4890 performance w/ DX11 for around the same price, try looking for the 5770. It's about as powerful and cheap on the wallet.
Acually I've read the 4890 is a fair bit ahead of the 5770. anyway ill go with the 4890 since I don't have the time until AMD figures out that they have to make more of the 5000 series cards because nowhere ****ing has em. Thanks for the info. Also the highest graphics game I will play will probably be Modern Warfare 2. Do you think it could play that on highest with 1200x800 with x16 AF and x4 AA? Just asking for your prediction as it isnt out yet. Here are the MW2 specs. I won't be playing crysis on high. Also by play I mean 30-40 frames

Hard Drive Space: 16 GB free hard drive space
Operating System: Windows Vista/XP
Processor: AMD 64 3200+ or Intel Pentium 4 3.0GHz or better
RAM: 512 MB RAM (XP) / 1 GB RAM (VISTA)
Video Card: Shader 3.0 or better 256 MB nVidia GeForce 6600GT / ATI Radeon 1600XT or better

I know I probably will but do you think I would get a steady 30-40 frames even in really open maps? Also I couldn't care less if I had to play on x4 AF and x2 AA.

Modern Warfare 2 requires a 2.5 Ghz Pentium 4 (taken from STEAM requirements). A 2.5 Ghz Pentium 4 gets crushed by Core 2 Duos running at 1.86 Ghz. Ghz does not directly = performance. MW2 won't be that much more demanding than the first one, and my Core 2 Duo running at 1.86 Ghz + 9800 GT ran the first Modern Warfare in the 70 fps range at 1440x900 all high settings. Sure if you game higher than 1440x900 that's when a faster CPU is appreciated, but most gamers don't play higher than 1440x900. Even bumping it up to 1680x1050 would still be alright as long as you overclocked them, but even then, games are a lot more GPU dependent these days than they are CPU
Acually as I already said it is a 3.2 pentium 4. I copy and pasted mine from steam. http://store.steampowered.com/app/10180/
 
Last edited:

Jon

FNG / Fresh Meat
May 14, 2009
202
6
0
29
Hilliard, Ohio
I know I probably will but do you think I would get a steady 30-40 frames even in really open maps? Also I couldn't care less if I had to play on x4 AF and x2 AA.
Hell yeah, that resolution will get it's *** kicked by the 4890. Might have to sacrifice a little AA but it will be near max. Won't notice it too much.

Oh yeah, and the 4890 is better than the 5770, but we're talking 2-3 frames per second difference. If it was me I would just get whatever is cheaper. But since you like throwing money around (lol sorry had to), do what you want.:p

Acually as I already said it is a 3.2 pentium 4. I copy and pasted mine from steam. http://store.steampowered.com/app/10180/
Oops, my mistake. Still, a 3.2 Ghz Pentium 4 still sucks for gaming and will get it's butt kicked by any Core 2 Duo chip.
 
Last edited: