I played Half-Life 1 using the minimum system reqs, and it sucked. It was so choppy that it hurt to play. Other games that are like that are: RTCW, BF1942, SOF2, Max Payne... but I can think of 3 games that aren't like that: Quake, Quake 2 and Quake 3. I believe that DOOM 3 will run fine on a 1Ghz CPU w/ a GF1. Remember, JC said that DOOM3 isn't using any technology that has been implemented since the GF1, so this makes sense. My question is, will the game even be able to run on a TNT2?
I laugh when I see Valve saying HL2 will run on an 800Mhz w/ a TNT2 because I know that, while it may be able to run, the experience will not be enjoyable.
I got a 9800 Pro because, while the 5900 may be faster overall, it's not fast enough to justify spending $100 more. Besides, I like to support the underdog, and ATI is the underdog right now.
I do think that ATI and Nvidia are price fixing though. I mean, this is the first time that new video card prices have stayed this high for this long. I expected the 9800 Pro to be way less than it is now, especially with the heat Nvidia has been puting on with the FX. And the 9800 pro 256MB is way too expensive for what it gives you: the performance of a 9800 Pro 128MB card. Also, I don't know why anyone would pay $500 for a 5900 Ultra when it only gets 10 more FPS at the most. Besides, the human eye can only see 60FPS, so beyond that who cares?
My DOOM3/HL2 machine specs:
AMD Athlon XP 2400+
1024MB dual DDR 400
ATI Radeon 9800 Pro
id ran their E3 demo in 2002 with a Radeon 9700 on a P4 2.2, and it worked great.
I think any comments that STATE that DOOM3 or HL2 will suck OR be good are retarded. I think both games will be great, but I don't KNOW that they will be great, or that they will suck. Debates on whether they'll suck or be good don't mean jack.