Halo PC & Patch Released

Microsoft sends word that Halo: Combat Evolved for the PC has hit store shelves across the United States. On the heels of this announcement, a patch is available, updating the PC version of Bungie's first-person shooter to version 1.01. The patch is 3.6 MB, available from 3D Gamers, Boomtown, Computer Games Online, Fappin, FileFront, GameCenter.cz, Gameplex, Gamer's Hell, and Worthplaying.
View : : :
159 Replies. 8 pages. Viewing page 3.
Newer [  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  ] Older
119.
 
Re: Halo Performance Woes
Oct 4, 2003, 23:56
Re: Halo Performance Woes Oct 4, 2003, 23:56
Oct 4, 2003, 23:56
 
New test same thing.
Date / Time: 10/3/2003 8:23:42 PM (978937ms)
2800MHz, 1024MB, 256M nVidia GeForceFX 5600 (DeviceID=0x0312) Driver=6.14.10.4523 Shader=2.0
F:\Microsoft Games\Halo\halo.exe -timedemo (Version=1.0.1.580)
Frames=4700
Total Time=280.81s
Average frame rate=16.74fps
Below 5fps= 5% (time) 0% (frames) (14.473s spent in 15 frames)
Below 10fps= 26% (time) 10% (frames)
Below 15fps= 47% (time) 27% (frames)
Below 20fps= 72% (time) 53% (frames)
Below 25fps= 86% (time) 72% (frames)
Below 30fps= 91% (time) 80% (frames)
Below 40fps= 96% (time) 90% (frames)
Below 50fps= 98% (time) 94% (frames)
Below 60fps= 99% (time) 98% (frames)
Memory used Max=169MB, Min=136MB, Ave=157MB

Date / Time: 10/4/2003 11:33:39 PM (6240234ms)
2800MHz, 1024MB, 256M nVidia GeForceFX 5600 (DeviceID=0x0312) Driver=6.14.10.4523 Shader=2.0
F:\Microsoft Games\Halo\halo.exe -vidmode 800,600,100 -use20 -window -timedemo (Version=1.0.1.580)
Frames=4700
Total Time=287.52s
Average frame rate=16.35fps
Below 5fps= 5% (time) 0% (frames) (15.363s spent in 15 frames)
Below 10fps= 26% (time) 10% (frames)
Below 15fps= 49% (time) 29% (frames)
Below 20fps= 73% (time) 55% (frames)
Below 25fps= 87% (time) 74% (frames)
Below 30fps= 92% (time) 81% (frames)
Below 40fps= 96% (time) 90% (frames)
Below 50fps= 98% (time) 95% (frames)
Below 60fps= 99% (time) 99% (frames)
Memory used Max=168MB, Min=136MB, Ave=156MB
NSA no AA and AF but everthing thing else is maxed. Also I run with the refreshrate fix(2.1a) still makes no difference.
My sytem:
2.8 Intel 800 bus
Prolink Gold 5600Fx 256DDr
1024 of dual channel OCZ 400DDR (512x2)
Soyo Dragon2 Platinum MB
Sata 150 Maxtor 80gig Hd (soon raid 1 Maxtor sata 150 80HD)
Audgy X-gamer with Klipsch 5.1's
21' Sony Trinitron Multiscan E500 Monitor
Plus other stuff.
I am really at a lost here. There has to be a game related reason for this. It is not the Video cards it has to be the game, to many different Video cards getting the same low scores. I will not play the game until there is some fix or clear reason why this is happening.
Is there any command for alotting memory to the game?
I think it would be best for everyone to post any tweaks besides what has already been post. Good luck everyone!
Ron5
Goal 60+ FPS;)

This comment was edited on Oct 4, 23:59.
118.
 
Re: Halo Performance Woes
Oct 4, 2003, 22:12
Re: Halo Performance Woes Oct 4, 2003, 22:12
Oct 4, 2003, 22:12
 
More woes: after using PS2.0 for a while, the sound (NF2 MCP-T) gets overlaid with static until it becomes unbearable.
Any one know what PS2.0 has to offer over PS1.4 in this game?
Or a workaround for the static?

thanks,
cx

117.
 
Re: Halo Performance Woes
Oct 4, 2003, 17:20
Re: Halo Performance Woes Oct 4, 2003, 17:20
Oct 4, 2003, 17:20
 
Guess I'll add my numbers to the study:
Date / Time: 10/4/2003 2:40:54 PM (9378484ms)
2100MHz, 512MB, 256M ATI Radeon 9800 PRO (DeviceID=0x4e48) Driver=6.14.10.6378 Shader=2.0
H:\HALO\halo.exe -use20 -console -timedemo (Version=1.0.1.580)
Frames=4700
Total Time=111.51s
Average frame rate=42.15fps
Below 5fps= 5% (time) 0% (frames) (6.306s spent in 11 frames)
Below 10fps= 5% (time) 0% (frames)
Below 15fps= 6% (time) 0% (frames)
Below 20fps= 6% (time) 0% (frames)
Below 25fps= 9% (time) 2% (frames)
Below 30fps= 21% (time) 10% (frames)
Below 40fps= 39% (time) 25% (frames)
Below 50fps= 65% (time) 52% (frames)
Below 60fps= 93% (time) 88% (frames)
Memory used Max=162MB, Min=132MB, Ave=151MB

I don't know why, but I had to force PS2.0 on the command line. I'm using Radlinker, and it says to use the default for PS version. Using PS2.0 gave me a small but consistent 1.5 FPS. Not much better, but definitely not worse.
One problem with PS2.0, though, is that sniper rifle + zoom + night vision is broken. The zoomed image has a black rectangle where the NV image should be. This works with PS1.4

I'm using no FSAA nor AF. But turning off AF actually helped the IQ... I was getting very noticable and annoying mipmap transitions. Maybe a lower setting would help (I was using 16x)

All eyecandy on and maxed except shadows, which I don't like anyway. At 1024x768 things run smoothly at all times.

I'm very pleased with the game. I love the physics, especially of the explosions. Covies flyin' thru the air with arms flailing, fountains of dirt or water shooting into the air. Great stuff.
The warthog is, so far, the only vehicle in any FPS I've played that I like. Its slipping and sliding makes it more like the strafing I'm used to. I like the AI and the alien and team mate chatter.

On another topic, I saw a comment somewhere that said the PC graphics were worse than the xbox (aka slow pc with small hd, old GPU and crappy monitor). Unless Gearbox *REALLY* fucked up, I find this impossible to believe: 640x480 better than 1600x1200?
So I went searching for some xbox screenies... Only 1 site showed screens from the actual game running on a TV. All the rest were high res renders that may have come from an xbox, but were certainly not 640x480. And they weren't just simple in-game screen shots... they were carefully composed and not from a standard 1st or 3rd person view point. Do screen shots get saved in maximum resolution? I know some games dump in max res and IQ. But these are *NOT* indicative of the way the running game looks. So I still wonder how it looks on the xbox.

And don't forget: timedemo *WILL* nuke your latest checkpoint. SAVE it first.

System:
ABIT NF7Sv2.0
Athlon 3000+/400FSB
2x256 Corsair PC3200 (dual channel 400Mhz)
ATI 9800PRO 256M

116.
 
Re: OK, I just got it today...
Oct 4, 2003, 15:03
Re: OK, I just got it today... Oct 4, 2003, 15:03
Oct 4, 2003, 15:03
 
It's amazing how many people are having problems running this game with low frame rates and have on paper a better machine than I. I have a Athlon XP(2200)+, Soyo Dragon+, 512 RAM, and an NVidia Ti4400. I am consistantly getting smooth gameplay both in single and multiplay. Seems to me some folks may have too much background apps running or maybe being a little too overzealous.

115.
 
Re: Halo
Oct 4, 2003, 13:21
Re: Halo Oct 4, 2003, 13:21
Oct 4, 2003, 13:21
 
That's all great stuff...but the net result is still that the game runs like crap. Maybe part of the minimum system requirements should read something like "...and driver versions that are not yet available. Please consult ATI/nVidia to determine when appropriate drivers will be available."

What drivers were the testers using? What about the devs? What about the folks that said "Yeah, this is good. Ship it." Maybe they would be kind enough to give us the same drivers they were using.
MAIN PC (for Soupkin)
=======
Asus A7N8X Deluxe
AMD Barton 2800
1024 Meg Corsair XMS PC3200 CAS2(2x512 in Dual Channel)
ATI Radeon 9700 Pro
Maxtor 40 Gig 7200 RPM ATA133
Maxtor 60 Gig 7200 RPM ATA133
350W Power Supply
Windows XP Home
114.
 
Halo
Oct 4, 2003, 10:14
Halo Oct 4, 2003, 10:14
Oct 4, 2003, 10:14
 
You people always have a tendency to blame the developer for every little things that goes wrong when a game is released.

Halo for PC is taxing a lot of high end machines right now because it uses DirectX 9.0b technology and is the first game to use ps2.0 technology as well. We had similar situation with "Aquanox" because it used ps1.1 technology and was the first game out then that used it and needed a Geforce 3 to run smoothly. It's going to take a couple of Video Driver releases to get the optimizations and speed up a bit for all High End Cards. NVIDIA/ATI will need to optimize the driver code a little bit which is expected. PS 2.0 has never been fully tested with a game until now and we are noticing the differences already. The Blame doesn't fall on Gearbox/Bungie or MS. They crushed the Major bugs and minor bugs needed to get the game shipped out to stores. All developers care about is crushing the last minute showstopper bug that tends crop up after release and gearbox did a fantastic job of making sure there were none found after proper internal testing. Now Gearbox's job as well as Bungie and MS is to continue the support of Halo and release updates on an as needed basis and get the mod tools out for the community.

Automatically relating to Gearbox's bad experience with 007:Nightfire is low blow and gearbox has released real good games in the past but there will always be a game that won't work out and companies take chances to push it out the door. Yes I agree Nightfire had issue but it was probably rushed for release in time for the Die Another Day theatrical release last fall. So who knows if that was the situation or not, but I can tell Gearbox has put that experience aside and moving on. Halo isn't Buggy. It's using new technology and is the first game to introduce it and they'll be more to come this fall you watch.

-Jeff E.

113.
 
Re: OK, I just got it today...
Oct 4, 2003, 00:52
NSA
Re: OK, I just got it today... Oct 4, 2003, 00:52
Oct 4, 2003, 00:52
NSA
 
#112 "This game runs like c-c-c-c-c-c-c-crap"

Well isnt that the truth.. well at first at least, I know some of us (well me at least) have managed to find the right balance of options/settings/chicken blood voodoo to get the game working, at least decently, sometimes brilliantly.

I honestly dont know why any 'retail' release game could need this much tweaking out of the box just to be playable.. some will say 'gearbox' others will blame M$.. but I dunno this is some funky crap. I am just happy I've gotten it to run reasonably well, with all the bells and whistles turned on. And for some reason it works better now, with the same settings, than it did when I first installed the damn game!! I swear this game is 100% M$.. it'll run fine after a day or two of screwing with you for no good reason...

I hope Bungie/Gearbox/M$ give us some aftermarket support... soon!

112.
 
OK, I just got it today...
Oct 3, 2003, 23:15
OK, I just got it today... Oct 3, 2003, 23:15
Oct 3, 2003, 23:15
 
...and I would suggest to anyone that is thinking of buying it, WAIT.

It still is not ready.

This game runs like c-c-c-c-c-c-c-crap.

I have got to ask whomever made the decision that this was releasable;

Are you on crack?

Seriously, if I did my job this half-assed I would be fired in a heartbeat. Now I would consider myself fairly objective...I have never even seen the Xbox version of this game. All I can say though is Wow, this game runs like crap. Any other game I have I can crank and it flies.

Please, someone at Bungie, Gearbox, or Microsoft...take a little responsiblity for this disgrace and clean it up - FAST.
MAIN PC (for Soupkin)
=======
Asus A7N8X Deluxe
AMD Barton 2800
1024 Meg Corsair XMS PC3200 CAS2(2x512 in Dual Channel)
ATI Radeon 9700 Pro
Maxtor 40 Gig 7200 RPM ATA133
Maxtor 60 Gig 7200 RPM ATA133
350W Power Supply
Windows XP Home
111.
 
Re: Halo Performance Woes
Oct 3, 2003, 21:00
NSA
Re: Halo Performance Woes Oct 3, 2003, 21:00
Oct 3, 2003, 21:00
NSA
 
Ron5, what settings were you using for the timedemo? AA and AF on? How about the display options in Halo?

Well I tried the 1.1 Shader and got a terrible 33FPS! So I popped it back to 2.0 and I got this! By far my best score to date.

Date / Time: 10/3/2003 5:55:07 PM (1424437ms)
2900MHz, 1024MB, 128M ATI Radeon 9800 PRO (DeviceID=0x4e48) Driver=6.14.10.6378 Shader=2.0
C:\Games\Halo\halo.exe -vidmode 800,600,100 -use20 -window -timedemo (Version=1.0.1.580)
Frames=4700
Total Time=97.53s
Average frame rate=48.19fps
Below 5fps= 3% (time) 0% (frames) (3.073s spent in 4 frames)
Below 10fps= 3% (time) 0% (frames)
Below 15fps= 4% (time) 0% (frames)
Below 20fps= 4% (time) 0% (frames)
Below 25fps= 4% (time) 0% (frames)
Below 30fps= 6% (time) 1% (frames)
Below 40fps= 22% (time) 13% (frames)
Below 50fps= 50% (time) 39% (frames)
Below 60fps= 87% (time) 81% (frames)
Memory used Max=160MB, Min=130MB, Ave=148MB

48FPS! I seriously think this timedemo thing is a bitch, sometimes its nice and sweet and sometimes it kicks you in the balls. I dont really get it.

My Halo settings were: Vsync, No Shadows, No Specular, All else set to 'high'. No EAX enabled though. AA and AF were set to 'application preference', which is basically OFF for Halo. Sigh. Anyone else have any insight into this beast?

EDIT #1: I ran the time demo 3 more times with the same settings and got: (1) 46 FPS, (2) 40 FPS, (3) 47 FPS... so it does vary somewhat, even with the same settings! Finnicky!

EDIT #2: Turning on AA 4x and AF 8x drops my FPS from 47 to 30 even. I guess 30 IS playable of course but it doesnt really seem to look all that much better with AA and AF on. What do you think?
This comment was edited on Oct 3, 22:52.
110.
 
Re: Halo Performance Woes
Oct 3, 2003, 20:27
Re: Halo Performance Woes Oct 3, 2003, 20:27
Oct 3, 2003, 20:27
 
Date / Time: 10/3/2003 8:23:42 PM (978937ms)
2800MHz, 1024MB, 256M nVidia GeForceFX 5600 (DeviceID=0x0312) Driver=6.14.10.4523 Shader=2.0
F:\Microsoft Games\Halo\halo.exe -timedemo (Version=1.0.1.580)
Frames=4700
Total Time=280.81s
Average frame rate=16.74fps
Below 5fps= 5% (time) 0% (frames) (14.473s spent in 15 frames)
Below 10fps= 26% (time) 10% (frames)
Below 15fps= 47% (time) 27% (frames)
Below 20fps= 72% (time) 53% (frames)
Below 25fps= 86% (time) 72% (frames)
Below 30fps= 91% (time) 80% (frames)
Below 40fps= 96% (time) 90% (frames)
Below 50fps= 98% (time) 94% (frames)
Below 60fps= 99% (time) 98% (frames)
Memory used Max=169MB, Min=136MB, Ave=157MB

This is sad.
Ron5


109.
 
Re: Halo Performance Woes
Oct 3, 2003, 16:13
Re: Halo Performance Woes Oct 3, 2003, 16:13
Oct 3, 2003, 16:13
 
Your using Shader 2.0

Goto your Halo shortcut and make the target

"C:\Program Files\Microsoft Games\Halo\Halo.eXe" -use11

It will use the 1.1 shader, should help your fps.


108.
 
Re: Halo Performance Woes
Oct 3, 2003, 15:58
Re: Halo Performance Woes Oct 3, 2003, 15:58
Oct 3, 2003, 15:58
 
Ok, I set everything to max (Even though I'm not sure about the timedemo running on my saved options) and the results dropped slightly.

Date / Time: 10/3/2003 3:55:26 PM (103347062ms)
2800MHz, 2048MB, 128M ATI Radeon 9700 PRO (DeviceID=0x4e44) Driver=6.14.10.6368 Shader=2.0
C:\Program Files\Microsoft Games\Halo\halo.exe -timedemo (Version=1.0.1.580)
Frames=4700
Total Time=164.54s
Average frame rate=28.57fps
Below 5fps= 6% (time) 0% (frames) (9.878s spent in 4 frames)
Below 10fps= 6% (time) 0% (frames)
Below 15fps= 6% (time) 0% (frames)
Below 20fps= 9% (time) 2% (frames)
Below 25fps= 33% (time) 20% (frames)
Below 30fps= 54% (time) 41% (frames)
Below 40fps= 88% (time) 81% (frames)
Below 50fps= 98% (time) 96% (frames)
Below 60fps= 98% (time) 97% (frames)
Memory used Max=161MB, Min=129MB, Ave=149MB

SOOOO, in order to get 30fps, I need all my options set to off or low. Hmmm... Any other options or feedback people?

-Scoob
-------------------------------------------------
Just when I think I've seen it all, I found a new wrinkle in my sack.

-ScoobyDOOM
107.
 
Re: Halo Performance Woes
Oct 3, 2003, 15:51
Re: Halo Performance Woes Oct 3, 2003, 15:51
Oct 3, 2003, 15:51
 
I thought of that too. I put the AA back to app preference and tried the timedemo again and got the following:

Date / Time: 10/3/2003 3:45:28 PM (102766171ms)
2800MHz, 2048MB, 128M ATI Radeon 9700 PRO (DeviceID=0x4e44) Driver=6.14.10.6368 Shader=2.0
C:\Program Files\Microsoft Games\Halo\halo.exe -timedemo (Version=1.0.1.580)
Frames=4700
Total Time=147.16s
Average frame rate=31.94fps
Below 5fps= 7% (time) 0% (frames) (10.787s spent in 12 frames)
Below 10fps= 7% (time) 0% (frames)
Below 15fps= 7% (time) 0% (frames)
Below 20fps= 8% (time) 0% (frames)
Below 25fps= 15% (time) 5% (frames)
Below 30fps= 38% (time) 25% (frames)
Below 40fps= 78% (time) 68% (frames)
Below 50fps= 94% (time) 90% (frames)
Below 60fps= 98% (time) 97% (frames)
Memory used Max=148MB, Min=130MB, Ave=140MB

BUT, in my video options, I have everything turned off or low. Does the timedemo use my saved settings? With those settings, I had noticed it about that much faster before reverting my AA and AF to application preference. I'll turn on all my options now and run it again. I'll also try the time demo with -use11. BRB!

btw, who are ya?

-Scoob
-------------------------------------------------
Just when I think I've seen it all, I found a new wrinkle in my sack.

-ScoobyDOOM
106.
 
Re: Halo Performance Woes
Oct 3, 2003, 11:49
NSA
Re: Halo Performance Woes Oct 3, 2003, 11:49
Oct 3, 2003, 11:49
NSA
 
Scooby.. are you sure Antialiasing and Anistropic (sp) filtering are turned to "Application Preference" in the display menu? I was getting those same 20 fps before I turned AA and AF off. Now I'm at least around 40fps and the game is playable!

105.
 
Halo Performance Woes
Oct 3, 2003, 10:48
Halo Performance Woes Oct 3, 2003, 10:48
Oct 3, 2003, 10:48
 


Hey guys, I've been waiting for Halo for a long time too, but when I compare it to a game like BF1942 it falls way short. They really got the technology right for that game. Anyone who has NOT played it, download the demo and compare.

As for Halo, so far I have to agree with the negative consensus that the game doesn't even come close to the hype. I tried the singleplayer and multiplayer. I tried all the tweaks that I've seen posted. I have a damn good machine for playing and access via a T1. Below are my specs and timedemo results. Just running the timedemo I'm seeing a LOUSY 20 FPS average. It's really not even playable for me with the options all set low/off and using the tweaks.

Suggestions/Feedback?

P4 2.8ghz
2 Gigs of Kinston HyperX DDR
4X 80Gig HD running Raid 0
Ati 9700 Pro with newest drivers and DX9


Date / Time: 10/3/2003 10:25:16 AM (83479187ms)
2800MHz, 2048MB, 128M ATI Radeon 9700 PRO (DeviceID=0x4e44) Driver=6.14.10.6368 Shader=2.0
C:\Program Files\Microsoft Games\Halo\halo.exe -timedemo (Version=1.0.1.580)
Frames=4700
Total Time=228.96s
Average frame rate=20.53fps
Below 5fps= 5% (time) 0% (frames) (12.936s spent in 11 frames)
Below 10fps= 6% (time) 0% (frames)
Below 15fps= 18% (time) 8% (frames)
Below 20fps= 38% (time) 25% (frames)
Below 25fps= 76% (time) 66% (frames)
Below 30fps= 96% (time) 92% (frames)
Below 40fps= 98% (time) 96% (frames)
Below 50fps= 99% (time) 97% (frames)
Below 60fps= 99% (time) 99% (frames)
Memory used Max=161MB, Min=131MB, Ave=149MB
-------------------------------------------------
Just when I think I've seen it all, I found a new wrinkle in my sack.

-ScoobyDOOM
104.
 
Re: who monitors these comments
Oct 3, 2003, 10:31
Re: who monitors these comments Oct 3, 2003, 10:31
Oct 3, 2003, 10:31
 
Tahts really strange, with the same settings i get these results:

Date / Time: 2003-10-03 16:29:01 (32112015ms)
3200MHz, 1024MB, 256M nVidia GeForceFX 5900 Ultra (DeviceID=0x0330) Driver=6.14.10.4523 Shader=1.4
G:\Games\Halo\halo.exe -vidmode 800,600,100 -timedemo -window -use14 (Version=1.0.0.564)
Frames=4700
Total Time=92.83s
Average frame rate=50.63fps
Below 5fps= 10% (time) 0% (frames) (9.735s spent in 11 frames)
Below 10fps= 10% (time) 0% (frames)
Below 15fps= 12% (time) 0% (frames)
Below 20fps= 13% (time) 0% (frames)
Below 25fps= 13% (time) 1% (frames)
Below 30fps= 14% (time) 1% (frames)
Below 40fps= 21% (time) 6% (frames)
Below 50fps= 40% (time) 23% (frames)
Below 60fps= 67% (time) 51% (frames)
Memory used Max=144MB, Min=128MB, Ave=137MB


...something sure isn't right here.

103.
 
Re: who monitors these comments
Oct 3, 2003, 05:39
Re: who monitors these comments Oct 3, 2003, 05:39
Oct 3, 2003, 05:39
 
#102,

El presidente does.

102.
 
who monitors these comments
Oct 2, 2003, 23:12
who monitors these comments Oct 2, 2003, 23:12
Oct 2, 2003, 23:12
 
who moderates these comments?

101.
 
Re: Time Demo
Oct 2, 2003, 23:07
NSA
Re: Time Demo Oct 2, 2003, 23:07
Oct 2, 2003, 23:07
NSA
 
Thats so weird. My timedemo.. obviously is around 34 fps average, but thats at 1280x960. In-game play is fine now, Ive managed to get most way through the campaign with no real slowdown issues. I had to turn off shadows and that other option, but the game seems to look decent. If I turn on AA and AF it slows WAY down. Oh well, multiplayer is usually fine and the campaign is ok now so it works. Halo PC wasnt all I had hoped it would be though!!

100.
 
Re: Time Demo
Oct 2, 2003, 23:05
Re: Time Demo Oct 2, 2003, 23:05
Oct 2, 2003, 23:05
 
oh yeah.. i added -use20 to my shortcut to use pixel shader 2.0... and i just got 75 fps...

159 Replies. 8 pages. Viewing page 3.
Newer [  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  ] Older