15 FPS on UT3

ZeroWing · Mar 26, 2009

Is 15 FPS on UT3 normal for 1920x1080 maxxed settings? Q6600 @ 3GHZ / HD4850 / 4GB / Vista. When I had my old monitor I could play this game w/o any lag. Any ideas on what could be wrong?

Langers2k7 · Mar 26, 2009

The 4850 is powerful, but it's not that powerful. Drop your resolution to 1680x1050 and try again.

ZeroWing · Mar 26, 2009

Langers2k7 said:
The 4850 is powerful, but it's not that powerful. Drop your resolution to 1680x1050 and try again.

What if I used a HD4870 1GB?

CardboardSword · Mar 26, 2009

you'd be able to get significantly higher FPS's. That's a very nice card, although I could've sworn the 4850 had enough juice to run UT3 at playable rates no matter the settings:S guess I'm obviously wrong haha.

Zatharus · Mar 26, 2009

ZeroWing said:
What if I used a HD4870 1GB?

CardboardSword said:
you'd be able to get significantly higher FPS's. That's a very nice card, although I could've sworn the 4850 had enough juice to run UT3 at playable rates no matter the settings:S guess I'm obviously wrong haha.

That is odd... Is this with the new Titan Pack/Black update?

I haven't had a chance to pop that up since the update and actually play. I have a measly little ol' 1Gig 9800GT that will play most maps at 40+ FPS at 1080p just fine. Depending on whether or not I force the system to run with 32 or more bots that is...

I'll have to give that a go later tonight with the new update. Your problem may also be an issue with the new update and some bug in the current AMD/ATI drivers.

ZeroWing · Mar 26, 2009

Zatharus said:
That is odd... Is this with the new Titan Pack/Black update?

I haven't had a chance to pop that up since the update and actually play. I have a measly little ol' 1Gig 9800GT that will play most maps at 40+ FPS at 1080p just fine. Depending on whether or not I force the system to run with 32 or more bots that is...

I'll have to give that a go later tonight with the new update. Your problem may also be an issue with the new update and some bug in the current AMD/ATI drivers.

patch version 1.3. Ill update the game now and see what happens

DarkTears · Mar 26, 2009

Would a 4850 X2 2GB get on a 23 Inch widescreen?

Langers2k7 · Mar 26, 2009

What version of catalyst are you running?

Zatharus · Mar 26, 2009

DarkTears said:
Would a 4850 X2 2GB get on a 23 Inch widescreen?

??? What would it get in FPS? Or would it be able to run a 23 in display? Not sure what you are getting at.

ZeroWing · Mar 26, 2009

Langers2k7 said:
What version of catalyst are you running?

9.3, latest

Zatharus · Mar 26, 2009

ZeroWing said:
patch version 1.3. Ill update the game now and see what happens

There have been some speed improvements with V2 supposedly.

ZeroWing · Mar 26, 2009

Zatharus said:
There have been some speed improvements with V2 supposedly.

i get about 20 frames in suspense now on 1920x1080 with v2

Okedokey · Mar 27, 2009

Is that a 64bit version of Vista? If not you should remove some of that RAM as it will be wasted and can actually slow down your gaming performance, otherwise, check temps.

DarkTears · Mar 27, 2009

Zatharus said:
??? What would it get in FPS? Or would it be able to run a 23 in display? Not sure what you are getting at.

both

Zatharus · Mar 27, 2009

Zatharus said:
??? What would it get in FPS? Or would it be able to run a 23 in display? Not sure what you are getting at.

DarkTears said:
both

1 - It depends on what resolution and quality settings you have enabled. (i.e. 1680x1050 at Max in UT3 would probably yield you 40-50FPS on average)

2 - Yes, the 4850X2 will be able to drive a 23" display.

Back to topic:

bigfellla said:
Is that a 64bit version of Vista? If not you should remove some of that RAM as it will be wasted and can actually slow down your gaming performance, otherwise, check temps.

He is running 4GB of ram. While it will not all be accessible in Vista32, it will NOT affect his gaming performance. Actually, since his ram configuration is most likely running in dual channel mode right now, removing part of it would adversely affect system performance.

ZeroWing · Mar 28, 2009

Zatharus said:
1 - It depends on what resolution and quality settings you have enabled. (i.e. 1680x1050 at Max in UT3 would probably yield you 40-50FPS on average)

2 - Yes, the 4850X2 will be able to drive a 23" display.

Back to topic:

He is running 4GB of ram. While it will not all be accessible in Vista32, it will NOT affect his gaming performance. Actually, since his ram configuration is most likely running in dual channel mode right now, removing part of it would adversely affect system performance.

Using Vista 32 bit, and temps are fine. Was able to play UT3 maxxed out on my old res (1440x900) w solid 60FPS. Its just kind of a drastic drop from 1440x900 to 1920x1080. -40FPS, isnt that a little much? I was also wondering If you can Xfire HD4850 with an HD4870 and if it would be worth it. Its really annoying me that I cant play UT3 maxxed anymore.

Zatharus · Mar 28, 2009

ZeroWing said:
Using Vista 32 bit, and temps are fine. Was able to play UT3 maxxed out on my old res (1440x900) w solid 60FPS. Its just kind of a drastic drop from 1440x900 to 1920x1080. -40FPS, isnt that a little much?

It is a 60% increase in resolution. It sounds like the 1920x1080 resolution is maxing out the card's RAM then. Do you only have a 512MB version of the 4850? If so (it sounds like it), then that kind of drop is normal. About the only time that having a 1GB card would come in handy is when you are gaming in a high resolution, like what you are now.

I was also wondering If you can Xfire HD4850 with an HD4870 and if it would be worth it. Its really annoying me that I cant play UT3 maxxed anymore.

I do believe this is possible. I remember ATI announcing this a while back - or at least talking about it.

If you want the higher frame rate, you will have to lower the resolution until you get a different card (or a second for Crossfire) - or play with less eyecandy.

ZeroWing · Mar 28, 2009

Zatharus said:
It is a 60% increase in resolution. It sounds like the 1920x1080 resolution is maxing out the card's RAM then. Do you only have a 512MB version of the 4850? If so (it sounds like it), then that kind of drop is normal. About the only time that having a 1GB card would come in handy is when you are gaming in a high resolution, like what you are now.

I do believe this is possible. I remember ATI announcing this a while back - or at least talking about it.

If you want the higher frame rate, you will have to lower the resolution until you get a different card (or a second for Crossfire) - or play with less eyecandy.

So your saying I need more memory? 1GB or so? I was going to buy an HD4870 with HDMI input so I can use the HDMI on my monitor and I can always get a 1GB version.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127413

Leopold Butters · Mar 28, 2009

ZeroWing said:
So your saying I need more memory? 1GB or so? I was going to buy an HD4870 with HDMI input so I can use the HDMI on my monitor and I can always get a 1GB version.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127413

The 4870 is only 20% faster than the 4850, I do not think it is worth an upgrade to that. this is something that would be more of an upgrade, http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&Description=GTX%20280&bop=And&Order=PRICE There is a new version of the 280, the 285. It is pretty much the same card only it runs cooler and is a little more powerful, not worth the extra 100 dollars over the 280, I think anways. here are some benchmarks between your card, the 4870 and the GTX 280 for UT3. http://www.techspot.com/review/109-geforce-gtx-260-280-versus-radeon-4850-4870/page8.html once you hit those higher resolutions with the GTX 280 it preforms way better than the 4870. Here are some more comparisons http://www.techspot.com/review/109-geforce-gtx-260-280-versus-radeon-4850-4870/page11.html

The GTX 280 is $90 more, but I think it is a better upgrade to go from the 4850 to the gtx 280 rather than the 4850 to 4870. You could probably find the GTX 280 cheaper somewhere else.

ZeroWing · Mar 28, 2009

Leopold Butters said:
The 4870 is only 20% faster than the 4850, I do not think it is worth an upgrade to that. this is something that would be more of an upgrade, http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&Description=GTX%20280&bop=And&Order=PRICE There is a new version of the 280, the 285. It is pretty much the same card only it runs cooler and is a little more powerful, not worth the extra 100 dollars over the 280, I think anways. here are some benchmarks between your card, the 4870 and the GTX 280 for UT3. http://www.techspot.com/review/109-geforce-gtx-260-280-versus-radeon-4850-4870/page8.html once you hit those higher resolutions with the GTX 280 it preforms way better than the 4870.

are there any new cards that are going to be coming out soon? I can always wait a little if theres a price drop/new generation around the corner. THat 280 looks tempting

15 FPS on UT3

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

VIP Member

New Member

banned

New Member

VIP Member

New Member

VIP Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

banned

VIP Member

New Member

VIP Member

New Member

New Member

New Member