Doom 3 system requirements

Lincoln Russell 14 Jul, 2004 at 9:37am ET Article published in Tech

Comments

1. 
   14 Jul 2004 ~ 10:33am csimon I think I'm good.
   
   thanks keebs
2. 
   14 Jul 2004 ~ 11:12am TheBaron well i meet everything but the 9800 pro. my 9700 aiw pro will just have to do it for the time being... sure makes me want to upgrade though
3. 
   14 Jul 2004 ~ 11:26am csimon It really doesn't specify the pro ...you're probably good with 9700 pro IMO
4. 
   14 Jul 2004 ~ 11:38am Morpheus-xXx- Dag yo, I'll be able to play Doom3. That's my concern for the summer, lol.
5. 
   14 Jul 2004 ~ 11:42am MJO

   General Keebler wrote:

   System Requirements recommended by PC Gamer:
   
   2GHz CPU
   512 MB Ram
   Radeon 9800
   5-Channel Audio
   
   Submitted by: csimon
   
   Source: Doom3Center
   
   
   Looks like I'm getting a new processor/mobo...

   
   Remember, it's most likely a 2 GHz PIV they recommend.
   If that is the case, you'll be fine.
   
   Man I could really use some more memory, it's just so expensive.
6. 
   14 Jul 2004 ~ 12:37pm csimon

   MJO wrote:

   Remember, it's most likely a 2 GHz PIV they recommend.
   If that is the case, you'll be fine.
   
   Man I could really use some more memory, it's just so expensive.

   well madshrimps says this:
   
   recommended specs:
   +2GHz CPU or equiv Athlon
   +512MB of RAM
   +Radeon 9800/GeForce FX 5600 and up
   +5 channel sound card with speakers (Sound Blaster Audigy 2)
7. 
   14 Jul 2004 ~ 1:01pm SimGuy Lets just summarize it right here:
   

   Yeah, I was lucky enough to receive my copy today, so I'll share it with you guys.
   
   1. 6800 is a tad faster than X800 cards. Both run it in full glory
   
   2. The game has four render paths: NV10, NV20, R200, and ARB2. All paths look awesome, even down to a g4mx, but the ARB2 path is the "full package," and is used for the R300+ and Geforce FX+ cards. It does all it's fancy **** in one pass.
   
   3. PCI Express enhances NOTHING.
   
   4. The difference between a 128mb and 256mb card is that the former uses compressed textures whereas the latter only compresses diffuse and specualr maps. In another words, no big deal. However, a 500mb card is needed to run the game in Ultra Quality mode.
   
   5. 512MB is the ideal system total memory. 384 is required, 1GB is nice, but the difference is negligible.
   
   6. Nothing special is included for a 64-bit OS.
   
   7. A 1.5 Ghz processor is the least recommended, but a 2Ghz and above will help since...
   
   8...The sound engine is entirely CPU dependant. Therefore a crappy soundcard works flawlessly. Not to worry, the enfine only uses a "small percentage of cycles, much less than if the engine relied on a soundcard.
   
   9. The only reccommendation regarding faster framerates is to disable to "advanced special effects option." In other words, upgrade if you have problems.
   
   10. They tie it up by providing three levels of "Doom lovin' PC's"
   
   Low-End:
   1.5GhzP4 or equivalent
   512MB Ram
   Geforce4 Ti 4800 or Radeon 9500
   
   Mid-Range:
   2.4GhzP4 or equivalent
   1GB RAM
   Geforce5950 or Radeon 9800 Pro/XT
   
   High_End: Aka Hardware that doesn't exist, but best guess anyway
   3.4GhzP4 or AMD equivalent
   2GB RAM
   GeForce 6800 Ultra or Radeon X800 XT PE.
   
   In conclusion, the game will run well on a variety of hardware, and Rob Duffy, the lead programmer, says that the game looks real good no matter what, and that it will continue to look better as hardware improves. Like all previous id engines, we'll be playing games based on D3 for another five years down the road.
   
   Enjoy everybody!

   
   (nabbed from FutureMark)
8. 
   14 Jul 2004 ~ 1:10pm Armo http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=368553&postcount=75
   
   review any 1
9. 
   14 Jul 2004 ~ 1:11pm mmonnin My 8500 Ran the game. I dont remember what level the graphics were at but it did run the game. Not very well I might add. It is still a VERY pretty game. The graphics are awesome even on a R8500LE.
10. 
    14 Jul 2004 ~ 1:51pm Medlock This SO makes me want to upgrade my 9700 Pro... I feel sorry for my friends though. One's running a 1.8 GHz celly, 256 mb, and a R9000. One other is running 1.7 GHz P4, 512 mb, and a R7500.
    
    ...Wait a minute. That means they're all gonna want to play it on MY computer!! :banghead:
11. 
    14 Jul 2004 ~ 5:13pm EyesOnly /me lookes at his rigs specs and realizes that he has nothing to worry about.
12. 
    14 Jul 2004 ~ 6:08pm EMT Holy crap man. I never did throw away $250+ over a silly video card and I'm not going to start now. Hmmmm it looks like they've come down in price since I bought the 9500 though. Maybe I'll upgrade around HL2 time...
13. 
    14 Jul 2004 ~ 6:10pm TheBaron after reading that review, I want a 6800 ultra RIGHT NOW
14. 
    14 Jul 2004 ~ 7:19pm MJO

    csimon wrote:

    well madshrimps says this:
    
    recommended specs:
    +2GHz CPU or equiv Athlon
    +512MB of RAM
    +Radeon 9800/GeForce FX 5600 and up
    +5 channel sound card with speakers (Sound Blaster Audigy 2)

    
    I translate that to:
    2 GHz PIV or AthlonXP 2000+
    Oh well we will know soon enough.
15. 
    14 Jul 2004 ~ 10:02pm GnomeWizardd makes me happy i just bought refurb 9800xt and put my 9800 pro in my dads pc LAN TIME!! w00t
16. 
    14 Jul 2004 ~ 10:24pm Armo i hope the p4 2.4 512 and 9800 can crank it out as much and as high as i want it too
17. 
    14 Jul 2004 ~ 10:30pm Thrax

    GnomeWizardd wrote:

    makes me happy i just bought refurb 9800xt and put my 9800 pro in my dads pc LAN TIME!! w00t

    
    Yeah, because Doom 3 will be 3% faster now!
18. 
    14 Jul 2004 ~ 10:41pm SimGuy

    GnomeWizardd wrote:

    makes me happy i just bought refurb 9800xt and put my 9800 pro in my dads pc LAN TIME!! w00t

    
    Should have just overclocked for the 3% & saved yourself the money
    
    Edit: Dude. $310 USD for a 9800XT? PNY's 6800GT's are $332.00 USD @ Provantage.com. DOH!
19. 
    15 Jul 2004 ~ 3:07pm Medlock In that article SimGuy quoted, they said the sound engine is entirely CPU dependant. If that's the case, why does everyone recommend SB Audigy 2 cards and such. Will my SB Live 5.1 (pretty old card) work in multiple channels in the game?
20. 
    15 Jul 2004 ~ 4:13pm Thrax Nobody <i>really</i> recommends the Audigy 2. It's technologically sound, but it suffers miserably from Creative's inability to design drivers. It's a mixed blessing.
    
    However, people suggest those types of cards, with hardware audio rendering engines, because most other games <b>use</b> and <b>need</b> hardware rendering to sound as good as possible.
    
    Now, I'm thinking that ID software designed it like this so Doom 3 wouldn't be dependent on an audio card to deliver the optimal experience. Everyone can experience the complete audio design of D3. The only thing that matters now is how many speakers your sound card can support.
21. 
    15 Jul 2004 ~ 4:18pm TheBaron personally, i ditched my audigy 2 in favor of my onboard alc650, and thats saying something, because the alc650 is a piece of crap. that audigy caused me nothing but problems, and at this point most modern machines can handle advanced sound without much of a performance hit anyway, so im all for them dumping it on my cpu
22. 
    15 Jul 2004 ~ 4:20pm MJO

    Thrax wrote:

    Nobody <i>really</i> recommends the Audigy 2. It's technologically sound, but it suffers miserably from Creative's inability to design drivers. It's a mixed blessing.

    
    Heh you would think that Creative had learned how to make drivers by now.
    But that's not the case, my old Live 5.1 suffered from crappy drivers as well.
    
    It takes two to tango, hardware plus solid drivers. I guess Creative has not figured that out yet?
    
    They have an odd habbit of bending numerous standards as well.
    I heard that my Live 5.1 doesn't meet the PCI specs 100%.
23. 
    15 Jul 2004 ~ 4:31pm Thrax It doesn't. All the problems with VIA chipsets, AGP video cards and and SB LIVE! cards were the pure result of the SB LIVE! accessing the system bus at a latency significantly lower than what PCI is designed for.
    
    It ended up undercutting video cards and the system itself for accessing core peripherals. The result? BSOD!
    
    Creative blows.
24. 
    15 Jul 2004 ~ 4:41pm MJO

    Thrax wrote:

    It doesn't. All the problems with VIA chipsets, AGP video cards and and SB LIVE! cards were the pure result of the SB LIVE! accessing the system bus at a latency significantly lower than what PCI is designed for.
    
    It ended up undercutting video cards and the system itself for accessing core peripherals. The result? BSOD!
    
    Creative blows.

    
    They are a bit too Creative I think.
    
    Actually my Live 5.1 worked fine for months and months on my old KT7A-Raid (KT133A)
    I read that was supposed to be near impossible to achieve.
    But then I upgraded to WinXP, and then it didn't work anymore.
25. 
    15 Jul 2004 ~ 6:37pm MJO Ehh floppy disc's?
    
26. 
    15 Jul 2004 ~ 7:56pm profdlp Not exactly designed for an unattended install, is it?
27. 
    15 Jul 2004 ~ 8:00pm GnomeWizardd i dont think ill ever buy anothe nVidia card after the 5900 series disasters
    
    I needed a 9800 pro or xt since the 9800pro replaced a 5900se in my dads pc
28. 
    17 Jul 2004 ~ 12:51am bazookajoe i got a 1.7Ghz p4 along with a ATI 9600xt VPU and 512DDR Ram with a Soundblaster live 5.1 sound card(which yes has had an unblievable amount of problems) Will Doom3 or HL2 run (resonably in medium settings) my rig?
    
    As for the Creative driver problems...It took me 3 days to get drivers off there instalation cd to work correctly!
29. 
    17 Jul 2004 ~ 12:59am Geeky1 It'll run, I doubt that it'll run well. Remember that a 1.3GHz Athlon or P3 beats the crap out of a 1.7GHz P4..
30. 
    17 Jul 2004 ~ 1:42am Thrax D3 is 6 CDs, and assuming a generously low estimate of 500mb per CD, that's a healthy 2,084 floppies. That'd be great!
31. 
    17 Jul 2004 ~ 1:55am primesuspect Back on the ATI bandwagon, huh Gnome?
    
    I've never seen anybody shift allegiances as fast as you do A few months ago, you were all hot about ditching your Radeon for your nVidia card
32. 
    18 Jul 2004 ~ 8:44pm Zilea Can someone tell me how my system specs will work in the game?
    My pc (which i got last month) has 3.06 gHZ HT technology, 512 MB DDR Ram, Geforce FX 5500, and Sound Audigy 2.
    I was wondering if i need to upgrade my video card, if so I was thinking about Radeon 9800 Pro or something. If someone can help me with all this please respond asap, thanks.
33. 
    18 Jul 2004 ~ 8:48pm shwaip My advice would be to wait till you have it, and see how your PC runs. but that's just me and my cash-strapped self.
34. 
    18 Jul 2004 ~ 9:04pm Zilea It's actually a shame that I have a pretty high-end comp (in my opinion) yet i gotta spend like $200 for a new card to handle this game (of course i understand how powerful this game is :P)
35. 
    18 Jul 2004 ~ 9:06pm Geeky1 You'll end up spending more than $200 if you want it to play well. The game's not SMP capable, is it?
36. 
    18 Jul 2004 ~ 9:16pm Zilea well, i was planning getting a radeon 9800 pro at bestbuy, which is $170 with rebate =D
37. 
    18 Jul 2004 ~ 9:35pm mmonnin Thats most likely the cheap version of the 9800. Make sure to get the 256bit. There is the trimmed down 128 bit cards that dont perform nearly as well.
38. 
    18 Jul 2004 ~ 10:09pm Zilea Well, i read the Doom 3 Bench mark at http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1821&p=21
    and if you check the performance tests, the 128 mb performs at the EXACT same FPS, which is all i really need.
39. 
    18 Jul 2004 ~ 10:33pm Geeky1 No, mmonnin isn't talking about the amount of memory, he's talking about the width of the memory bus. You want a 256-bit card, not a 128-bit card. And I'm not sure that it'll run "well" on a 9800 Pro (my definition of well is easily playable at 1600x1200/32-bit & maximum detail)
40. 
    18 Jul 2004 ~ 11:42pm Thrax Your definition of well is seriously overstated considering the state of modern game engines.
41. 
    18 Jul 2004 ~ 11:53pm Geeky1 Probably true. But that's still what I expect. AA is basically unnecessary at 16x12, but if I can't have maximum detail and at least some AF at 1600x1200, the system simply isn't powerful enough.
42. 
    19 Jul 2004 ~ 12:23am Zilea 1600 x 1200? holy crap, i hate that resolution because ican't read the text!
43. 
    19 Jul 2004 ~ 12:26am Thrax Lemme guess. Your monitor is smaller than 21"?
44. 
    19 Jul 2004 ~ 12:39am Geeky1 Zilea, uh... I run 1600x1200 on my laptop... my desktops run at least 1600x1200, preferably higher (I have a 21" Sony CPD-G520 that'll do 2048x1536)
45. 
    19 Jul 2004 ~ 1:13am Zilea I have 3 PCs in my house, my main PC is on a 19" Realsync, my other is on a customized 23".
    This monitor actually has compatibility to 1600 x 1200, but i dont like how smell the text is.
46. 
    19 Jul 2004 ~ 2:43am woooo.... Well i thik my pentium 4 3,4ghz gainward geforce 6800 ultra 256mb and 1536mb memory should be enought.
47. 
    19 Jul 2004 ~ 3:07am Geeky1 Iiii dunno... that P4, you know... I've got Pentium Pros that are faster than that...
    
    J/K. I've got a 2.8E overclocked to 3.5 in one of my desktops, and despite the fact that I don't like the P4's design, I can't deny that it's a fast machine.
48. 
    19 Jul 2004 ~ 3:22am Zilea hey woooo, holy shit dude. How do you afford that? Parents? I could no way in hell get my parents to spend over $400 to get that. That's a $1600+ comp. Your parents must be rich :P
49. 
    19 Jul 2004 ~ 3:41am Geeky1 Bought it with my own money, along with all my other comps (except the laptop )
    
    There's the P4-E system:
    IC7-G, P4-E 2.8, 1GB PC3200, Radeon 8500/64MB, 2 80GB HDDs (I think- it may be 1 80 and 1 60. Or 2 80s and 1 60. I don't even remember anymore. ), DVD burner and 52x CD-RW
    
    The single athlon system:
    NF7-S 2.0, 2600m @ 2.65GHz, 1GB PC3500 (BH-5 chips), R9700 Pro, 2 80GB HDDs, DVD-ROM and 52x CD-RW
    
    The dual athlon system:
    K7D-L, 2 2500s modded to MPs @ 1.87GHz, 1GB PC2700/3200 (512MB of each), R9000, 4 160GB HDDs, DVD-ROM and 52x CD-RW
    
    and I've got two other systems in varying states of construction;
    A dual P4 Xeon system:
    PC-DL Deluxe, 2 2.8GHz/533/512k Xeons (have to order those still), 1GB of DDR (still have to order that), R9800XT or better (have to order that too), etc.
    
    and a dual P3 system:
    Iwill DVD266U-RN, 2 1GHz P3s, 512MB+ of DDR (may need to order some), R7500, etc.
50. 
    19 Jul 2004 ~ 4:46am EyesOnly Shouldn't there be a demo out. That way we could try it and know if our rigs are fast enough.
51. 
    19 Jul 2004 ~ 5:42am Shorty Pre-Ordered from Play.com
    
    I somehow think my 9800xt, 1gb of RAM and Athlon 64 3200+ should cut it
    
    Zilea...Why not register? for the forums that feed the news comments.. *pimp* *pimp*
52. 
    19 Jul 2004 ~ 11:45am Dogman04 Got an AMD Athlon 64 3200 notebook system from Compaq, w/ 512 MB Ram and 64MB GeForce Mobile 440 graphics card (dedicated graphics memory, and not shared/integrated as in most laptop systems), and wondering if these specs are adequate for Doom 3??
    Also, I heard that laptop systems may have problems loading newer PC games due to encryption and copyrighting codes intefering w/ CD/DVD writer & combo drives, as almost all laptops do not have Read Only CD or DVD (ROM) drives. Any advice??
53. 
    19 Jul 2004 ~ 11:58am TheBaron the game has several (4?) different rendering paths, so even if your systems gfx aren't top of the line (which they aren't, its a notebook) the game will still run very well on your machine. you just may not be able to see individual dust particles.
    with that said, your laptop is a beast
    
    about the cd copyrighting, im under the impression that only a few (completely stupid) companies do that, and they damn well shouldn't. i wouldn't worry about it
54. 
    19 Jul 2004 ~ 2:30pm SimGuy Yep, 4 rendering paths.
    
    It will run and look great on the NV10 rendering (DX7) path with the GF4MX (according to the PCGamer review).
55. 
    19 Jul 2004 ~ 3:09pm GHoosdum What resolution do you think it'll run playably at on the Mobility Radeon 9600 (non-Pro 64MB) in my notebook, SimGuy?
56. 
    19 Jul 2004 ~ 9:26pm Zilea hey guys, i just played doom 3 alpha. ( I had it on a cd for about 2 years from a friend who gave me it ,i never played it beacuse i thought it was a virus, long story short, i trusted him and played it and it worked, not a virus ).
    Anyway, I was playing it on whatever the default settings were, and I was getting 28-30 FPS when I was just walking around.
    Whenever a monster came into view and I started shooting, my fps dropped to 8-12.
    I indeed will be upgrading to Radeon 9800 Pro
57. 
    19 Jul 2004 ~ 9:41pm Thrax You realize that the doom 3 alpha is about 14 months old, and only had one programmed rendering path?
    
    The alpha is about 4-7 times slower than the real game.
58. 
    19 Jul 2004 ~ 11:09pm C I got an AMD 1100 gz, 64mb geforce, 256 mb ram. Whats the cheapest way to run doom3 decently?
59. 
    19 Jul 2004 ~ 11:13pm TheSmJ All depends on what mobo you have.
    
    Otherwise, your system would need a complete overhaul to play Doom 3 at all.
    
    Lucky for computer shopers, a great gaming machine could be easily built for $500 or less (not including monitor).
60. 
    20 Jul 2004 ~ 3:30am Zilea yep... i bought mine customized at pcclub.com and i got a pretty awesome comp for like $1100.
61. 
    20 Jul 2004 ~ 4:58am MM I have Radeon 9600XT 256MB.
    Is it fine to run optimal configuration ?
    My other computer specs:
    P4 3.0Ghz
    512MB RAM
62. 
    20 Jul 2004 ~ 5:12am Thrax That should run it pretty well, MM.
63. 
    20 Jul 2004 ~ 1:16pm Zilea that's what we HOPE.
    i'm on a 512 DDR 400 Ram, 3.06 ghz HT technology, sound audigy 2, and geforce fx 5500.
    Sadly, if it wasnt for my card i think i'd be running at optimal configuration.
64. 
    20 Jul 2004 ~ 1:23pm primesuspect Just noticed that a lot of people are linking to this thread through google. Welcome to all new visitors Please sign up to the forums and stick around, we have one of the best communities on the web
    
65. 
    20 Jul 2004 ~ 1:27pm GHoosdum Yes, welcome to Short-Media, folks!
66. 
    20 Jul 2004 ~ 3:06pm Gobbles Wonder if it will run on my:
    
    XP2500+
    Abit NF7S
    512 Corsair XMS pc3200ll
    Radeon 8500LE...
    
    Would a 9600xt do alot better or should I sell my other kidney and get the 9800xt or x800 Cuz then I gotta sell a toe or something to pay for the game...
    
    Gobbles
67. 
    20 Jul 2004 ~ 3:30pm Zilea if you're on a low budget like me just get a radeon 9800 Pro, which is about $200 and based on the Doom 3 benchmark at http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1821&p=21
    it'll run perfectly.
68. 
    20 Jul 2004 ~ 4:56pm LawnMM 1600x1200 in a game? Why? I've never found a reason to go above 1024x768 in a game. The differences aren't noticeable and its more visually pleasing to run at a lower resolution with max details than a higher res with lower detail settings. Not to mention the extra frame rate.
69. 
    20 Jul 2004 ~ 5:15pm GnomeWizardd everything in my sig cept the 9800xt is being replaced my a 6800 so i think I am set
70. 
    20 Jul 2004 ~ 5:43pm Cmrbreno13 Everyone is saying ATI Radeon 9800xt etc. but how well will the 9700Pro hold up? My system specs are as follows:
    
    WinXP Pro
    P4 3.0ghz (Hyper threaded)
    1GB PC3200 Corsair XMS DDR RAM (Dual Channel)
    120GB Maxtor Diamond SATA HD
    Radeon 9700Pro
    Audigy Gamer sound card
    
    _________________
    
71. 
    20 Jul 2004 ~ 5:46pm Cmrbreno13 Forgot to add that my motherboard is the Intel 875P .
72. 
    20 Jul 2004 ~ 5:53pm Thrax Your 9700 Pro will hold up quite awesomely. It's not that much slower than a 9800 XT at all.
73. 
    20 Jul 2004 ~ 9:31pm jazzman_76063 I just preordered doom 3 from buy.com. I hope my comp will run it pretty well.
    Specs-
    P4 3.0 ghz 800mhz fsb
    Intel D856GBF mobo (i think...)
    1gig pc3200
    Geforce fx5600 256mb
    Creative SB Live!
74. 
    20 Jul 2004 ~ 11:13pm Goozer My processor, memory, and sound are all good. My video card is a
    64mb GeForce4 MX440, will I be able to run it?
75. 
    21 Jul 2004 ~ 12:06am mmonnin Heheh no, not at all.
76. 
    21 Jul 2004 ~ 3:45am R4--N_M4l-3R

    Goozer (Guest) wrote:

    My processor, memory, and sound are all good. My video card is a
    64mb GeForce4 MX440, will I be able to run it?

    
    Mark my words, expect to run the game fine I will quote PC Gamer stating "Doom 3 looks sensational even with a GeForce4 MX card." So according to page 79 of the September 2004 PC Gamer, you will be locked and cocked. Using a little of my own knowledge, (my brother has the same card) I can tell you that you will not be seeing most of the flashy lighting and shadow effects, and since the card does not support pixel shaders, your details will be significantly less wonderful. The card will run limited bump mapping, and to help get the latest drivers and make sure to run it in a 8X AGP mobo. If you don't care about details, than you will run at acceptable framerates. Doom 3 is locked at 60 fps anyway.
    
    If you didn't bother to read that, then let me sum it up by saying, unlike most of the recent high-end games, Doom 3 will run on almost anything, due to tight and efficient code. Lastly, this is all specualtion, since I haven't played the game yet (duh) so don't flame me if you spend 50$ on game I said you could play, but you can't
77. 
    21 Jul 2004 ~ 3:50am R4--N_M4l-3R

    LawnMM wrote:

    1600x1200 in a game? Why? I've never found a reason to go above 1024x768 in a game. The differences aren't noticeable and its more visually pleasing to run at a lower resolution with max details than a higher res with lower detail settings. Not to mention the extra frame rate.

    
    The difference is highly noticeable, especially in the bump-mapped textures of Doom 3. Look at a PC game like half-life or vice city at 1024 and then at 1600 and the difference is immediately apparent. Also, picture this, 1024x768 is fine on a 15 inch monitor but on a 22 inch display, it is jagged and aliased. Higher rez is a key for bigger displays.
78. 
    21 Jul 2004 ~ 9:10am spooks My system is a P4 3.2ghz, 128mb 9800 pro, audigy 2, 1gb corsair xms 3200 pro, 10k 36.7gb western digital raptor wonder how my system will shape up to it.... man I really want a 6800 ultra or x800 xt now. :-(.
79. 
    21 Jul 2004 ~ 10:58am keto spooks, I expect your system - which is almost identical to mine btw - will SMOKE thru Doom3. I have a 9800XT 256MB and 2 raptors in RAID 0 so a hair faster but that's all.
80. 
    21 Jul 2004 ~ 11:15am TheBaron

    'R4 wrote:

    [N_M4l{3R']The difference is highly noticeable, especially in the bump-mapped textures of Doom 3. Look at a PC game like half-life or vice city at 1024 and then at 1600 and the difference is immediately apparent. Also, picture this, 1024x768 is fine on a 15 inch monitor but on a 22 inch display, it is jagged and aliased. Higher rez is a key for bigger displays.

    
    absolutely agree
    higher res makes for a better all around gaming experience for me
81. 
    21 Jul 2004 ~ 2:30pm Unregistered Call me crazy but I've been using the same CPU for 2 or 3 years now, I've got an old AMD Thunderbird 1333, and I recently tried out a 2100+ XP but i went back to the TB... damned thing is a workhorse. Intel eats the corn out of AMD's crap.
82. 
    21 Jul 2004 ~ 3:18pm TheBaron

    Unregistered (Guest) wrote:

    Call me crazy but I've been using the same CPU for 2 or 3 years now, I've got an old AMD Thunderbird 1333, and I recently tried out a 2100+ XP but i went back to the TB... damned thing is a workhorse. Intel eats the corn out of AMD's crap.

    
    graphic
    
    */end van wilder reference*
83. 
    21 Jul 2004 ~ 6:29pm TheSmJ I'll be playing the game on the system in my sig (only I plan to have a 6800 GT by the game's release). Thanks to the 21" monitor, I plan on playing the game at 1280x1024 at the very LEAST.
84. 
    21 Jul 2004 ~ 7:20pm Zilea i play all my games at 1280 x 1024, even though i can play at a higher res.
    Also, although Doom 3 will require a fast processor, nobody should think their processor will be able to withstand the game. In fact, as long as you got a 2 ghz computer, you can then concentrate on the video card. Because, without a good video card, this game will run like shit, no matter how fast your processor is and no matter how much ram your computer has.
85. 
    21 Jul 2004 ~ 10:09pm Tarsco is it possible overclocking a low-end comp and the overclocked comp runnin like a mid-end comp?
86. 
    21 Jul 2004 ~ 10:13pm SimGuy http://www.short-media.com/forum/showthread.php?t=17134
    
    Looks like the 6800GT is the card to have for the budget minded.
    
    Oh, and with regards to whoever brought up gaming at 1600x1200, I fully agree. Once you hit that high resolution on a big-assed 21" CRT, you'll never go back to 1024x768.
87. 
    21 Jul 2004 ~ 10:14pm jester my comp specs:
    
    athlon xp 1900+ (OC)
    512mb ram
    80gb HD WD
    R9200 (OC}
    
    is this good enough to run D3?
    
    (OC)=overclocked
88. 
    21 Jul 2004 ~ 10:44pm profdlp

    Tarsco (Guest) wrote:

    is it possible overclocking a low-end comp and the overclocked comp runnin like a mid-end comp?

    Your question is difficult to answer. It is like asking if you can make a low-end car run as fast as a mid-end car.
    
    Define low-end and high-end.
89. 
    22 Jul 2004 ~ 1:36pm Zilea Jester..we cannot answer your question unless you tell us your video card, because the entire game rests on your video card.
90. 
    22 Jul 2004 ~ 1:37pm Geeky1 He did. It's a Radeon 9200.
91. 
    22 Jul 2004 ~ 1:45pm GHoosdum

    jester (Guest) wrote:

    my comp specs:
    
    athlon xp 1900+ (OC)
    512mb ram
    80gb HD WD
    R9200 (OC}
    
    is this good enough to run D3?
    
    (OC)=overclocked

    
    It'll run, jester.
92. 
    22 Jul 2004 ~ 2:30pm TheBaron

    Zilea (Guest) wrote:

    Jester..we cannot answer your question unless you tell us your video card, because the entire game rests on your video card.

    
    dude, register
93. 
    22 Jul 2004 ~ 3:46pm zilea lol im lazy.
94. 
    23 Jul 2004 ~ 10:48am Jake I have a question, I have a 9700 ati pro, only 1.6 ghz, but 1536 mb of ram, will the excess of RAM make up for the videocard and processor?
95. 
    23 Jul 2004 ~ 10:50am Shorty

    zilea (Guest) wrote:

    lol im lazy.

    Register and you can have a shiny avatar
96. 
    23 Jul 2004 ~ 10:51am GHoosdum Jake, is your 1.6 GHz CPU an AMD or an Intel?
97. 
    23 Jul 2004 ~ 10:53am Shorty

    Jake (Guest) wrote:

    I have a question, I have a 9700 ati pro, only 1.6 ghz, but 1536 mb of ram, will the excess of RAM make up for the videocard and processor?

    From the third post
    

    Low-End:
    1.5GhzP4 or equivalent
    512MB Ram
    Geforce4 Ti 4800 or Radeon 9500

    
    The memory will help but not make up for the slower CPU. However, it should run respectably
98. 
    23 Jul 2004 ~ 11:02am Jake Intel
99. 
    23 Jul 2004 ~ 11:04am Jake thanks shorty
100. 
     23 Jul 2004 ~ 11:08am Jake Ghoosdum, i have intel