Published on 24th June 2005 by
Originally Posted by The_PopeI suggested 1024, as per your logic, but he chose 1280: I guess anyone on a 17" TFT will favour their native resolution of 1280, and there won't be many CRT gamers who can't play at 1280... if you bench at 1024 you have TFT gamers interpolating / upscaling to fit their screen and 1024 isn't too crispy on a CRT either.
Originally Posted by The_PopeYes, you could test both, but we have to draw a line *somewhere*: if Tim spends all day benchmarking BF2, he won't finish his review for a certain NDA that expires on Monday.
Originally Posted by The_PopeYou won't find many other game reviews that give you the technical & performance data we deliver, so if we haven't covered a setting you'd like to see, download the demo and try it out for yourself - there's often no better yardstick for judging a potential game purchase than the hands on ;)
Originally Posted by RotoSequenceDamn, I suppose my 9800 pro just isnt going to cut it anymore on my 19" CRT if I want to play this game, is it? :(
Originally Posted by LeeumI run 1280 x 1024 all high settings with no AA or AAF, gives me ~40 FPS with my 9800 Pro flashed to XT. Only thing I dislike is the long loading time, it says i've updated my display settings each time I go onto a server :?
Originally Posted by Da Dego
Oooooooohhhh....What nda!? :D
Originally Posted by rupbertThe new ATI card?
Originally Posted by bigzHaha, no.
Originally Posted by The_PopeRupbert: I *could* tease you with comments like "I'm not allowed say" but I'm not that cruel - it's NOT the new ATI card...
You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.
8th February 2016
4th February 2016
3rd February 2016
© Copyright bit-tech