Quote: Originally Posted by Dampkring
I heard ViewSonic are very nice for games.
Viewsonic has a good rep. For games, a monitor with a low ms response time is one of the things you need to look for.
Monitors with a high response time have a 'lag input' feel to them (a noticeable delay between moving the mouse and the movement on the screen) - but it's something that you can become used to quite easily. Some don't even notice it at all.
Although older LCD's and those with really high response times can also suffer from 'ghosting'. That's when you make a movement and there is a slight 'ghost' of the movement. That is noticeable.
For example, my monitors have a few different modes.
The 'normal' modes have a "6ms" response time which is perfectly acceptable. There is no ghosting, but I can discern the input lag. It does become apparent when I switch to Game mode which has a "0ms" response time, you can instantly notice how much more 'snappy and responsive' it feels.
But in either setting, it doesn't really detract from the experience.
Many professionals, also friends told me that Ghz don't really do the difference because it depends on the CPU build.
AMD and Intel Ghz are never equal, like an AMD chip operating at 2.8GHz would process data faster than an Intel chip running at 4.0GHz...
To a certain degree that is correct, depending on the model. One advantage some newer AMD chips have are that they tend to have a better 'higher average minimum framerate' than intel chips, even highly clocked ones.
That's one reason that makes them good for gaming, despite being noticeably slower at other tasks.
But a higher hz is always beneficial, regardless of architecture.
I first decided to upgrade my computer for StarCraft II (to run all on ultra), but I was tempted to finally get GTA IV because I'm a fan, so I guess I will wait a little longer before I buy GTA IV on PC, it seems really to be very bad optimized for nowadays hardware, pity... because it's kinda a lying advertise for the PC version, if it can't run well with these extra settings...
One thing that GTA IV engine does reasonably well is that it scales pretty well in the image quality area.
Sure, there is a noticeable difference between max IQ and low settings, but compared to some games - it isn't absolutely butt ugly on low. And with that chip and a 5870, you won't have to go low.
It's also quite 'playable' at low framerates to a certain degree. Although sub 20fps is brutal...
You will be able to find a compromise between IQ and playability. So despite it's flaws, don't let it put you off buying it.
Quote: Originally Posted by Uber Philf
Is that really true?
So me running my GTA4 at 800x600 res is basically being run by the CPU?
I have all my settings to the lowest it can go, all the bars set at 1, and running 800x600 @ 60MHZ, and the best FPS i can get is like 40, and it also varies on whats going on in the game, like rain ill go down to like 20-15 fps... :/
'fraid so. At that res, your card is basically twiddling it's thumbs