I have a Core 2 Duo E6300, 2 gigs of ram 667 speed, 975X chipset motherboard which is suppose to be the fastest, ATI X1950 Pro 256 and Stalker runs real slow and choppy even with settings very low to the point the graphics suck. I dont understand it every other game runs like butter on my PC even ones that have better graphics than stalker. I am running Vista. I dont understand what the deal is, is it that unoptimized or am I not doing something right?
i've heard many people saying they can't run the game properly w/ vista - and the game doesn't technically support vista. vista stalker players sound in.
its your vista man! my buddy had the same problem...installed windows and ran smoothly for some reason i cant see what im typing but i ment to put windows xp
when STALKER meets my Vista Ultimate 32...with SLI enabled, performance drops to almost unplayble degree compared to when on XP 64; disable SLI...it's getting better, black screen full time with sound on...would like to hear some Vista success stories here~~
i have a inel d945dpn and when it comes to playing games i have bad sound glitches and slow framerates or choppy, how i fixed it? i downloaded firmwire update and bios updates. that what you should do , try it and tell me it how it goes.
i have a intel celron 3.33 1.5gb ram,ATI Radeon X1600 and i can run the game on full dynamic lighting and everything with no problems.its pro running slow for u cuz Vusta sucks and once Vista has all the things fixed in about a year u will be fine.
Select the Simple Dinamic Lights(I don't remember is say that, but is the second option).
In advanced option:
* The shadows and lights details are the option that requires it more RAM and CPU speed, try in lower (in minimum the details are deactivated and look really bad).
* The textures in 3/4 is enough(the last option is very slow combined with Complex Dinamic Lights option)
* The grass density in 1/2(more detail need more RAM).
* The object detail is the minor of the problem, only defines the distance of the objects and don't requires it a fast CPU)
The main problem thath slows this game down is the lighting, the full dynamic lighting just doesnt seem well optimsed at all, with everything maxed on my 7950GT, 2 GB of RAM and 3800X2 I get 20fps............its the game, pretty poorly unoptimized with that lighting in particular, with static lighting and everything else maximum or high I get 74fps average. But even then when running about I get the odd strange stutter, but the vids on Gamespot get it way worse than I do. Gamespot vids..........run.........stutter..........run...........stutter:P
Yes the game itself isnt optimized well just do a few simple changes/tests on your own changings some of the settings and it proves that theory pretty quick...I have a AMD X2 64 4600+ overclocked to a 5000+. 2 GB dualchannel ram, GeForce 8800GTS 640E, Asus M2N32 SLI-Deluxe motherboard and the game runs pretty good but not the best on my vista hard-drive but it definantly runs a lot better on XP...Vista right now just plain sucks for gaming the drivers aren't matching up with anything right...the sounds are still off with a lot of stuff...Microsoft needs to patch the hell out of vista and do it very fast because if they are going to be pushing the system and the system will be the only one supporting Direct X 10.....well i'm sorry i could care less about DX10 if Vista is still having run-time problems i'll gladly stay with a lower Anti-Aliasing rate and such on XP till they fix freaking vista.
Is Vista !! i had stalker also but it just ran so SLOWLY !!! but later on i found out that is that STALKER IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH VISTA !!! u can check in the Video Review that gamespot made on the game.. they mention it there.. according to gamespot, they makers of the game are working on a patch to fix it !!
Turn it off! I believe its called "Static lighting" and while it does diminish a bit of the atmosphere, it is still a great game and still quite nice to look at. I think its a bug or a game engine flaw of some sort, but the HDR lighting seem to cripple anyone's rig, whether its a geforce 6600 or 8800.
[But machine is built by P4-2.4Ghz, Geforce nVidia Fx-5200 graphics card & 512mb DDR-SD ram . I can't play PREY Smothly in my pc even in 640 x 480 Resulation. Please somebody help me how Towersofhanoi can & I can't. PLs HELP..... ]arnaob
basically, Fx 5200 isn't a gaming card (even with 256MB); I think my good old Geforce 4 Ti4800 (128MB) is more powerful than that. Prey seems to require at least FX 5800 and 5900 cards. as for how on earth a 32 MB Geforce 2 MX can manage Prey...I have no idea; I remembered I replaced my Geforce 2 MX400 (64MB) with Geforce 4 Ti4800 because the MX400 card was not able to handle Unreal II: The Awakening...??
[QUOTE="arnaob"][But machine is built by P4-2.4Ghz, Geforce nVidia Fx-5200 graphics card & 512mb DDR-SD ram . I can't play PREY Smothly in my pc even in 640 x 480 Resulation. Please somebody help me how Towersofhanoi can & I can't. PLs HELP..... ]teardropmina
basically, Fx 5200 isn't a gaming card (even with 256MB); I think my good old Geforce 4 Ti4800 (128MB) is more powerful than that. Prey seems to require at least FX 5800 and 5900 cards. as for how on earth a 32 MB Geforce 2 MX can manage Prey...I have no idea; I remembered I replaced my Geforce 2 MX400 (64MB) with Geforce 4 Ti4800 because the MX400 card was not able to handle Unreal II: The Awakening...??
you are correct, my 5200 runs stalker pretty well though
Log in to comment