GeForce 8600M GT - Will it play BIOSHOCK?

When i get my 1720 i know i won't be doing much gaming on it, mostley video editing. Anyways the other day i got this game Bioshock, and i heard you have to have a pretty kick ass system to play it. So i was just wondering will my new rig be able to play this game at bearable rates?

 

Definitely.

You can play it at 1024x640 at Medium settings. Or 800x500 at Medium + a few High's.

 

Dont worry, you'll be able to play it, although you might have to turn down certain setting like anti-aliasing. Game will mostly be a memory hog, make sure you have 2 gigs.

 

Sick man glad to hear it.

I may stick another 1024mb of ram in there for a better gaming experience later on, just wanted to make sure it would play it okay before i install.

 

It will play it fine.

If my X1600 256mb can play it, the 8600GT can surely play it.

edit* Get at least 2gigs of RAM.

 

anyone know a good website to buy some RAM online?

 

Turn down AA? More like Turn OFF .

Seriously, I'm not joking. AA will kill your FPS in this game .

 

what about in GMA 950? hahahaha JK =P. it would smash it bigtime

 

anyone know a good website to buy some RAM online?

 

newegg.com is always a good place to start looking.

 

Try checking out the listings on the forum.

http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=121363

 

I'm just impressed with my 8600M GT.

Playing Far Cry @ 1440x900 and @ Very High.

In the jungle the frame rate drops do 15, but normally is above 20. Indoors even better - 30-60.

 

i wonder how it will handle Crysis when it comes out in november?..

 

if it struggles with far cry which is a 5 year old game... i wouldnt get my hopes up for crysis

 

Mine isn't struggling at all with Farcry at very high settings. He's probably got some stuff screwed on his 1520.

 

I finished bioshock on the Vostro 1500 yesterday
ran very smoothly with high settings for graphics at 1024 res
make sure you run it in full screen mode.
I couldn't believe how drastically windowed mode killed the speed on it

 

yeah i heard a lot of people say that far cry played great on there 1520s..

 

How was it? was it as kewl as everyones saying?

 

What are your settings?

 

Crysis's GPU requirement and load will be similar to Bioshock--it'll simply require more RAM.

If you can run Bioshock at 1024x640 res with Medium-High settings, expect around the same for Crysis.

They don't teach you guys math in Afghanistan's Alkaeda boot camp?

I didn't know 2007 - 5 = 2004 .

That said, Far Cry was pretty technologically advanced and ahead of its time--like Doom 3. The best graphics at the time (the 6800 Ultra) couldn't even run Doom 3 at MAX settings at 1280 x 1024. It required at least two 6800 SLI'd to run it at MAX.

In case you actually don't know elementary math, 1440 x 900 has only 1.1% less pixels than 1280x1024. Running a 3 year old game at a resolution that even the best of its time couldn't do at a playable FPS is impressive enough.

 

Same as yours.

A single 6800 can play Doom 3 at 1280 x 1024 at MAX comfortably. How do I know? My desktop with a single 6800 (non ultra) does.

 

Okay, then it was 1680 x 1050 then, my bad.

If that was the case, you can disregard what I just said in my last post .

 

That is a horrible frame rate for far cry, I have a two year old notebook that never goes below 50fps at the same resolution at max settings.Far cry on a 8600 should almost never go below 60fps.

 

Bioshock on my 1520 with a 8600gt and a gig of ram was running really well on 1280 x 800 resolution with everything set at high. Parts is slowed down to a crawl like when the water came rushing at you but remember this was set at high.

So people with 2 gigs of ram would have better performance.

 

yup i had the same experience...i have 2 gigs, and put everything on high and 1280 res. I do have the 163.44 driver, but cant tell you if it helped or not cause i only played with the driver. It ran fine but some parts were slowed down. Never got slow enough to become unplayable. I was very impressed.

 

1680x1050 on medium plays the demo just fine. (I'm also using the 163.44 driver.)

 

yah i just played at 1280x800, with everything on high, but this time i played fullscreen cause last time it was windowed...it played awesome and i noticed very, very little choppiness. This is my first computer with any type of nice gfx card, proc, or anything, and also my first computer game and so far i love it. Graphics are just downright nuts.

 

Playing it at 1440x900 at medium settings but i reckon i could move it to high. Will need to try though.

 

if you take your time with it, it will be one of the best FPSs you ever play

but it really depends how 'into it' you are, because learning about the overarching story surrounding the game is purely optional


btw, you might need 2 gigs

 

What's the video on your 2 years old notebook?

I guess you are right, but I can't figure out where is the problem with my frame rate. Can anyone post some pics from the video settings menu so I can compare.

Thank you.

 

im having a few problems playing bioshock on mine.

it will stop every so often for a few seconds, it then makes a slight clicking noise and then it carries on playing from where it left off, i beleive that the clicking noise may be coming from the hard drive. although i dont know if this is a driver issue. My hard disk speed is only 5400rpm, could this be the reason?

 

Maybe...but i only get that problem about once a hour..it stops for bout a seocnd then continue playing without any lag.

 

I think I found "the problem" My Video driver was controlling the the antialiasing and anistrophic settings and they were set the max.

With these 2 at max it is the way I said it. I believe you forgot about them

If you set both at 2x and get no less than 60fps in the Jungle.

 

how about playing bioshock on my vostro with 1.5gb ram and a 8400gs?

 

Ah, kewl! I actually just bought a new 2gb stick of RAM from Newegg.com thanks for the heads up Triple_Dude that site kicks ass! So all together i will have 3gigs of RAM, I should have no problem playing Bioshock now

 

i can pretty much max out bioshock on my gx700.
on 1024 res i get an average 30-50 fps on max.
on 1280x800 i get an average 25-35 on max

 

I dont get it... Bioshock would run well on 1024x800 med settings but it'll look crap right? I'd rather native res + low settings

 

on 1280 x 800 on medium i was averaging around 25 fps with the highest maybe at like 35, i'll probably end up playing at 1024 on medium just so i can have the higher fps. i'd prefer not having the beautiful graphics and having smooth gameplay than sluggish gameplay with good looking graphics

 

No....it just looks better on native res.

 

Hello !

I play bioschock demo with last drivers ( I tested them all ) , I get 20 fps in middle settings and 40 fps at low settings ( both playable). I play all my games at native resolution : 1440x900.

Bad point I can't overclock anymore with 160 drivers.

Inspiron T7300 , 8600M GT

 

For those with 8400M GS machines (m1330, certain Inspirons) you can see my detailed review of Bioshock with screenshots and FRAPS framerates.

http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?p=2474450#post2474450

It's not exactly elite, but totally playable and very entertaining.

As stated in my other thread, although I also prefer playing in native res wherever possible, I would highly recommend going lower and enabling all high quality lighting and texture effects, for two reasons. One, dropping a notch or two -significantly- enhances frame rates compared to turning off effects - there's a big difference. Second, Bioshock is all about atmosphere. The particle and reflection effects are a technical marvel, add hugely to the suspense of the game, and you would be doing yourself a disservice to miss them.