FarCry on intel x3100

i have a problem, as whenever i play farcry, the landscape should be green but it isnt its all blue.

it looks like this:


i have it on these settings:


the spec of my machine is in my sig below:

 

Try updating to the latest driver it should help.

 

i have the latest drivers from intel, version 15.7 for vista

 

As of now 15.7 is consider too buggy by Intel so they are currently developing a new driver that should be release by Feb. 13 and it should solve most of the problems gamers are experiencing. My best recommendation is to wait or download 15.6.6 driver, which is old but most have some or nay better performance as of now.

 

hi thanks for the advice, do you know how to change from hardware/software mode as i dont even know what i am currently running on

 

Make sure Far Cry is patched, that problem is very common and is not related specifically to X3100 drivers.

 

Why is it that Intel scientist can build a Core 2 Duo extreme but they cannot build a good GPU?

Nvidia and Ati literally makes an @ss out of intel here.

Maby Nvidia and ATI should consider making CPUs aswell.

 

hi havok could you explain to me how to patch it, and where to get the path from, thanks for ur help

 

http://farcry.filefront.com/file/Far_Cry_v14_Patch;70566

 

Nope. 15.7 is not pulled, the 14.32 is pulled. 14.32 had serious problems like changing the resolution to default 800x600 everytime the computer is rebooted. There's nothing like that on 15.7.

Wow, I can't believe you just posted that. Let's compare the prices that the Intel GPU and Nvidia/ATI GPU sells for.

Intel-$4
Nvidia/ATI-From $40 value to $700 high end

Intel Chips-$50 value to $999 high end

The factors that make a good CPU does not always apply to making a good GPU and vice versa. CPUs don't benefit from having additional execution units like ALUs and FPUs like GPUs do. For GPUs, you just add more shaders, more pixel pipelines, and performance scales pretty close to linear. Just supply enough memory bandwidth. CPUs don't work that way.

Plus, Nvidia/ATI has been working on graphics chips for 20-25 years. Intel has been only making graphics chips for less than 10 years, after acquiring a graphics company. They really didn't make their own core until the 845G, that's only 5 years ago. Simply, Nvidia/ATI has the experience that Intel doesn't.

And look, no Nvidia/ATI won't make a good CPU suddenly. Look how AMD, the former ATI, struggles against Intel with their Phenom chip, but since this thread isn't about CPUs, I'll stop.

 

I don't think it's that Intel can't make a good GPU, it's that they just don't make dedicated GPUs. Problem is, you're comparing its performance to nVidia/ATi's dedicated line, which will always, no exceptions, blow integrated graphics out of the water, because shortly put, integrated graphics suck (for gaming).They aren't a gaming company, they just make their stuff powerful enough for Aero and standard tasks.

Isn't the X3100 the most powerful integrated card on the market?

 

I think from reading various forums and threads, only the X3000(desktop counterpart of X3100) on XP can equal/be faster than the ATI/Nvidia IGPs. X3100 and Vista lowers performance so much they aren't even in the same class anymore. Lots of games that perform similarly/better on hardware T&L/VS than the software mode on the X3000, its slower on hardware for the X3100.

The following results I have collected is pretty conclusive that X3100 is too weak compared to the X3000.

Noxxle(T7300, 2GB DDR2-667)
3dmark05:
software-868
hardware-690

Me(E6600, 2GB DDR2-800)
3dmark05:
software-932
hardware-998

(Before anyone says the difference between mine and Noxxle's is because of the CPU, take a look at the difference for software)

 

I believe, (may be wrong) the Nvidia 7150 is the reigning IGP.

 

Actually, AFAIK, the AMD 690G/X1250 is still the fastest IGP overall. From the scarce benchmarks I could find, I would find the AMD/ATI solutions as winner.

 

thanks havoc it worked

 

Good. Enjoy