*****The GMA X3100 gaming thread - HL2 screens + more*****

hmm my COD4 is crashing when I try to play it on the notebook. When it's loading the engine (while watching the first Video), an Errormsg appears in the Background, and I can't tab out to see it. So I can only press enter, and then the game exits. I tried every settings I could think of, used the cfg from Unreal.. still crashes. But it's the same install I'm using on my desktop, where it's working fine...

COD4 v1.4, Drv XP 14.32.3
Any ideas?

PS: I googled, ofc, but no one seems to have the same prob..

*edit*:
Reinstalled, tried v1.0, same prob. ;-(
And ofc I killed all background apps to eliminate incompatibilities... still no hit.

 

I have exactly the same problem! And I had no luck with Google, too
Currently I'm using XP driver 14.32.3 and my laptop has Video BIOS 1436. Maybe we can find a solution together?!

Orilus

 

i can't play cod 4 singleplayer for some reason, says direct x error.

 

hmm I only tried singleplayer, maybe I'm also getting that DirectX error. Some ppl reported it's becacuse auf old DirectX (wow -.-"), but mine is up2date, or because of XFire, which I'm not using...

I would like to find a solution, but as I can't even see the errormsg.. is there an error-logfile for COD4?

 

you will very likely get higher frame rates in Xp than Vista.

Main reason why I wiped vista and stuck Xp pro on there.

Runs much faster.

 

probably in hear somewhere but cant be bothered to trawl through 60 odd pages lol

can this 'chip' handle CS1.6 by any chance

 

Of course it can...

 

lol cheers

 

thats what i thought too, I tried playing CS1.6 and it ran horrible, 10-12 fps, i tried all different resolutions and drivers, no go
CS:S runs fine but crashes after about 1/2 hour or just randomly during gameplay... :/

 

orly? I can play it (native res, 1280x800) with steady 30+ fps...

 

Me too. Runs even better in directx 8.1 mode

 

(I meant 1.6 btw)

 

How do u use Direct 8.1 when u have 9.0?
does anyone know for sure if X3100 will run Counter Strike Source well? I didnt download the upgrade thing though, just the original.

 

It will run it on lower settings with good framerates. (30+ is only acceptable for a fast paced game like that)

For the DX8 thing, google "Counter Strike: Source DX8". It will explain how to enable it.

 

well i somehow fixed my CS1.6 problem (i have no idea), now it runs nice 50fps constant (LCD refresh is 50hz), sometimes dipping to 30fps , this is at 640x480, 32 player server, source runs at about 30fps but crashes randomly with a BSOD that mentions sysaudio.sys (im starting to think im the only one that has this problem.. :/ ), still for both source and cs1.6 x3100 is perfectly fine as both games are horribly CPU bound on a 32 player server, CS1.6 less so obviously;; in fact i tried playing with the DX7.0 setting for a while and it made no difference in crowded places my FPS would still dip horribly, meaning GPU isnt maxed here;; my brave attempt to upgrade the CPU ended woefully when i found out its soldered onto the MB -_- thats what i get for gaming on an ultraportable

 

640x480 LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

 

my LCD is 12", 640x480 is a perfectly reasonable resolution

 

Not really... CS 1.6 should be able to run at native resolutions, all maxed out.

 

my lcd is 12" too and 640x480 looks TERRIBLE!

 

i get 10 FPS and a whole 15fps with EVERYTHING on low or none. this for CS:S
comp running stock with 19.3G of HDD left...

WARCRAFT 3:Frozen Throne is also a little laggy......

wish i could do a clean install of Vista...

 

Wow...my 32 MB ati 7500 ran this game maxed out...

 

DutyHunter, your CPU is a T2310 1.46GHz CPU, 533MHz FSB and 1MB L2 cache.
you have no chance running source with that CPU (on a 32 player server for example, but probably even a 20 player server) , my T7300 running at 2.2Ghz really struggles with it, im not certain about W3 but i think thats a CPU intensive game too, and you have a really weak cpu for gaming, no matter what you set your graphics to, as a test, boost everything up to high on source the fps should stay the same

 

!!!!!!!! RUN CS:SOURCE IN DIRECTX 8 MODE !!!!!!!!!

Please google how to do this. If the command line doesnt work, create a autoexec.cfg

I have an x61 with a T7300 proc like you Anarky321. It can handle cs1.6 with ease on a 32 player server. 1024x768 resolution with everyone on high (except for shadows). 30+ fps. I am using XP, but running in software mode is nearly as fast. Vista and XP's software performance is similar.

 

Im running CS Source in Dx9 & getting Higher FPS Than you in Dx8.

 

he said DirectX because i PM'd him and said that my CS:Source crashes with BSOD (we have the same laptop), i think he said that for me (maybe not), mine runs fine in dx9 too only it crashes randomly, im trying out "-dxlevel 81" right now

 

oh ok, yeah a game like that should run easily on Dx9 with no problem.

 

I am giving up on this thread. Someone needs to create a faq for the x3100. I nominate "inteluser"

 

noxx u deserve a cookie, source is running for 30mins almost and hasnt crashed yet, thanks you just made my desktop obsolete lol

 

I SECOND THAT!

 

make sure it mentions something about source being cpu-bottlenecked, thats all i ask for

 

hes already done that threw out this hole thread.

 

would be a great idea..

 

Yes, thats why i nominated him...

The faq needs to be on the first page of a new thread so it can be continuously updated and we can direct new users to the post. Then they won't have to search the forums for their answers. I have noticed the same questions popping up repeatedly in this thread because users refuse to SEARCH. Apparently, this is just asking too much.

 

commonly known as the 'forums desease'...

 

ive come back to rescind my comments about Counter-Strike:Source being CPU bottlenecked on the x3100, after extensive further testing it seems the x3100 is the main bottleneck in the game, which is not to say that a fast cpu isnt essential, but after extensive tweaking and resolution comparisons i was able to tweak source to run at an average 55fps in a 32 player server with my x3100 and 2.2ghz C2D, which is more than 2x what it ran at before, however this is at 640x resolution with everything on low except textures on med, vsync off, and trilinnear filtering; im also using a number of custom .cfg commands for it, which alone boosted my fps by 20 with no visible difference in gameplay, if anyone is interested i can post them here; also i found that changing some of the settings in the 3d options of the x3100 had noticeable results

in conclusion, x3100 seems to be extremely fill-rate limited and thus bottlenecks cs:s at anything above
640x480 resolution

 

I dont understand how you can play the game at that resolution. I was getting perfectly playable frame rates in 1024x768. Try forcing Software mode while running in directx 8. If you don't know how to do that, search these forums. It has been posted a couple times.

 

That would be great if you could post those cfg's, ive been trying to get a bit more out of that game

Thanks

 

New driver for Vista 15.7.3. Testing it now.

 

haha i run it at 1280x800 all on High & in Dx9 mode with only a simple autoexec config that actually works on alot of other games like cod4. if you want it ill upp it.

 

It's good that you play on high settings and all, but others prefer 30+FPS so that the game is playable. That being said, mind uploading the CoD4 config? I want to compare it to mine, as I'm still not hitting a satisfactory framerate.

 

ok here are the commands, you add them to the config.cfg file located in the steam>steamapps>yoursteamname>counter-strike source>cstrike>cfg file, BUT right after you add them to the end of the config.cfg file you have to make the file READ-ONLY, for some reason it deletes them every time i play after i exit the game, probably because i should be using a separate config file with an exec command but i dont know how to do that, anyways here they are, the only noticeable thing i got from them is that the treetops are gone on dust2, just the trunks left, but u get used to it very fast

cl_ejectbrass 0
cl_phys_props_max 0
cl_muzzleflash_dlight_3rd 0
cl_muzzleflash_dlight_1st 0
cl_ragdoll_fade_time 1
cl_ragdoll_physics_enable 1
cl_show_splashes 0
cl_smooth 0
commentary 0
mat_antialias 0
mat_bloom 0
mat_bufferprimitives 1
mat_clipz 0
mat_fastspecular 1
mat_hdr_enabled 0
mat_mipmaptextures 0
r_cheapwaterstart 1
r_cheapwaterend 1
r_drawdetailprops 0
r_dynamic 0
r_lightinterp 0
r_propsmaxdist 100
r_RainSimulate 0
r_shadows 0
rope_smooth 0
fog_enable 0
gl_clear 1
r_3dsky 0


to noxx::: what do you mean 'software mode'? software shaders? im already forcing "-dxlevel 80", you mean at 1024x for you it never falls below 35fps?, in a game like that acceptable fps for me is if it doesnt fall below 30 ever even on a 32 player server

 

hahaha u real funny buddy, i got it running at over 30 FPS. ill post screens later.

My COD 4 Config:

Edit: ^^ that Autoexec Config in the rar also works with CS: Source & you should see a HUGE Difference in FPS.

 

i read through that autoexec.cfg, and while im sure it gives a decent fps boost there are some sacrifices im just not willing to make to play at a higher res, and these 2 options are just terrible, first one will remove the weapon models so you dont even see what gun you have out which imho sucks a*s, and the second disables mmx which is NOT a good move on an intel cpu which most people here use, the rest are fine although i didnt read the whole thing in detail

r_drawviewmodel 0
r_mmx 0

in conclusion, you say you play at 1280x? but you have weapon models disabled? thats a pretty bad tradeoff; id rather play at a lower res than not being able to see what im shooting, this being an FPS and all

 

You did? That's amazing, assuming the framerate is consistently over 30. Screens would be appreciated but I'm not doubting you.

 

weapon models are on, so i dont know what ur talking about at all, im posting screen in a sec.............

 

Heres some more CS: Source Screens:

Avg 24-48 FPS, Around 30 FPS most of the time, Though it never drops lower than 24.

Setting Screens:

Gameplay Screens:

 

Again, the problem with those screens, is a lot of cards can get those framerates with no action. If you could post some screens of some online action, I think that would help people a lot.

By the way, this card is actually showing to be pretty powerful. Good work, Unreal. You are putting some serious time into pulling all that you can out of this card. Just for that, 1+ rep!

 

I have no doubt that its much better than their previous cards like GMA950, but its still plagued with too much problems. With one game it performs magnificently, but in other game(oftentimes with the same game engine) it performs absolutely horrid. It's amazing how Half Life 2 game runs while every other game based on the engine runs like its nothing related.

When AMD/ATI shows their RS780 IGP sometime this month/early next month, they'll show Intel how unified shader GPUs are really made.

 

Well, I haven't actually seen this card first hand, so I don't "really" know. But, from what it looks like, the card is probably one of the most powerful IGP's on the market right now, but is cursed with bad driver support. Intel is still pretty new to the "Gaming" IGP idea... so it may take them a little bit. Hopefully they will fix these problems.

You can't expect too much from IGP's, but hopefully we will see the potential of this card revealed pretty soon!

 

ill post some action screens later, but playing Online even with alot of people it doesnt drop in FPS at all & it shouldn't especially on a game thats years old.